Define "time"

Time only exists as one dimension within which change occurs.

Imagine that the only thing that existed in the entire universe was a single mathematical point. In this instance, there is neither space nor time. Dimensions only exist as a definition of the relationship of one thing to another. If instead of all existence being a mathematical point, all that existed was a red billiard ball, then space is born, but not time. There is distance and volume in defining a billiard ball. Without movement relative to a second "thing", our billiard ball would exist in timeless space. If the single thing in existence was a soap bubble, that changed relative to itself both time and space would exist. Mostly though, time and space are terms that only attach to a universe of multiplicity.

If the universe of multiplicity, perceptual reality, is the fundamental state of Reality, then time/space exist and have existed since the beginning of relativity. Years, months, days, hours, minutes, seconds, nanoseconds, etc. are no more real than inches, feet, yards, and miles. These are all measuring stick terms, not the things being described. Prior to the late 19th century time and space were thought to be constant, fixed and unchanging. Einstein, and others, made that notion obsolete. The reality of time and space are highly dependant upon the position of the observer, and distortions in the matrix can be caused by the position and size of mass ... though that too may be more a function of observation than "real".

Now we are struggling to comprehend what is happening on the Planck level, the (probably) irreducible foundation of existence. The building blocks of existence appear to have no real existence themselves, but pop in and out of 13 dimensions ... and those dimensions may never be understood at all.

Well said, Asherman.


Odd thing about time; we frequently take "shortcuts", feeling we haven't the time to do a thing "right", only to discover we must then find the time to do that thing over

Yes, well said.

I also think your post brings up the difficulties in semantics while dealing with the issue time. They are often the cause of great misunderstanding.
I am talking about the frames we need to support our theories, such as :"Imagine that the only thing that existed in the entire universe was a single mathematical point...."

The single mathematical point would then be the entire universe, but to explain the infinity of such a small thing is mindblowingly confusing. So the frames of our thought are there to support our notions until they are capable to stand alone, so to speak.

Instead of rather slow moving rocks I was thinking more of the very short wave-(high energy particles) that we see (gamma rays etc.)

These particles seem to diffuse their energies in a fraction of a second here on earth. How did they travel some several hundred or indeed thousands of parsecs without diffusing, either by lengthening the wave length (red shifting) or disappearing (particle physics).

Therefore I surmise that time goes so slowly to a particle that is moving as fast as the total accelerations of gravity that 5,000 years at that velocity is equivalent to .0015 seconds stopped in Earths gravity. Of course there may be another "mechanical" reason for this phenomenen but several experiments that I have only read about have attempted to eliminate outside influences. These are the things that the fellows that are playing around with the cyclotrons think about.

I further surmise that somehow time will be defined as rate of change due to a formula something like this.


Time is equal to the difference between "c" and "c" + G times distance.

"c" being the unfettered speed of light . G being the accelerations of gravity. Distance being the actual measureable difference in locations of objects. However I cannot do the math ---yet. We need to come up with equivalent units somehow. I'm a werkin on it

Best Wishes, M, (think hard)

Sounds about right Mech.

Thanks Asherman,

It has often amused me that the definition of time is so much more than a conundrum. Heck everybody knows what time is---until one tries to describe it .

I speculate, largely for my own amusement, on how long Euclid must have pondered on his basic definitions.

More of a trick than one would think---until one thinks about it