Stopping time is IMPOSSIBLE, and I have proof that needs debating page 2

Maybe time is real, and not a perception, but then again, what is it? Time is a difficult thing to identify and define.

what’s funny is that special relativity is invented by Einstein, and even Einstein said:

People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.

Time is just a measurement, its not controllable. You cannot manipulate something that you are only observing that’s just absurd.

Your statement on the other hand is too obviously paradoxal.

No, it isn’t. What I said was correct because of time dilation and length contraction. Spacetime literally distorts when you approach the speed of light. Google some introductions on special relativity or something, because I’m really not good at explaining this and might get some details wrong.

Originally posted by livingrival:

Time is just a measurement, its not controllable. You cannot manipulate something that you are only observing that’s just absurd.

Read, please:

Originally posted by norumaru:

Originally posted by Blood_Shadow:

So many misconceptions in this thread… Sigh.

First, time is not merely a perception or a state of mind. It is a very real physical entity, as real as the three dimensions of space. I don’t care what school of philosophy you’re coming from, but special relativity disagrees with you, and it has been verified by countless experiments.

Thank you. This shoudn’t have taken 20 posts to get to! Shame on everyone else in this thread.

This OP, kids, is why you should avoid ideas whose proponent’s talk transcrips start with “Speaker takes multiple prolonged bong rips”.

I did read it, that’s verging on the theory of time travel, a completely different concept, still makes it uncontrollable.

Originally posted by livingrival:

I did read it, that’s verging on the theory of time travel, a completely different concept, still makes it uncontrollable.

Time travel is not a theory; it’s barely even a hypothesis depending on what branches of physics you’re speaking from. Gravity is a theory, as is special relativity. Both are supported by countless experimental evidence, so are assumed to be true until counter-evidence is found. No counter-evidence has been found as far as I know.

Time is not controllable, yes. But it isn’t just a measurement, nor is it only a part of observation.

well, there is two different concepts that are both called time: a physics property of causality; and a system of chronological mapping.

the two things confusingly go by the same name, but are as distinct from eachother as are space and coördination.

we cannot try to affect coördination; we can only redefine it or use it for navigation through space. space, however, we move through mostly uncontrollably, by being stuck on this planet, but we can mildly influence where we are intentionally.

time on the other hand seems much harder to intentionally influence our position in; being stuck with our gradual gliding into the cause to consequence direction. the suggestion of time travel is that it isn’t impossible to wilfully navigate it.

this cannot be disproven by a mere equivocation.

Causality isn’t as solid as it might seem in everyday life. In special relativity, two events simultaneous in one frame of reference may not be simultaneous in another frame of reference. For now, the only thing we can say is that we do not know enough about time to speculate about whether it can be stopped or not.

Also, I don’t think a “proof” means what the OP thinks it means. I’d explain, but it might make me look like an arrogant nitpicker (which I probably am), so…

Sometiimes I concentrate really hard and try to stop time…. fail.

Originally posted by Blood_Shadow:

Originally posted by livingrival:

I did read it, that’s verging on the theory of time travel, a completely different concept, still makes it uncontrollable.

Time travel is not a theory; it’s barely even a hypothesis depending on what branches of physics you’re speaking from. Gravity is a theory, as is special relativity. Both are supported by countless experimental evidence, so are assumed to be true until counter-evidence is found. No counter-evidence has been found as far as I know.

Time is not controllable, yes. But it isn’t just a measurement, nor is it only a part of observation.

Okay I agree time travel is only a hypothesis, wrong choice of words on my behalf.

But without going too far off topic….

As a collective we have pretty much defined time as what a watch or a clock says it is, makes life easier. To stop time however you have to be looking at it not as digits but as the constant movement of objects as a whole. Problem is (looking at it in a sci-fi view) if everything stopped moving but yourself, that is not looking at the constant movement of objects as a whole – because you’re still moving, so time would not have stopped.

If time did stop we wouldnt know about it, simple as that.

As a collective we have pretty much defined time as what a watch or a clock says it is, makes life easier.

That definition is just plain wrong. This is the point I’m trying to stress. Say, we are carrying identical clocks. If you move away from me at some speed, I’ll observe that your clock is actually going slower than mine, and my clock will look the same to you. If you think there’s a paradox here, look up the “twin paradox” and see how it’s resolved; I’m not good at explaining it.

I shall look this up, but from first thoughts, this seems like an illusion rather than a definition of what time itself is.

Even Einstein states that time is what a clock says.

Originally posted by livingrival:

I shall look this up, but from first thoughts, this seems like an illusion rather than a definition of what time itself is.

Even Einstein states that time is what a clock says.

Things are often not what they seem. The physical nature of time only becomes apparent when you move at approaching the speed of light.

Einstein said time is what a clock measures, yes. But he in no way implied that time is an illusion created by the human mind; all that statement says is that time is “something” and a clock is capable of measuring said thing. In my physics textbook at least, it continues by discussing that different clocks in different frames of reference can measure time differently.

…wait. Oops, I guess I failed a bit in my last post. So yeah, that definition of time is not “plain wrong”; I thought you meant that time is a product of human perception, which it isn’t.

But he in no way implied that time is an illusion created by the human mind

i *just* gave you a quote of him saying almost exactly that, somewhere at the top of this page.

You mean this?

People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.

Well, I looked it up, and Wikipedia says the quote doesn’t mean what you think it means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present#Special_Relativity.27s_.22present.22

All the quote says is that events simultaneous in one frame of reference may not be simultaneous in another frame of reference. It says that causality and the “present” is an illusion, but not time itself. Time, the dimension, is a very real physical entity.