Prev: Relativity Researcher: Increase Your Research Productivity with the Leading Web 2.0 Research Portal
Next: Radio Waves, Photons, and Wave Speed.
From: Ste on 19 Dec 2009 19:18
I was contemplating the laws of physics, as one does, and in the
course of some basic research on the matter I came across the concept
of the "arrow of time", and the statement that whereas one can move in
both directions in space, currently we can only move forward in time.

Now I'm not an expert in physics, so perhaps this question may come
across as ridiculously simple. But setting aside for one moment human
perception and common sense, the question is this: exactly what leads
us to conclude that we are constantly moving forward in time?
From: dlzc on 19 Dec 2009 22:17
Dear Ste:

On Dec 19, 5:18 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> I was contemplating the laws of physics, as
> one does, and in the course of some basic
> research on the matter I came across the
> concept of the "arrow of time", and the
> statement that whereas one can move in
> both directions in space, currently we can
> only move forward in time.
>
> Now I'm not an expert in physics, so
> perhaps this question may come across as
> ridiculously simple. But setting aside for
> one moment human perception and common
> sense, the question is this: exactly what
> leads us to conclude that we are constantly
> moving forward in time?

We don't remember tomorrow.

David A. Smith
From: xxein on 19 Dec 2009 22:46
On Dec 19, 10:17 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote:
> Dear Ste:
>
> On Dec 19, 5:18 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I was contemplating the laws of physics, as
> > one does, and in the course of some basic
> > research on the matter I came across the
> > concept of the "arrow of time", and the
> > statement that whereas one can move in
> > both directions in space, currently we can
> > only move forward in time.
>
> > Now I'm not an expert in physics, so
> > perhaps this question may come across as
> > ridiculously simple. But setting aside for
> > one moment human perception and common
> > sense, the question is this: exactly what
> > leads us to conclude that we are constantly
> > moving forward in time?
>
> We don't remember tomorrow.
>
> David A. Smith

xxein: Nor can we undo events. Despite similar claims of producing
antigravity by crude EM means, we cannot undo events --- we only try
to 'force' a false reversal.
From: Androcles on 19 Dec 2009 22:53

"dlzc" <dlzc1(a)cox.net> wrote in message
news:60fd1208-b8a2-4dd7-8f1f-49bfbea49a40(a)u1g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
Dear Ste:

On Dec 19, 5:18 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> I was contemplating the laws of physics, as
> one does, and in the course of some basic
> research on the matter I came across the
> concept of the "arrow of time", and the
> statement that whereas one can move in
> both directions in space, currently we can
> only move forward in time.
>
> Now I'm not an expert in physics, so
> perhaps this question may come across as
> ridiculously simple. But setting aside for
> one moment human perception and common
> sense, the question is this: exactly what
> leads us to conclude that we are constantly
> moving forward in time?

We don't remember tomorrow.

David A. Smith
====================================
I do, I'm having lamb for dinner same as last week.
I've already taken it out of the freezer.


From: Ste on 20 Dec 2009 11:20
On 20 Dec, 03:17, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote:
> Dear Ste:
>
> On Dec 19, 5:18 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I was contemplating the laws of physics, as
> > one does, and in the course of some basic
> > research on the matter I came across the
> > concept of the "arrow of time", and the
> > statement that whereas one can move in
> > both directions in space, currently we can
> > only move forward in time.
>
> > Now I'm not an expert in physics, so
> > perhaps this question may come across as
> > ridiculously simple. But setting aside for
> > one moment human perception and common
> > sense, the question is this: exactly what
> > leads us to conclude that we are constantly
> > moving forward in time?
>
> We don't remember tomorrow.

Droll. But I ask the question in all seriousness, and because it
strikes me that there is nothing that suggests an absolute constant
movement forward along any spacial dimension, so why is there an
assumption of constant movement forward along the time dimension
(which introduces absurdities like travelling into the past)?

On the subject of travelling into the past, how would travelling
backwards in time, be distinguishable from simply restoring the
universe to the same physical state as in the past (but which had not
actually travelled "back in time" in any meaningful sense)?

Obviously I haven't posted here before, so I'm not sure whether there
is anyone here who can discuss this at an appropriate level. And more
generally, I'm interested to know whether the assumption of forward
movement is not just a product of subjective human intuitions (and
bearing in mind that every paradigm shift in science has involved
throwing out what was previously held as unquestionable).
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Prev: Relativity Researcher: Increase Your Research Productivity with the Leading Web 2.0 Research Portal
Next: Radio Waves, Photons, and Wave Speed.