- #1
dasmike1
- 7
- 0
Can it be said that time is directly related to movement? That is to say, on a quantum level, if all motion were to cease, would that not bring about the cessation of time?
Last edited:
That is a very misleading way of describing differential aging. Time flows at exactly one second per second in every frame of reference, it just LOOKS different from other frames of reference. It CAN have a different number of seconds along two different world lines between two events (see the Twin Paradox) but that's differential aging, not differing rates of time flow.TJGilb said:I'm not sure how best to put it as to prevent any misconceptions about time travel, but according to Special Relativity time flows differently between two frames of reference depending on their relative velocities. You can calculate these differences using something called a Lorentz boost. Check it out here for the actual equations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation
The relationship is the same. The Lorentz transform applies for modern quantum field theory just as it does for macroscopic phenomenadasmike1 said:t does however elaborate on some of the research reading I've done in relation to velocity and point of view as it relates to the perception of passing time. But it seems to apply on a macro level. I'm still trying to understand the relationship of movement on a quantum level.
phinds said:That is a very misleading way of describing differential aging. Time flows at exactly one second per second in every frame of reference, it just LOOKS different from other frames of reference. It CAN have a different number of seconds along two different world lines between two events (see the Twin Paradox) but that's differential aging, not differing rates of time flow.
dasmike1 said:what would happen if ALL subatomic motion in the universe were to cease?
Can you tell me how fast it is moving in that situation?Khashishi said:Objects can stop moving in the space direction, but they always "move" forward in the time direction
1 s/sDavid Lewis said:Can you tell me how fast it is moving in that situation?
It is clearly dimensionless. Perhaps you should open your own thread on the topic instead of derailing this one.David Lewis said:The speed is denominated in what units of measure?
General RelativityOstrados said:According to Special Relativity the Earth is bending spacetime,
The free falling apple takes a straight (geodesic) path in distorted space-timeOstrados said:... in a curved space and thus it will take a curved path in spacetime (vs flat path if there is no gravity) ...
A.T. said:General RelativityThe free falling apple takes a straight (geodesic) path in distorted space-time
It can be said, but it doesn't lead to any meaningful conclusion.dasmike1 said:Can it be said that if you somehow managed to stop all motion on a sub-atomic level would time cease to exist?
dasmike1 said:Thanks, Rootone.
@Ostrados, can you cite any published articles that I could read to look into your assertion? The idea that Spacetime is not directly linked to matter and motion seems somehow counter-intuitive...how can one exist without the other? Can you offer an illustration that could help me visualize that a bit clearer?
Again, the same set of equations that govern relativity at a macro level also govern relativity on a quantum level. The Lorentz transform applies at both levels.dasmike1 said:but again it seems to function on a macro level only.
And if invisible pink unicorns frolicked below the center of the Earth and north of the North Pole then ...GRjunkie said:If you could stop all motion in the universe relative to the CMB, including that of light, then
Wait...! You KNOW about the UNICORNS?! Curses! And here we've worked so hard to keep them a national secret. DAMN fox news!Dale said:And if invisible pink unicorns frolicked below the center of the Earth and north of the North Pole then ...
Dale said:Again, the same set of equations that govern relativity at a macro level also govern relativity on a quantum level. The Lorentz transform applies at both levels.
Yes, they are the equations which relate space and time and motion. They are the equations that describe time dilation and relativity of simultaneity and other motion and time related effects.dasmike1 said:I'm unclear as to whether the Lorentz equations could be used to decipher whether or not motion and time are inseparably linked.
That is all motion is: a different point of view. You can always transform something in motion to something not in motion simply by a change in point of view. (And vice versa)dasmike1 said:They seem to deal with objects already in motion, and how things work when viewing that motion from different points of view.
Just set v=0 and look at t.dasmike1 said:It appears that they don't address the idea of time without motion.
Even if it were true that time and motion were interdependent (what I think you really meant...), that wouldn't imply they are the same thing. Indeed, they are clearly not the same thing, since time has units of seconds and speed has units of meters per second. Clearly different things, even though clearly motion is dependent on time because the units of motion contain the units of time. But since the units of time do not contain the units of motion, I don't think it is useful/valid to say time is dependent on motion.dasmike1 said:@GRjunkie...THANK YOU! lol ...So now I don't feel so "out there" in contemplating this idea of motion and time being either interrelated or maybe even the same thing...
Ostrados said:if there is no motion then there is no matter.
A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic FieldVanadium 50 said:Please provide a peer-reviewed reference to that.
Vanadium 50 said:You are misrepresenting that paper. It does not even mention photons, a concept that was invented 40 years afterward.