Ground-breaking work in understanding of time

Eurekalert ^ | July 31, 2003 | Brooke Jones

[Prodigal Son]

I was wondering if someone would throw Barbour in there...

[Lancey Howard]

I have always thought that a dead person is "frozen" in time forever at that final instant of his life. His life is in its final second, then its final half-second, then its final half of that half-second, and so on. But then, the rest of us are following right along in our own lives during those "intervals" of time, aren't we? Hmmm......

[Doctor Stochastic]

There's a story (legend?) of a woman who fell from the 7th floor of a hotel, went through several awnings and landed essentially unhurt. Someone asked her if "the sins of her life flashed before her eyes as she fell." Her reply was, "I only fell seven floors."

[ThinkPlease]

An alternate interpretation is that when some schmoe has something useful to say, he gets published and the attention of established scientists. Contrary to popular opinion, the gates of science are not closed to new ideas, even when they come from some schmoe.

You have me wrong, here. I'm bashing Hovind, not this guy. :-) The airyness of this article doesn't sway me either way to agree with his ideas or not, but they appear interesting. I might have to go track down the paper and see if its interesting.

[Cyber Ninja]

Their Professor has three of his best students line up at one end of
the longest hallway of the university. One is a math major, one is a physics major,
and the third is an engineering major. At the other end of the hallway is a very cute coed.

The Professor says, “Boys, every time I ring this bell, you may move half way to the girl.
The Professor rings the bell.

The math student shakes his head, turns and walks away. He knows that no matter how
many times the Professor rings the bell, he will never reach his prize.

The physics student looks down at his shoes, sighs, and wonders off. He knows too,
that he would never reach the girl.

The engineering student takes off running down the hall towards the coed.
He stops half way and listens for the bell. He knows that after enough bell ringing that he will be close enough for all practical purposes.

[betty boop]

Fascinating....and so "timely!" :^)

Thanks for this great post, Nebullis.

[RightWhale]

Can we see the article itself? The article is already halfway down Interpretation Road before we even know the subject. It's not NYT or Reuters, so we will automatically give it some initial credence.

[Nebullis]

I'm bashing Hovind, not this guy. :-)

I understand. And I'm all for it. I'm responding to the popular perception that any upstart or outsider will be right and the establishment wrong. I didn't think that was your view.

[cc2k]

The only time you or I, or anyone else, has available to us is now...oops, I mean now...no, now... Oh, the heck with it.

There is no past nor future, only now, and now is fleeting, indeed.

;^)

Actually, if I understand what this article says about Lynds' paper, Lynds is saying that there is no now. There is only a continuous progression from the past to the future. There are no fixed reference points in the continuity of time. No matter how small you "slice" time, there's still an infinite and continuous stream from the beginning of your "slice" to the end of your "slice." There is no discreet "quantum" of time.

[chilepepper]

B_t(t^t)

[WVNan]

What does this theory do to Alfred N. Whitehead's Concresence or segments of time? It does speak to Process Theology, but it seems to blow Concresence apart. Or am I misunderstanding one or the other?

[WVNan]

Surgeries? Freepmail me details. Are you still in the same place?

[Alamo-Girl]

Indeed, this is very timely! Thank you so much for the ping!!!

[betty boop]

Yes; a "mental construct," so to speak. At least in its (imaginary) "pointilist" aspect.

[betty boop]

A-G, my sense is, this is an important insight: "Naturally the parameter and boundary of ... respective position and magnitude are naturally determinable up to the limits of possible measurement as stated by the general quantum hypothesis and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, but this indeterminacy in precise value is not a consequence of quantum uncertainty. What this illustrates is that in relation to indeterminacy in precise physical magnitude, the micro and macroscopic are inextricably linked, both being part of the same parcel, rathen than just a case of the former underlying and contributing to the latter." [emphasis added]

[kb2614]

I've managed to read this article twice and now I have a headache (MY....BRAIN.....HURTS!!!). I remember trying to read "A Brief History of Time" and got 5 pages in before my brain locked up and I started meowing.

[Nebullis]

I don't see it up yet. It's always fun to speculate from the leaks! (It's not PRL)

"Time and Classical and Quantum Mechanics: Indeterminacy vs. Discontinuity", Foundations of Physics Letters.

[betty boop]

I might have to go track down the paper and see if its interesting.

If you find it on-line, would you please let me know where?

[RightWhale]

Looks like the journal is pay-per-view, which is okay. Is this journal refereed? Looks like all the physics science quacks in the world have formed their own society and publish in this journal when Nature gives them the boot. Is that what this is?

[Nebullis]

"Foundations of Physics: An International Journal Devoted to the Conceptual Bases and Fundamental Theories of Modern Physics, Biophysics, and Cosmology, emphasizes the logical, methodological, and philosophical premises of modern physical theories and procedures.
A distinguished editorial board, including several Nobel laureates, selects articles of interest to oriented physicists and other scientists who are sensitive to the crucial and often controversial issues that underlie current studies in the physical sciences"