When most physicists say, "Time is an illusion" they usually mean time moves at different rates as described by General Relativity. When Barbour says, "Time is an illusion" he actually means it.
He still thinks he knows, or should know, how long ago his wife has died. So even he is not convinced as a human being that time is illusory. The question has a wrong answer for him, and for everyone else. The sequence of hand moves he considers 'real' but all he is doing is describing motion, immediately after saying motion is illusory. It's a circular argument about semantics at this point, not "reality"
Most physicists ? Really ? No. I disagree. This man here has an opinion on time. There are many other different opinions shared by many physicists. Time to me is necessary in our reality. It’s part of what makes existence possible. The arrow of time is real.
I read his book on this subject many years ago. I could not claim to have understood all the mathematics. however his ideas were well presented and make more sense, than one might think on the face of it. “Time does not exist!” Sounds crazy but maybe it is not. Very interesting chap Barbour
I read Julian's book in 2003. I was enthralled and happy to see this. He seems to be similar to Donald Hoffman's thoughts on time and consciousness. Thanks
Time appears to be one of our senses: sight, hearing, touch, taste, smell, and time. No two people appears feel and experience time in the same way. For some it runs or flies, for others is drags and crawls. It's not when we are, it's where we are.
Nice analogy, we seem to have the ability to access memory and time by conscious means, which seems tangible but illusive. The human brain does filter time memories, I guess that is an evolutionary adaptation that keeps us universally connected?
The methodology of a speculative temporal philosophy With the scientific development pointing into a certain direction across various disciplines, that time could only be an illusion, accompanied by a societal consensus vis-a-vis this conception, i decided to try and concept a new view on the philosphy of timelessness. Asking yourself anything, being the main tool of all of philosphy, the questions that are being stated by a philosophy of timelessness are going to represent the core of this treatment. For some of them, first approaches are going to be delivered, which are to be executed at another point. This way, a first conception of this philosophy is to be proposed, and the foundation of the methodological framework for further considerations to be layed down. The first obstacle to be overcome is the language. Besides others, the first ones to encounter some difficulties are the ones who try to define the nature of timelessness using a language which fundamental structure depends on the temporal order of being things. Considering this, all expressions that are to be viewed on the background of timelessness, will be accompanied by a corresponding reference or a new term will be introduced. The understanding of those terms, demands a high level of cognitive devotion to the following premise: Time does only exist as a mental construct. Regarding the previously stated warning, it is the language that creates a mental contradiction by speaking these words. But since time cant be eliminated on a cognitive level, it is not yet necessary to predict an attack on the day to day semiotics. But since we just eliminated time from a physical level, some of the rather intuitiv answers to simple questions seem not to be applicable anymore and other previously not even thought of questions seem to be pressing for an elegant solution. Imagine a physical world without time, a consortium of from one another least possibly different nows, only connected through the laws of nature. Every one of those nows would be equal in the face of timelessness and all of them would be happening simultaneously. But there are nows, that include time, and it are those ones which include intelligent life itself. Since intelligent life has to be made possible by selfawareness, and it itself needs a concept of a past and future self, u cant speak of single nows but rather a now complex. Since there is no temporal Order of things, common physical equations have to be translated into the language of temporal philosophy as seen below: A system moving at the speed v changes its state at a rate lower by a facotr of (1 − v2/c2)−1/2 than the system in the rest frame, meaning that every human life( if and as long as it has a concept of time )represents such a now complex, in which time is to be found, but only within the boundaries of the associated mind. If the human consciousness moves in time, but the corresponding body itself does not, the conclusion is to be drawn, that at smaller mergers of nows within the human now complex, there are separate consciousnesses feeling the journey through time. Therefore it has to be calculable how many of those conscious states a human now complex includes and therefore how often one appears in his own life. The respective subject is then limited by time, constructed of almost innurable states of consciousness, all regarding themselves as the real present one, for eternity. To put it in simpler terms: Your life is like a book, with the pages torn out and distributed on the floor. Every single page does exist equally next to the other, for ever. Death can be defined as the first now of human now complex, from which on all following nows of that complex are not able to simulate the associated consciousness in relation to all other systems of the universe. This topic will be further discussed in the chapter devoted to the language analytics of the temporal Philosophy. Going further into the book metaphor, you have a Universe consisting of several books, one them you, and the rate at which you read one book in relation to another is only determined by gravity and speed, the direction in which it is read by the laws of thermodynamics, the physical foundation will be specified at a given time. You should have a clearer pictures now, about the fundamental laws that determine this philosophy and to not stretch this introduction unnecessary i am now going to state the various forms of life that will be at the center of this philosophy. It is defined by its relation to time and its perception and the practical part of this philosophy will be devoted to finding a series of demands u can set for interactions with the different kinds of life. It will take some effort and will be discussed in different parts of this treatment but we will be able to split life into 4 categories: unaware life Aware life Selfaware life Selfaware life aware of timelessnes Intuitivly less accessible and harder to visualize is going the be the approach to put a moral value on certain action, since the calculation will be determined by variable views on time, simply because life of every categories includes certain aspects of the previous categories and you will have to consider all possible angles on time before even trying on depicting a normative ethics of timelessness. For the introduction into the temporal philosophy it will be enough to have a basic understanding of classical physics, thermodynamics and relativity. Quantummechanics will be introduced at a later stage to help us save the problem of the eternal return and derive the free will. The speculative nature of this philosophy lays within the fact, that there is no scientific prove of its premise at the time this is being written and it therefore does not claim any sort of legitimation or applicability in the present moment. I do think however, that a willing reader will have to accept the fact that a lot of things would have to change in human interaction if this premise is proven at a certain point and in the cultural evolution of every temporal philosophy it will be stated why a civilization is only able to conduct this thought process at a certain point of its development and even later will be able to accept its conclusions . Aim of the methodology of the speculative temporal philosophy shall be: to present a perhaps purely biological distinction between the various layers of life made possible through a metaphysical framework in concurrence with and through current physical theories, along with the existing parameters respective to the aforementioned metaphysics study, as a basis for my chief work.
This is a very good question from 3:40. What will change? If we change the name and instead of time we will call it change. As if asking what the change is, how many changes have passed since you were born. Or maybe change is the fourth dimension. And instead of space-time, we have space-change.
Wonderful interview. One thing though; just as in the frozen time model of Einstein, if all the now's are just moments like frames from a movie, and movement itself in the sense of a flow is just an illusion, what causes his hand to be in one spacetime place, and then in another?
It's all a movie...just still moving at a certain rate...they say 24 fps produce more motion blur...or 30 fps... optimal for human eye So, the question is: who&where is the director...
Attempt to answer: Energy appears to be at the basis of motion and gravity. His ability to control energy is what allows him to create his own motions.
Time is the repositioning of matter and energy due to energy. The mathematical concept of time is needed to describe chemical reactions, physical movement and the relativistic universe
What an absolutely holistic thinker. I wish more physicists these days bothered with the classics, and with the understanding that not all of classical physics has been adequately reinterpreted in the wake of the quantum revolution. I'm personally a possibilist, but I can certainly get behind Barbour's presentism.
I like this and agree (on time). There is one geometry that addresses all these problems - QM and more - and it is fractals (emergent structures), and they're my business.
Wouldn't any fractal be a representation of 1, meaning every point in the universe is the same point of fractal within one infinite point, this would mean that humans are just waves of energy created by our entanglement of points that is created by the belief we can observe ourselves, perception and belief is what creates the energy of the universe and this creates set memory, fractals would be quantum points of density created by one point creating an infinite graph of density of mass that could go on infinitely within itself creating infinite memory from a finite infinite point of density. The universe can never change or nothing could be real for us.
I love Sean Carroll's take on this. What does this view of time achieve? What does it progress? Does it generate any prediction or even effects? Carroll said that if anybody could demonstrate an effect or a value from looking at the world this way then he might be inclined to join the conversation. It seems no more than an exercise in semantics.
It forces a new understanding of math and if it is" true," what emerges is a way to manipulate space and time that we might not have constructed if we were tied so tightly to the somewhat illusion of time and space. The "units" you measure either with create the world you live in and construct in your programs and maths. When we approach other dimensions - very small for example sub atomic, we now have to reconcile ourselves and our measuring devices with the space we are attempting to describe and manipulate.
I think it goes much deeper than that. Lee Smolin also thinks some similar ideas and believes we may have to consider one of space or time as being emergent phenomena to even be able to make sense of quantum gravity.
this makes so much more (intuitive) sense as these convoluted spacetime explanations. But I wonder what he makes of time dilation experiments. besides its mathematical necessity and the fact that we don't have any device to measure time directly (comparable to temperature - no one thinks theres is a "space-temperature dimension" in reality although we can read it on a thermometer) I've never seen any reason the believe there is a "flow of time". Deep Time is a good comparison. In geology you are used to think in millions of years. So you constantly run into people thinking "yesterday" was a very important date but at the same "time" think whats below their feet has been that way forever. So it's not that time actually is that important.
Very interesting points are made. I was wondering if Mr. Julian harbour is aware of that jean-Pierre Petit , A French scientist already developed a cosmological model called “The Janus Cosmological Model (JCM) describes the universe as a Riemannian manifold with two different metrics that handle positive and negative masses in general relativity with no paradox, in very good agreement with latest observational data.”
Yes, I would say that we have two types, Emerging when translated to a mathematic construct like "t" , and Perception when it comes to human psychology. We require to "measure" phenomena and for this purpose the "t" emerging construct. We need to explain why we know the past and foresee the future and for this purpose we perceive.
I think we describe time as flowing for many reasons. One reason is we see a progression from the now to that now moving into the future and at same time becoming the past. There is a difference in these categories especially with the uncertainty principal taken into effect. The past is certain in a way the future can not be. The future is not 100% knowable due to uncertainty. The present is the nexus between the fixed and knowable and the only future which we can give probabilities to. This idea of time is not new. Time is also the rate at which something happens in relation to other things and not just the order. The fact that simultaneity in relativity is based on frame of reference doesn’t invalidate the reality of time. It just makes time a little more complicated. Also, this conversation about the brain ordering snapshots of nows and this giving the illusion of time is very problematic. First of all, such processing of snapshots relies on chemical processes that rely on a specific direction of time. Second of all it tends towards an almost mystical notion of consciousness created time. It’s possible I am not understanding this so tell me how time doesn’t exist? I agree time is not something any more fundamental than our universe but with that you have said nothing as everybody admits time as we understand it does not pre date the Big Bang so is not any more fundamental than the rest of the universe which started at the Big Bang... ideas of some kind of hypertime and multiverse aside. I really think much of this is a straw man attack on time. I think Lee Smolin in Time Reborn has a more accurate view of time.
@@ChristopherWentling We don't actually "see" progressions from present to past or future. They are all imagined or inferred. We only "see" the now. The truth is lost in your assumptions. Our concept of time is also a good example of how we make sense of the chaos, how we look for patterns and regularities in nature, give them a name, incorporate them in our lives and they then begin to shape us. It's also part of reductionism-breaking things down into parts and giving a new perspective. Time-as we know it today did not exist before clocks did. It has altered they very way we think. 400 years ago most things were measured by the rising and setting of the sun, with a few intervals in between. Try and imagine how this would change the way people think, and act-it's not hard. Also the claim that time began with a "big bang" is pure fiction. Popular "belief" does not equal an observable fact..or to put it another way, correlation is not causation.
@@surfinmuso37 : You could say the same thing about music. We only hear one note at a time, but our brain strings the past notes together in our memory to make a tune which in turns makes music. If we had no memory of the past, there would be no music.
@@bobblacka918 No. We hear much more than one note at a time - a chord is just one example(3 notes played at once-not separate at all).. up to a whole orchestra playing at once. Your example makes little sense. Music ...and ALL things happen in the "now"..in reality there is no past or future, our memory makes us believe of a past...but even the past can only be perceived in the present. Understand? Also there are people that have little or no memory...yet they certainly experience music.
Ugh. I've been all enthused re: Barbour the last few days, and still think some of his thoughts make sense. But I just read a paper in which he espoused the Many Worlds interpretation. That's kind of a show-stopper for me. He did say "in modified form," though so I guess I'm willing to learn what his own version is.
Yes, when the brin stop is a sign that shows by time movemento. Because, mind direction it will go like time movement. Which's really connected with the heart, andlastlIy. Heartcan stop, that was the end of each an individual's personal death
From this video, I could only say that the unification of classical and quantum is simply the symmetry, but to put this in a mathematical context or equations it goes beyond my skills in math and physics!
Beautiful summary. How many snapshots it takes for a researcher to put it that way! I love the parmenidesian twist on that. Even change is illusory. It would be too easy to say that time is relative to recurring moving objects. Once you have read Julian's books and articles and seen the videos plus same with his collaborators, you will eventually agree that there haven't been any other axiomatization and framework explaining timely things even close to their precision and comprehension.
Brain damage can create a strobe effect (like a disco) The brain sees a series of frozen "motion" The motion your brain generates isn't actually recorded at 60fps (or whatever) The brain can't use that much energy It is more efficient to create the appearance of motion from a few stills
I have thought exactly the same thing! But yet I find myself feeling a temporal distance, for example when it's Sunday and I read about something that happened on the preceding Thursday. That was today, then, yes, but it was also three days earlier.
That is exactly what happens in nature, though. If you don't have yardsticks, then there is no yard. I know, Plato... well, guess what? Plato was wrong.
Arguing time away is not really helpful. There's time dilation, dilated time, yet just because time is slowed dosent mean it stops. In the micro quantum world maybe fractillian sparkly world of subatomic forces interacting as the momentum energy travels through the matrix. These subatomic particles and their momentum are interconnected. Simply means the sparkly quantum particles that are being observed in that minuscule space one can see/imagine at that scale, will continue to sparkle and fluctuate because time affects time all the time, and the subatomic connect time and space. It's interesting that we have discovered that extremes in hot and cold such as the beginning and the end of the universe, matter in these extreme conditions exhibit fractillian interactions with eachother. Making their evolution mathematically predictable until they're temperatures increased or descreased, depending on which extreme hot/cold the matter is in, and fragment into smaller evolutionary systems evolving on their own. So is fractillian time evolution not time, see I'd say it is, even with particle evolution no longer in play, because it's the beginning or end of the universe and their are no particles, and surely the egg came before the chicken. Or is the chicken turning into an egg
Its funny-your reasoning is about trying to bend a created concept(time) to fit the phenomena of reality. For instance-since time was invented by man we have found that it is not constant and there are many factors comprising and effecting time. So we keep coming up with different names for new aspects of time. We have to enlarge the picture. Its kinda like trying to dig oneself out of a hole-we are just getting deeper into needless complexity. Not only that-then there is the even bigger problem of trying to fit time with other created concepts like gravity. So it goes on. And no-we know nothing about the so-called "beginning of the universe" so please do not claim speculation as fact.
@@MartinSmithMFM gravity spacetime causality you can't get to where you want to go until you get there. Gravity and spacetime are essentially the same thing. It warps spacetime. I don't see how gravity and spacetime, empty space, can be particlized. To me it's an absolute. Mass warps the field and is eventual absorbed as the matter decays. The only way I see spacetime as a particle would be like the entire universe as a single particle. Similiar I suppose like men in black where an entire universe thou is contained as a particle in a necklace. That's where (in that dimension or universe) is where things like the higgs field are treated like the electron photon fields. But in our reality as far as causality Spacetime gravity and matter consciousness are on even keel. So the past present future or more specifically the past and future are possibly in a duallity or superposition. So it isn't purely deterministic because each conscious moment of past time presents choices and if our time went on infinitely itd be an infinite number of conscious decisions. Consciousness decides an uncountable immeasurable exchange of gravity and spacetime. Because when did happen ok, but what did it do, only history can tell. Except maybe if you're in that alternate higher dimension. Some people choose to put others in danger and their families, choices
Shakespeare was not discussing the nature of time but the facticity of illusion. By this I do not mean illusions. I use the word in its philosophical sense.
He is correct. What we call time is just our way of measuring change. Man is the measure of all things. Things change at different rates so we divided a day into intervals calling it hours, seconds etc. Time is a great example of how man creates things and how those things then change us. I just wish he would not speak of things we do not know- "We know that just after the big bang...etc" No. We do not know this-it is mere speculation.
Superficial understanding of the term "Time".. It's not only related to change, Time is related to numbers and to spaces.. If time was not real when related to space then why the traveller by plane would get from a continent to another in couple of hours while traveller on a mule would take months to reach the same destination. We live in a space that has its own timer, and the timer is related to all the spaces and creatures that live within this space.. If time was not real, there would be no generations that die together and generations that are born together.. Yes time is not something physical, it's not made of matter, but it's real in the structure of life cycles.. It's there as much as moon and sun are there and it will remain to exist as long as the movements of planets continue in specific rhythm. to each one of us his own timer which is working within the global timer set for this planet
This is EXACTLY what I recently figured out in my ruminations. Is this guy a scientist or philosopher? Probably this idea, at least, is philosophical and hypothetical, and not testable, not refutable.
time emerging from causality sets up good models of the universe but they do very well and then they fail ! Maybe we got something wrong along the way ! Maybe it’s time maybe not
I found his narrative very mixed up and confused. He says time is an illusion and then talks about his wife passing two years earlier ? Time ? Very confused this.
His idea about time is ok as time seen by human sense, but it does no use to explain many phenomenons beyond of our sense capability. Equivalence of mass n energy for example. Time in reality is beyond our cognitive sense to grasp, thats why Einstein become man of the century because the way he understand things isn't like other human, and its explain many phenomenons.
Physical movement is, in my eyes, just a chemical reaction against gravity. Every matter tries to be at the same place at the same time, called gravity, that's impossible. The reaction against is heat, cause of chemical reactions and fusions, which creates movement. Movement always wants to stop, cause it needs energy from reactions of matter trying to be at the same place ^^ and only inside black holes wins the gravity. Our impression of time is also just chemical reactions as long as we fighting against gravity.
Why would a painter come to these same thoughts on the non existence of time? Because words confound us from birth...unless they’re in a poem jingle, or rhyme 🐚
Nobody knows. But the frame rate would be too high for our brains to display it anyway, so you had to upgrade your hardware. To rephrase your question in physicist's therms: is time a continuum, or is it quantized? Wikipedia answer (time): Time quantization is a hypothetical concept. In the modern established physical theories (the Standard Model of Particles and Interactions and General Relativity) time is not quantized. Planck time (~ 5.4 × 10−44 seconds) is the unit of time in the system of natural units known as Planck units. Current established physical theories are believed to fail at this time scale, and many physicists expect that the Planck time might be the smallest unit of time that could ever be measured, even in principle. Tentative physical theories that describe this time scale exist; see for instance loop quantum gravity.
That was quite interesting, but I'm not sold on the big bang just doesn't make any sense atoll. Starting position is a better way to think of it. Temperature of the vacuum space has increased from the previous epoch. So how does this happen. Microbes little half moon shaped life. This is how we get from a frozen state to a gaseous state of the infinite ♾️ vacuum space. About 10 or so years ago I had discussions about this with B,Cox under my full name and he had the same thoughts about the infinite ♾️ vacuum space. Water is a miracle in all its forms. And like our planet Microbes gave us oxygen. And with this the temperature went up. I believe this same process occurred in the vacuum space. Microbes may be throughout the entire infinite ♾️ vacuum space. So we need to capture some ice people lots of ice from the vacuum space and just see what shows up. If microbes are present, then that would certainly explain what's happened prior to this epoch. Let's start there.
But all the story of the night told over, And all their minds transfigured so together, More witnesseth than fancy’s images And grows to something of great constancy, But, howsoever, strange and admirable.
Atoms and molecules are always in motion, and your body is comprised of atoms and molecules. This means that we can never be in an absolute state of being “still”. With that said, yes we can all sense change, but it does not prove that “Time” exists. Hope that helps.
Time as an independent "thing" has no existence apart from the Ultimate Reality, Pure Consciousness or Brahman (Cf. Shankara's Advaita Vedanta). This is experiential but not in a dualistic sense. To tap into and merge with the timeless eternal NOW, no problem. Access "Mahamritunjaya mantra - Sacred Sounds Choir" and listen to it for 5 min per day for at least two weeks. In due time you will experience a state that transcends time, (Turiya, the fourth state that engulfs waking, dreaming and deep sleep. There's only the eternal NOW. (Sat-Chit-Ananda).
Yes, time is a very useful unit of measurement used to measure change, but that does not make time into something intrinsically real. Time is still just a human made-up concept.
Time has sequential direction and it's measurable. Second law of thermodynamics states that entropy only increases, universe began in low entropy state it expanded to a higher entropy. So it's not motion it's entropy that dictates arrow of time. If time was an illusion then we should be able to traverse just as easy back and to future which implies that universe deterministic and future already exists and my actions right now can impact not only future but past as well. Taking this notion of time being an illusion to its absurd conclusion.
I don't think Bardour would completely disagree with you here. When he says "time is an illusion", I think he specifically refers to the notion that "time is like a 4th dimensional axis in space-time geometry", and he doesn't mean "everything that happens is immutable and predetermined". The me it doesn't seem like he is trying to take choice, entropy or agency out of it. If anything, his notion of time as an emergent, unfolding property seems to align very well with the Bolzmannian arrow of time, right? We could both check out his talk, 'Time's Arrow and the Entropy of the Universe', where he expands on the subject considerably: ua-cam.com/video/8Munhfxzv9w/v-deo.html From the intro: interesting things happen when you no longer conceive of the universe as a closed system. Since entropy is typically defined using closed systems, one might find different behaviour once you pull the lid off the container.
I love the way that Barbour thinks. But the statement "No one knows how consciousness works" is an outrageous claim. Such an absolute statement about global ignorance, when it is our particular individual ignorance that is unknown to begin with. Categorical statements about the ignorance of everyone else are a hallmark of unfortunate intellectual elitism.
Is there somewhere in these Statements a knowledge of a Creator where time can Start at the beginning of Gods creation He allows us our personal imagining. Try start at The Tree of Life M.Braithwaite Yorkshire Viking
Not really coherent. In one moment he denies spacetime/static time, which would be confirming the reality of time/change, and in the next moment he calls the passage of time an illusion.
We are kids. Long way to go? IMO time and space are the greatest and purest manifestation of this universe....If anything is real it is time, space and a higher order of consciousness... Not the experiences.
@@surfinmuso37 I think our thoughts are kinda abstract reality and not physical reality. And, for some higher consciousness our physical reality is it's abstract reality-- the whole of existence may just be a thought of a higher consciousness. But from our perspective, in our limited consciousness, time and space are the most fundamental reality and not an illusion. The problem with experience is that it is so relativistic and how exactly does a point "a" get to point "b" on the arrow of time is something that our best minds have admitted we don't really understand. I do think that for a scientist experience and experiments are fundamental but there is a room for doubt.
@@braydensmith7362 The vast majority of what we are taught by others, especially that which involves "beliefs" are all secondary concepts. For example the concept or idea of god is just a representation of anothers persons "beliefs"..their stories. The people that accept these beliefs have never had a direct experience of god, they accept /believe secondary representations from others. The teaching of scientific dogma is another example. Perspective is simply relative. Not sure what u mean by equal concepts....that sentence make little sense.
It's my perception as well. Symmetries may be aesthetically beautiful or elegant to many people, as well as often a powerful tool, but we shouldn't impose them on everything necessarily just because of that.
If I cant understand consciousness then u can’t say we imagine time and time emerges from our consciousness ! That’s a fallacy! You would have to demonstrate that
PLEASE READ TWICE. Maybe we only see the world in one frequency, this is my reality now at this point in time. If I'm able to change my frequency then I would see a different reality to this one but at the same point in time. Maybe there are infinite amounts of frequency's but only one time line. May be it isn't a line but a sphere, and the experiences/emotions in that reality are different depending on what frequency we are on at that point in time. Eg; I'm in my car traveling on a road from point A to Point B I'm listening to my radio but I change the station along the way I still get to my destination but my experience/emotions were different cause I changed the frequency. { I might of changed from classics to heavy metal this put me in a different mood which changed my outlook but the scenery out the window was the same so was the road I traveled on. } 1.] We can carbon date things on this planet back 1000's of years fact. 2] Two siblings can grow up in the same household but have two different outlooks on there childhood depending on their experiences they had during the same time line.
Serial time exists. Its importance is related to our daily life and death. Our time in this world is finite. We have another life depending upon what we do here... rest all this non sensical discussion is meaningless and a waste of real time.... read the book The Human Self and Allah by Parwez...
This is nonsense. Talk of change means nothing without time. Time is intrinsic to change. Please define change without time. Even if time isn’t fundamental doesn’t make it any less real. Is a flower not real because it isn’t fundamental?
He is correct. We observe change and called it time. This is the order it occurred. Man observed change for millions of years-then in the 13th century we divided it up and called it time. It was the beginning of reductionist science-Descartes then cemented this way of thinking around 1620 after his (lol) "divine dream". This is pretty basic. Change without time is just change, but time without change does not exist.
See it more as something to ponder rather than an all or nothing. The analogy with a movie being made up with a lot of separate shots is one such thing to ponder. We watch the movie and assume that something is moving. In fact that what is moving isn't the characters on the screen but the frames we see. Barbour is just saying, backed up by neurological observations, that what we perceive as motion doesn't in fact exist "out there" but is rather just a series of different frames, time capsules or "nows". Are you aware of the work of Lee Smolin and Roberto Mungabera? They believe that time exists and are working overtime to try to get us to rethink the idea that time is an illusion. They think the time is an illusion idea has terrible consequences for philosophy of life and how we treat each other. I am pretty swayed by their thinking. But I would't be inclined to just dismiss something out of hand without breaking it down and being sure I understand what is actually being said. All good things!
The problem with Julian Barbour’s idea with time is not that time is not continuous. I believe that likely there is a minimal amount of change and as such time that happen, maybe something like plank time, but Julian Barbour says he believes all the time slices are present in the brain at once and the brain takes those slices and gives order and illusion of movement to time through the “magic” of consciousness. I at most would say that the minimal unit of quantum time is too small for the brain to see the individual quanta of time... no big surprise there as the brain can’t see individual frames of a movie.
@@ChristopherWentling Yes Christopher I also find the idea the all those time frames or capsules are stored in the brain ready to be conjured up to create meaning as pretty implausible if not weird. It similar to those ideas that monkeys will eventually type out the entire works of Shakespeare word for word. As someone who believes in consciousness (the default assumption of hardcore materialistic science is that is doesn't) this way of thinking soon ends in a cul de sac. Perhaps, like art whose function it is to exaggerate things to see them clearer, these all or nothing (time exists or not) stances help to bring out truth dialectically cause that indeed is how our brains seem to work given the readiness of humans to slot so easily into one or other worldview.
@@ChristopherWentling Ex Excellent critique. I think you are onto something. Our experience is more primarily of discontinuities than of a dented consistency.
@@bradleybohus4097 Interesting exchange from both of you. I can sense 'initiative' 'impule' - Bergson has a great idea! This needs to be mixed in. It may yet lead us to a Creator, creating in us the impulse to live. Hopkins would certainly see it like that; and that is compatible with Heidegger as well as Plato.
„It is always now, only the content is constantly changing.“ (Eckhart Tolle)👍👍👍
When most physicists say, "Time is an illusion" they usually mean time moves at different rates as described by General Relativity. When Barbour says, "Time is an illusion" he actually means it.
I think it is not suitable for Barbour's view. You don't understand the meaning of Barbour.
most physicists actually mean it. At least they very often cite Bostrom's Anthropic Bias and it presupposed that time is an actual illusion
He still thinks he knows, or should know, how long ago his wife has died. So even he is not convinced as a human being that time is illusory. The question has a wrong answer for him, and for everyone else. The sequence of hand moves he considers 'real' but all he is doing is describing motion, immediately after saying motion is illusory. It's a circular argument about semantics at this point, not "reality"
Most physicists ?
Really ?
No. I disagree.
This man here has an opinion on time. There are many other different opinions shared by many physicists.
Time to me is necessary in our reality. It’s part of what makes existence possible.
The arrow of time is real.
I still have his book The End of Time from 1999. What a wonderful man.
I read his book on this subject many years ago. I could not claim to have understood all the mathematics. however his ideas were well presented and make more sense, than one might think on the face of it. “Time does not exist!” Sounds crazy but maybe it is not. Very interesting chap Barbour
I didn't understand the mathematical either... although it made sense intuitively to me.
@@ClaySanford-e8o Completely agree with that sentiment. He is a brave man Barbour,deciding to go on his own outside of academia.
The best way of answering the question, "What is Time"? is that time is the dimension between events!
What is event?
I read Julian's book in 2003. I was enthralled and happy to see this. He seems to be similar to Donald Hoffman's thoughts on time and consciousness. Thanks
The interviewer is awesome here! Really knowledgeable and probing 👍👍
Time just feels so simplistic, it's like it just feels like something that makes the math works
Excelent video. Philochrony is the theory that affirms that time is magnitive: objetive, imperceptible (intervals) and measurable (duration).
Wow, that's quite a load of nonsense.
@@schmetterling4477 You are wrong. Philochrony has the truth about time.
3:45 this is true for all our senses - we do not even see anything without micro movement
Time appears to be one of our senses: sight, hearing, touch, taste, smell, and time. No two people appears feel and experience time in the same way. For some it runs or flies, for others is drags and crawls. It's not when we are, it's where we are.
Yes! Even feelings. For me joy or anger is real, but those feelings do not exist on their own. Just like time. We made it up.
Nice analogy, we seem to have the ability to access memory and time by conscious means, which seems tangible but illusive. The human brain does filter time memories, I guess that is an evolutionary adaptation that keeps us universally connected?
Finally, after such a long time looking for it, here is one clear explanation of why time is an illusion! Thank you so much.
Time is the calculation of entropy.
The methodology of a speculative temporal philosophy
With the scientific development pointing into a certain direction across various disciplines, that time could only be an illusion, accompanied by a societal consensus vis-a-vis this conception, i decided to try and concept a new view on the philosphy of timelessness.
Asking yourself anything, being the main tool of all of philosphy, the questions that are being stated by a philosophy of timelessness are going to represent the core of this treatment. For some of them, first approaches are going to be delivered, which are to be executed at another point. This way, a first conception of this philosophy is to be proposed, and the foundation of the methodological framework for further considerations to be layed down.
The first obstacle to be overcome is the language. Besides others, the first ones to encounter some difficulties are the ones who try to define the nature of timelessness using a language which fundamental structure depends on the temporal order of being things.
Considering this, all expressions that are to be viewed on the background of timelessness, will be accompanied by a corresponding reference or a new term will be introduced.
The understanding of those terms, demands a high level of cognitive devotion to the following premise:
Time does only exist as a mental construct.
Regarding the previously stated warning, it is the language that creates a mental contradiction by speaking these words.
But since time cant be eliminated on a cognitive level, it is not yet necessary to predict an attack on the day to day semiotics.
But since we just eliminated time from a physical level, some of the rather intuitiv answers to simple questions seem not to be applicable anymore and other previously not even thought of questions seem to be pressing for an elegant solution.
Imagine a physical world without time, a consortium of from one another least possibly different nows, only connected through the laws of nature.
Every one of those nows would be equal in the face of timelessness and all of them would be happening simultaneously.
But there are nows, that include time, and it are those ones which include intelligent life itself.
Since intelligent life has to be made possible by selfawareness, and it itself needs a concept of a past and future self, u cant speak of single nows but rather a now complex.
Since there is no temporal Order of things, common physical equations have to be translated into the language of temporal philosophy as seen below:
A system moving at the speed v changes its state at a rate lower by a facotr of (1 − v2/c2)−1/2
than the system in the rest frame, meaning that every human life( if and as long as it has a concept of time )represents such a now complex, in which time is to be found, but only within the boundaries of the associated mind.
If the human consciousness moves in time, but the corresponding body itself does not, the conclusion is to be drawn, that at smaller mergers of nows within the human now complex, there are separate consciousnesses feeling the journey through time.
Therefore it has to be calculable how many of those conscious states a human now complex includes and therefore how often one appears in his own life.
The respective subject is then limited by time, constructed of almost innurable states of consciousness, all regarding themselves as the real present one, for eternity.
To put it in simpler terms: Your life is like a book, with the pages torn out and distributed on the floor. Every single page does exist equally next to the other, for ever.
Death can be defined as the first now of human now complex, from which on all following nows of that complex are not able to simulate the associated consciousness in relation to all other systems of the universe. This topic will be further discussed in the chapter devoted to the language analytics of the temporal Philosophy.
Going further into the book metaphor, you have a Universe consisting of several books, one them you, and the rate at which you read one book in relation to another is only determined by gravity and speed, the direction in which it is read by the laws of thermodynamics, the physical foundation will be specified at a given time. You should have a clearer pictures now, about the fundamental laws that determine this philosophy and to not stretch this introduction unnecessary i am now going to state the various forms of life that will be at the center of this philosophy.
It is defined by its relation to time and its perception and the practical part of this philosophy will be devoted to finding a series of demands u can set for interactions with the different kinds of life.
It will take some effort and will be discussed in different parts of this treatment but we will be able to split life into 4 categories:
unaware life
Aware life
Selfaware life
Selfaware life aware of timelessnes
Intuitivly less accessible and harder to visualize is going the be the approach to put a moral value on certain action, since the calculation will be determined by variable views on time, simply because life of every categories includes certain aspects of the previous categories and you will have to consider all possible angles on time before even trying on depicting a normative ethics of timelessness.
For the introduction into the temporal philosophy it will be enough to have a basic understanding of classical physics, thermodynamics and relativity. Quantummechanics will be introduced at a later stage to help us save the problem of the eternal return and derive the free will.
The speculative nature of this philosophy lays within the fact, that there is no scientific prove of its premise at the time this is being written and it therefore does not claim any sort of legitimation or applicability in the present moment.
I do think however, that a willing reader will have to accept the fact that a lot of things would have to change in human interaction if this premise is proven at a certain point and in the cultural evolution of every temporal philosophy it will be stated why a civilization is only able to conduct this thought process at a certain point of its development and even later will be able to accept its conclusions .
Aim of the methodology of the speculative temporal philosophy shall be: to present a perhaps purely biological distinction between the various layers of life made possible through a metaphysical framework in concurrence with and through current physical theories, along with the existing parameters respective to the aforementioned metaphysics study, as a basis for my chief work.
Time is not an illusion but it is a perception.
This is a very good question from 3:40. What will change? If we change the name and instead of time we will call it change. As if asking what the change is, how many changes have passed since you were born. Or maybe change is the fourth dimension. And instead of space-time, we have space-change.
Wonderful interview. One thing though; just as in the frozen time model of Einstein, if all the now's are just moments like frames from a movie, and movement itself in the sense of a flow is just an illusion, what causes his hand to be in one spacetime place, and then in another?
It's all a movie...just still moving at a certain rate...they say 24 fps produce more motion blur...or 30 fps... optimal for human eye
So, the question is: who&where is the director...
* "just still frames"
Attempt to answer: Energy appears to be at the basis of motion and gravity. His ability to control energy is what allows him to create his own motions.
Time is the repositioning of matter and energy due to energy. The mathematical concept of time is needed to describe chemical reactions, physical movement and the relativistic universe
How does causation and time happen in quantum fields / wave function? Could there be backward causation of time in quantum wave function?
Does time have something to do with energy moving towards equilibrium to increase entropy?
Is causation linked to consciousness / subjective awareness?
What an absolutely holistic thinker. I wish more physicists these days bothered with the classics, and with the understanding that not all of classical physics has been adequately reinterpreted in the wake of the quantum revolution.
I'm personally a possibilist, but I can certainly get behind Barbour's presentism.
Well said. I hope the near future brings us more holistic scientists like Barbour!
@@ConsciousnessWatch Or one of Barbour's nows!
Can causation in space-time of general relativity be related to causation in quantum field mechanics, how interact?
I like this and agree (on time). There is one geometry that addresses all these problems - QM and more - and it is fractals (emergent structures), and they're my business.
Wouldn't any fractal be a representation of 1, meaning every point in the universe is the same point of fractal within one infinite point, this would mean that humans are just waves of energy created by our entanglement of points that is created by the belief we can observe ourselves, perception and belief is what creates the energy of the universe and this creates set memory, fractals would be quantum points of density created by one point creating an infinite graph of density of mass that could go on infinitely within itself creating infinite memory from a finite infinite point of density. The universe can never change or nothing could be real for us.
lizzyann 76 🤯
Excellent. To be more precise, you might say, 'they're my concern'! Haha!
I love Sean Carroll's take on this. What does this view of time achieve? What does it progress? Does it generate any prediction or even effects? Carroll said that if anybody could demonstrate an effect or a value from looking at the world this way then he might be inclined to join the conversation. It seems no more than an exercise in semantics.
It forces a new understanding of math and if it is" true," what emerges is a way to manipulate space and time that we might not have constructed if we were tied so tightly to the somewhat illusion of time and space. The "units" you measure either with create the world you live in and construct in your programs and maths. When we approach other dimensions - very small for example sub atomic, we now have to reconcile ourselves and our measuring devices with the space we are attempting to describe and manipulate.
I think it goes much deeper than that. Lee Smolin also thinks some similar ideas and believes we may have to consider one of space or time as being emergent phenomena to even be able to make sense of quantum gravity.
Does he have any thoughts on Bergson particularly?
To everyone who likes Barbour ideas on time, check out Everything Forever from Gevin Giorbran.
this makes so much more (intuitive) sense as these convoluted spacetime explanations. But I wonder what he makes of time dilation experiments.
besides its mathematical necessity and the fact that we don't have any device to measure time directly (comparable to temperature - no one thinks theres is a "space-temperature dimension" in reality although we can read it on a thermometer) I've never seen any reason the believe there is a "flow of time".
Deep Time is a good comparison. In geology you are used to think in millions of years. So you constantly run into people thinking "yesterday" was a very important date but at the same "time" think whats below their feet has been that way forever. So it's not that time actually is that important.
I agree with him. I think time is an abstraction
Very interesting points are made. I was wondering if Mr. Julian harbour is aware of that jean-Pierre Petit , A French scientist already developed a cosmological model called “The Janus Cosmological Model (JCM) describes the universe as a Riemannian manifold with two different metrics that handle positive and negative masses in general relativity with no paradox, in very good agreement with latest observational data.”
Very interesting great point of view though I would call time a perception
Yes, I would say that we have two types, Emerging when translated to a mathematic construct like "t" , and Perception when it comes to human psychology.
We require to "measure" phenomena and for this purpose the "t" emerging construct.
We need to explain why we know the past and foresee the future and for this purpose we perceive.
Vengo de la revista "Muy Interesante Junior" de diciembre de 2020
Could quantum field(s) / wave function have causation that produces space-time in general relativity?
For millions of years our species only knew of change, not time. "All flows" is a universal axiom-we simply derived "time" from this.
I think we describe time as flowing for many reasons. One reason is we see a progression from the now to that now moving into the future and at same time becoming the past. There is a difference in these categories especially with the uncertainty principal taken into effect. The past is certain in a way the future can not be. The future is not 100% knowable due to uncertainty. The present is the nexus between the fixed and knowable and the only future which we can give probabilities to. This idea of time is not new. Time is also the rate at which something happens in relation to other things and not just the order. The fact that simultaneity in relativity is based on frame of reference doesn’t invalidate the reality of time. It just makes time a little more complicated. Also, this conversation about the brain ordering snapshots of nows and this giving the illusion of time is very problematic. First of all, such processing of snapshots relies on chemical processes that rely on a specific direction of time. Second of all it tends towards an almost mystical notion of consciousness created time. It’s possible I am not understanding this so tell me how time doesn’t exist? I agree time is not something any more fundamental than our universe but with that you have said nothing as everybody admits time as we understand it does not pre date the Big Bang so is not any more fundamental than the rest of the universe which started at the Big Bang... ideas of some kind of hypertime and multiverse aside. I really think much of this is a straw man attack on time. I think Lee Smolin in Time Reborn has a more accurate view of time.
@@ChristopherWentling We don't actually "see" progressions from present to past or future. They are all imagined or inferred. We only "see" the now. The truth is lost in your assumptions. Our concept of time is also a good example of how we make sense of the chaos, how we look for patterns and regularities in nature, give them a name, incorporate them in our lives and they then begin to shape us. It's also part of reductionism-breaking things down into parts and giving a new perspective. Time-as we know it today did not exist before clocks did. It has altered they very way we think. 400 years ago most things were measured by the rising and setting of the sun, with a few intervals in between. Try and imagine how this would change the way people think, and act-it's not hard. Also the claim that time began with a "big bang" is pure fiction. Popular "belief" does not equal an observable fact..or to put it another way, correlation is not causation.
@@surfinmuso37 : You could say the same thing about music. We only hear one note at a time, but our brain strings the past notes together in our memory to make a tune which in turns makes music. If we had no memory of the past, there would be no music.
@@bobblacka918 No. We hear much more than one note at a time - a chord is just one example(3 notes played at once-not separate at all).. up to a whole orchestra playing at once. Your example makes little sense.
Music ...and ALL things happen in the "now"..in reality there is no past or future, our memory makes us believe of a past...but even the past can only be perceived in the present.
Understand?
Also there are people that have little or no memory...yet they certainly experience music.
Mister ingratitude...
this was amazing, thanks
Life is Eternal,
Motion is the most precious sign of Life,
Time is 'the shadow' of Motion.
The Stuff-side, physical world, is a Motion-Ocean.
Ugh. I've been all enthused re: Barbour the last few days, and still think some of his thoughts make sense. But I just read a paper in which he espoused the Many Worlds interpretation. That's kind of a show-stopper for me. He did say "in modified form," though so I guess I'm willing to learn what his own version is.
Is there causation in change; if so time could be product of causation?
It's amazing thy can still teach it with the same fervour.
Yes, when the brin stop is a sign that shows by time movemento. Because, mind direction it will go like time movement. Which's really connected with the heart, andlastlIy. Heartcan stop, that was the end of each an individual's personal death
From this video, I could only say that the unification of classical and quantum is simply the symmetry, but to put this in a mathematical context or equations it goes beyond my skills in math and physics!
Beautiful summary. How many snapshots it takes for a researcher to put it that way! I love the parmenidesian twist on that. Even change is illusory. It would be too easy to say that time is relative to recurring moving objects. Once you have read Julian's books and articles and seen the videos plus same with his collaborators, you will eventually agree that there haven't been any other axiomatization and framework explaining timely things even close to their precision and comprehension.
Brain damage can create a strobe effect (like a disco)
The brain sees a series of frozen "motion"
The motion your brain generates isn't actually recorded at 60fps (or whatever)
The brain can't use that much energy
It is more efficient to create the appearance of motion from a few stills
Why is he not famous??
Time doesn't exist because it's always now and the day is always today. The past and the future don't physically exist.
if you take a 4D block universe, each observer moment inside that universe perceives a certain moment of time and considers it "now".
I have thought exactly the same thing! But yet I find myself feeling a temporal distance, for example when it's Sunday and I read about something that happened on the preceding Thursday. That was today, then, yes, but it was also three days earlier.
Solved
change is how we as humans measure time, but that does not mean that time is emergent from change. thats like saying a yard emerges from a yardstick.
That is exactly what happens in nature, though. If you don't have yardsticks, then there is no yard. I know, Plato... well, guess what? Plato was wrong.
@@schmetterling4477 wym?
Arguing time away is not really helpful. There's time dilation, dilated time, yet just because time is slowed dosent mean it stops. In the micro quantum world maybe fractillian sparkly world of subatomic forces interacting as the momentum energy travels through the matrix. These subatomic particles and their momentum are interconnected. Simply means the sparkly quantum particles that are being observed in that minuscule space one can see/imagine at that scale, will continue to sparkle and fluctuate because time affects time all the time, and the subatomic connect time and space. It's interesting that we have discovered that extremes in hot and cold such as the beginning and the end of the universe, matter in these extreme conditions exhibit fractillian interactions with eachother. Making their evolution mathematically predictable until they're temperatures increased or descreased, depending on which extreme hot/cold the matter is in, and fragment into smaller evolutionary systems evolving on their own. So is fractillian time evolution not time, see I'd say it is, even with particle evolution no longer in play, because it's the beginning or end of the universe and their are no particles, and surely the egg came before the chicken. Or is the chicken turning into an egg
Its funny-your reasoning is about trying to bend a created concept(time) to fit the phenomena of reality. For instance-since time was invented by man we have found that it is not constant and there are many factors comprising and effecting time. So we keep coming up with different names for new aspects of time. We have to enlarge the picture. Its kinda like trying to dig oneself out of a hole-we are just getting deeper into needless complexity. Not only that-then there is the even bigger problem of trying to fit time with other created concepts like gravity. So it goes on. And no-we know nothing about the so-called "beginning of the universe" so please do not claim speculation as fact.
Again, very lucid sidenote
@@MartinSmithMFM gravity spacetime causality you can't get to where you want to go until you get there. Gravity and spacetime are essentially the same thing. It warps spacetime. I don't see how gravity and spacetime, empty space, can be particlized. To me it's an absolute. Mass warps the field and is eventual absorbed as the matter decays. The only way I see spacetime as a particle would be like the entire universe as a single particle. Similiar I suppose like men in black where an entire universe thou is contained as a particle in a necklace. That's where (in that dimension or universe) is where things like the higgs field are treated like the electron photon fields. But in our reality as far as causality Spacetime gravity and matter consciousness are on even keel. So the past present future or more specifically the past and future are possibly in a duallity or superposition. So it isn't purely deterministic because each conscious moment of past time presents choices and if our time went on infinitely itd be an infinite number of conscious decisions. Consciousness decides an uncountable immeasurable exchange of gravity and spacetime. Because when did happen ok, but what did it do, only history can tell. Except maybe if you're in that alternate higher dimension. Some people choose to put others in danger and their families, choices
the universe exists in the box of consciousness
out of this realization that time is an illusion, unfortunately, nothing comes of it yet
Know what is in the box before thinking out side of it ..
18 min look to the golgi complex and gravity and sm. movements...
Shakespeare was not discussing the nature of time but the facticity of illusion. By this I do not mean illusions. I use the word in its philosophical sense.
He is correct. What we call time is just our way of measuring change. Man is the measure of all things. Things change at different rates so we divided a day into intervals calling it hours, seconds etc. Time is a great example of how man creates things and how those things then change us. I just wish he would not speak of things we do not know- "We know that just after the big bang...etc" No. We do not know this-it is mere speculation.
Great points. I am not sure you can really use, 'correct' here! "plausible" (?) ...
Superficial understanding of the term "Time".. It's not only related to change, Time is related to numbers and to spaces.. If time was not real when related to space then why the traveller by plane would get from a continent to another in couple of hours while traveller on a mule would take months to reach the same destination. We live in a space that has its own timer, and the timer is related to all the spaces and creatures that live within this space.. If time was not real, there would be no generations that die together and generations that are born together.. Yes time is not something physical, it's not made of matter, but it's real in the structure of life cycles.. It's there as much as moon and sun are there and it will remain to exist as long as the movements of planets continue in specific rhythm. to each one of us his own timer which is working within the global timer set for this planet
This is EXACTLY what I recently figured out in my ruminations. Is this guy a scientist or philosopher? Probably this idea, at least, is philosophical and hypothetical, and not testable, not refutable.
You say time is emergent. I think time is a logical and mental construct.
folds and transcriptions.
time emerging from causality sets up good models of the universe but they do very well and then they fail ! Maybe we got something wrong along the way ! Maybe it’s time maybe not
I found his narrative very mixed up and confused. He says time is an illusion and then talks about his wife passing two years earlier ? Time ?
Very confused this.
And God said, " I am the alpha and the omega" the beginning and the end. Timeless.
How do you know what god said? We haven’t seen this god
People have a distaste for simplicity...
His idea about time is ok as time seen by human sense, but it does no use to explain many phenomenons beyond of our sense capability. Equivalence of mass n energy for example. Time in reality is beyond our cognitive sense to grasp, thats why Einstein become man of the century because the way he understand things isn't like other human, and its explain many phenomenons.
Physical movement is, in my eyes, just a chemical reaction against gravity.
Every matter tries to be at the same place at the same time, called gravity, that's impossible. The reaction against is heat, cause of chemical reactions and fusions, which creates movement.
Movement always wants to stop, cause it needs energy from reactions of matter trying to be at the same place ^^ and only inside black holes wins the gravity.
Our impression of time is also just chemical reactions as long as we fighting against gravity.
Why would a painter come to these same thoughts on the non existence of time?
Because words confound us from birth...unless they’re in a poem jingle, or rhyme 🐚
Does reality have a frame-rate?
Nobody knows. But the frame rate would be too high for our brains to display it anyway, so you had to upgrade your hardware.
To rephrase your question in physicist's therms: is time a continuum, or is it quantized? Wikipedia answer (time):
Time quantization is a hypothetical concept. In the modern established physical theories (the Standard Model of Particles and Interactions and General Relativity) time is not quantized.
Planck time (~ 5.4 × 10−44 seconds) is the unit of time in the system of natural units known as Planck units. Current established physical theories are believed to fail at this time scale, and many physicists expect that the Planck time might be the smallest unit of time that could ever be measured, even in principle. Tentative physical theories that describe this time scale exist; see for instance loop quantum gravity.
15 min mass from the symmetry breaking...
That was quite interesting, but I'm not sold on the big bang just doesn't make any sense atoll. Starting position is a better way to think of it. Temperature of the vacuum space has increased from the previous epoch. So how does this happen. Microbes little half moon shaped life. This is how we get from a frozen state to a gaseous state of the infinite ♾️ vacuum space. About 10 or so years ago I had discussions about this with B,Cox under my full name and he had the same thoughts about the infinite ♾️ vacuum space. Water is a miracle in all its forms. And like our planet Microbes gave us oxygen. And with this the temperature went up. I believe this same process occurred in the vacuum space. Microbes may be throughout the entire infinite ♾️ vacuum space. So we need to capture some ice people lots of ice from the vacuum space and just see what shows up. If microbes are present, then that would certainly explain what's happened prior to this epoch. Let's start there.
But all the story of the night told over,
And all their minds transfigured so together,
More witnesseth than fancy’s images
And grows to something of great constancy,
But, howsoever, strange and admirable.
Constancy, not consistency!
One hellova long winded way of saying time is a construct of the mind to be able to interpret the world in a meanigful way.
TIME IS ALL ABOUT STATISTICS AND GRAVITY IS DA ONLY STATISTICIAN IN DA....RAUM...TO OWN TIME YA HAVE TO CONFRONT ALL OPTIONS AT ONCE...
Physicists Schmizicist.. as they all chase the laser pointer . Barbour locks onto the person moving it
It sound rather crazy to me. Not to say absurd and useless. "What was first, the chicken or the egg" sort of thing.
How though cause u still sense change when your in a still environment
Atoms and molecules are always in motion, and your body is comprised of atoms and molecules. This means that we can never be in an absolute state of being “still”. With that said, yes we can all sense change, but it does not prove that “Time” exists. Hope that helps.
@@yujen1645 both you and this physicist are wrong time is a sensible idea and all that we perceive are idea's!
Time as an independent "thing" has no existence apart from the Ultimate Reality, Pure Consciousness or Brahman (Cf. Shankara's Advaita Vedanta). This is experiential but not in a dualistic sense. To tap into and merge with the timeless eternal NOW, no problem. Access "Mahamritunjaya mantra - Sacred Sounds Choir" and listen to it for 5 min per day for at least two weeks. In due time you will experience a state that transcends time, (Turiya, the fourth state that engulfs waking, dreaming and deep sleep. There's only the eternal NOW. (Sat-Chit-Ananda).
🤯
Hasn't the relativity of simultaneity been experimentally verified? Also, He looks good for someone in his early 80's.
time is on his side
the Confucians made the image, the taoists animated it via a reflection.. movement and stillness
Time is the yardstick by which we measure entropy-change. So, time is necessary to measure physical change.
Yes, time is a very useful unit of measurement used to measure change, but that does not make time into something intrinsically real. Time is still just a human made-up concept.
Time has sequential direction and it's measurable. Second law of thermodynamics states that entropy only increases, universe began in low entropy state it expanded to a higher entropy. So it's not motion it's entropy that dictates arrow of time. If time was an illusion then we should be able to traverse just as easy back and to future which implies that universe deterministic and future already exists and my actions right now can impact not only future but past as well. Taking this notion of time being an illusion to its absurd conclusion.
I don't think Bardour would completely disagree with you here. When he says "time is an illusion", I think he specifically refers to the notion that "time is like a 4th dimensional axis in space-time geometry", and he doesn't mean "everything that happens is immutable and predetermined". The me it doesn't seem like he is trying to take choice, entropy or agency out of it. If anything, his notion of time as an emergent, unfolding property seems to align very well with the Bolzmannian arrow of time, right?
We could both check out his talk, 'Time's Arrow and the Entropy of the Universe', where he expands on the subject considerably: ua-cam.com/video/8Munhfxzv9w/v-deo.html
From the intro: interesting things happen when you no longer conceive of the universe as a closed system. Since entropy is typically defined using closed systems, one might find different behaviour once you pull the lid off the container.
No, entropy is a decrease, per se. You cannot have an increasing decrease!
El tiempo del hombre es diferente al tiempo de Dios,solo los justos están en el tiempo de Dios ,porque el tiempo del hombre es una ilusión
I love the way that Barbour thinks. But the statement "No one knows how consciousness works" is an outrageous claim. Such an absolute statement about global ignorance, when it is our particular individual ignorance that is unknown to begin with. Categorical statements about the ignorance of everyone else are a hallmark of unfortunate intellectual elitism.
The Janus model has been developed by a French physicist called Jean Pierre Petit...is this a copyright issue or are you guys collaborating?
Anyone can work on the Janus Cosmological Model just like Paul Dirac does not own positrons.
@@iroulis extremely true. 'There is no copyright on ideas' (Or titles. You could write a book called, 'The Bible'. But no-one would publish it!)
Sounds like this supports simulation theory.
Is there somewhere in these
Statements a knowledge of a Creator where time can
Start at the beginning of
Gods creation He allows us
our personal imagining.
Try start at The Tree of Life
M.Braithwaite Yorkshire Viking
Well I mean einsteinian gravitys been parroted so much by now it's nearly all fallen on dead ears by now.
Not really coherent. In one moment he denies spacetime/static time, which would be confirming the reality of time/change, and in the next moment he calls the passage of time an illusion.
We are kids. Long way to go? IMO time and space are the greatest and purest manifestation of this universe....If anything is real it is time, space and a higher order of consciousness... Not the experiences.
Hey? So your direct experiences are not real but your indirect/secondary ones/concepts are? u do have a long way to go.
@@surfinmuso37 I think our thoughts are kinda abstract reality and not physical reality. And, for some higher consciousness our physical reality is it's abstract reality-- the whole of existence may just be a thought of a higher consciousness. But from our perspective, in our limited consciousness, time and space are the most fundamental reality and not an illusion.
The problem with experience is that it is so relativistic and how exactly does a point "a" get to point "b" on the arrow of time is something that our best minds have admitted we don't really understand. I do think that for a scientist experience and experiments are fundamental but there is a room for doubt.
@@braydensmith7362 lol we are all entitled to an opinion...even if it is a very confused one.
@@braydensmith7362 The vast majority of what we are taught by others, especially that which involves "beliefs" are all secondary concepts. For example the concept or idea of god is just a representation of anothers persons "beliefs"..their stories. The people that accept these beliefs have never had a direct experience of god, they accept /believe secondary representations from others. The teaching of scientific dogma is another example. Perspective is simply relative. Not sure what u mean by equal concepts....that sentence make little sense.
God The Creater is the one who control the Universes
The end of time? The last idea... DCN
Why are scientists so obsessed with symmetries? Is not that some kind of bias?
It's my perception as well. Symmetries may be aesthetically beautiful or elegant to many people, as well as often a powerful tool, but we shouldn't impose them on everything necessarily just because of that.
Search a few videos here on Noether's Theorem. It is the foundation for why scientists like symmetries so much.
Study about symmetry and you'll see its importance.
If I cant understand consciousness then u can’t say we imagine time and time emerges from our consciousness ! That’s a fallacy! You would have to demonstrate that
PLEASE READ TWICE. Maybe we only see the world in one frequency, this is my reality now at this point in time. If I'm able to change my frequency then I would see a different reality to this one but at the same point in time. Maybe there are infinite amounts of frequency's but only one time line. May be it isn't a line but a sphere, and the experiences/emotions in that reality are different depending on what frequency we are on at that point in time. Eg; I'm in my car traveling on a road from point A to Point B I'm listening to my radio but I change the station along the way I still get to my destination but my experience/emotions were different cause I changed the frequency. { I might of changed from classics to heavy metal this put me in a different mood which changed my outlook but the scenery out the window was the same so was the road I traveled on. } 1.] We can carbon date things on this planet back 1000's of years fact. 2] Two siblings can grow up in the same household but have two different outlooks on there childhood depending on their experiences they had during the same time line.
why do we have to read twice?
Serial time exists. Its importance is related to our daily life and death. Our time in this world is finite. We have another life depending upon what we do here... rest all this non sensical discussion is meaningless and a waste of real time.... read the book The Human Self and Allah by Parwez...
This is nonsense. Talk of change means nothing without time. Time is intrinsic to change. Please define change without time. Even if time isn’t fundamental doesn’t make it any less real. Is a flower not real because it isn’t fundamental?
He is correct. We observe change and called it time. This is the order it occurred. Man observed change for millions of years-then in the 13th century we divided it up and called it time. It was the beginning of reductionist science-Descartes then cemented this way of thinking around 1620 after his (lol) "divine dream". This is pretty basic. Change without time is just change, but time without change does not exist.
See it more as something to ponder rather than an all or nothing. The analogy with a movie being made up with a lot of separate shots is one such thing to ponder. We watch the movie and assume that something is moving. In fact that what is moving isn't the characters on the screen but the frames we see. Barbour is just saying, backed up by neurological observations, that what we perceive as motion doesn't in fact exist "out there" but is rather just a series of different frames, time capsules or "nows".
Are you aware of the work of Lee Smolin and Roberto Mungabera? They believe that time exists and are working overtime to try to get us to rethink the idea that time is an illusion. They think the time is an illusion idea has terrible consequences for philosophy of life and how we treat each other. I am pretty swayed by their thinking.
But I would't be inclined to just dismiss something out of hand without breaking it down and being sure I understand what is actually being said.
All good things!
The problem with Julian Barbour’s idea with time is not that time is not continuous. I believe that likely there is a minimal amount of change and as such time that happen, maybe something like plank time, but Julian Barbour says he believes all the time slices are present in the brain at once and the brain takes those slices and gives order and illusion of movement to time through the “magic” of consciousness. I at most would say that the minimal unit of quantum time is too small for the brain to see the individual quanta of time... no big surprise there as the brain can’t see individual frames of a movie.
@@ChristopherWentling Yes Christopher I also find the idea the all those time frames or capsules are stored in the brain ready to be conjured up to create meaning as pretty implausible if not weird. It similar to those ideas that monkeys will eventually type out the entire works of Shakespeare word for word.
As someone who believes in consciousness (the default assumption of hardcore materialistic science is that is doesn't) this way of thinking soon ends in a cul de sac. Perhaps, like art whose function it is to exaggerate things to see them clearer, these all or nothing (time exists or not) stances help to bring out truth dialectically cause that indeed is how our brains seem to work given the readiness of humans to slot so easily into one or other worldview.
@@ChristopherWentling Ex
Excellent critique. I think you are onto something. Our experience is more primarily of discontinuities than of a dented consistency.
His argument 8:00 - 11:30 is backwards and wrong, movement is real the fact that movement takes time is why the brain "takes snap shots".
U seem confused. The brain is not a camera and does not take snapshots. U are projecting.
@@surfinmuso37 so when u get in your car what do you do?
@@bradleybohus4097 Interesting exchange from both of you. I can sense 'initiative' 'impule' - Bergson has a great idea! This needs to be mixed in. It may yet lead us to a Creator, creating in us the impulse to live. Hopkins would certainly see it like that; and that is compatible with Heidegger as well as Plato.
his theoretical physics are an illusion. time is real.
@Jane Christensen check the electric universe and for time. you have plenty of proof^^
Boogeyman @boogeyman, I hope you’re not suggesting that a “theory” is “proof”.
It' so sad that such an old man hasn't been able to figure this triviality out, yet.
Movement is not an illusion.
The guy plays wt words.
thank you for asserting your position