Time has long been a major subject of philosophy, art, poetry, and science. There are widely divergent views about its meaning; hence it is difficult to provide an uncontroversial definition of time. Many fields use an operational definition in which the units of time are defined. Scholars disagree on whether time itself can be measured or is itself part of the measuring system.
Absolute, true, and mathematical time, in and of itself and of its own nature, without reference to anything external, flows uniformly and by another name is called duration. Relative, apparent, and common time is any sensible and external measure (precise or imprecise) of duration by means of motion; such a measure - for example, an hour, a day, a month, a year - is commonly used instead of true time.
The idea that time could be something that we have invented, rather than something intrinsic to the universe, has a long history. In 5th century BC Greece, Antiphon the Sophist wrote, in his chief work Truth;
"Time is a thought or a measure, not a substance."
Similarly, Parmenides believed that time, motion, and change were illusions, leading to Zeno's paradoxes (Zeno was a follower of Parmendies).
Immanuel Kant, in the Critique of Pure Reason, described time as an a priori notion that allows us (together with other a priori notions such as space) to comprehend sense experience. With Kant, neither space nor time are conceived as substances, but rather both are elements of a systematic mental framework necessarily structuring the experiences of any rational agent, or observing subject. Spatial measurements are used to quantify how far apart objects are, and temporal measurements are used to quantify how far apart events occur. Similarly, Schopenhauer stated in the preface to his On the Will in Nature that "Time is the condition of the possibility of succession."
In contrast to Newton's belief in absolute space, and closely related to Kantian time, Leibniz believed that time and space are a conceptual apparatus describing the interrelations between events. The differences between Leibniz's and Newton's interpretations came to a head in the famous Leibniz-Clark Correspondence. Leibniz thought of time as a fundamental part of an abstract conceptual framework, together with space and number, within which we sequence events, quantify their duration, and compare the motions of objects. In this view, time does not refer to any kind of entity that "flows," that objects "move through," or that is a "container" for events.
Emerson considers time as presentness, where past and future are but our present projections (of our memory, hope, etc.). For Emerson, time needs a qualitative measurement rather than a quantitative one.
In Existentialism, time is considered fundamental to the question of being, in particular by the philosopher Martin Heidegger. See Ontology.
My favorite: Einstein's time
Einstein's answer overturned long-held ideas about the nature of time as a steady, continuous progression of events from past to present to future. Although it's hard to believe, there is no single "master clock" for the entire universe. Time does not progress at the same rate for everyone, everywhere. Instead, Einstein showed that how fast time progresses depends on how fast the clock measuring time is moving. The faster an object travels, the more slowly time passes for that object, as measured by a stationary observer. Perhaps even more astonishing, one person's past could theoretically be another's future—which is why Einstein described the past, present and future as "persistent illusions." This room and everything else on Earth are traveling at 107,000 kilometers (67,000 miles) an hour around the Sun. You are standing still, but only in relation to Earth. Relative to the Sun, you are traveling through space very quickly. Physicists use the phrase "relative motion" to convey the idea that whether an object is at rest or in motion depends on your point of view—or your "frame of reference."
2006-06-17 08:35:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Hawk996 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
well OBVIOUSLY time exists. I mean if it DIDNT exist, how could you explain DAY and NIGHT, MONTHS, and YEARS. minutes and seconds, even hours ? Those all show TIME passes and exists.
If time didnt exist then i dont know i guess things would be more blan or w/e coz theres not different months days etc. you would just b stuck in one moment and nothing would ever change. No one would grow older, no one would be born no one would die. Unless god put us in a certain age group or something NO ONE WOULD EXIST. I never thought of this before but i guess the world DOES revolve around time. Does that help ? Well according to this t e e n a g e r time *does* EXIST ask me if you need nething elsee
xox
_______' s h a w t y ;; <3*
2006-06-17 15:38:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Physical time has a physical existence. Its duration is what exists with the absence of either the past or future. Everything of physical nature of the past exists in the "present" as does all that shall happen in the future. Its physical value is always that of a memory. There are no events taking place that you are able to directly observe. Everything drops into the past even before you are able to perceive the light coming from it, or are able to sense it in any other manner. I have wondered if this may be the reason that God made our minds of electro-chemical composition - so that everything would be slowed down to where we could recognize it as a continuum. I don't know.
2006-06-18 19:02:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe that it does, because as time goes by, nature moves on - plants grow, people grow, animals grow. It also lets us die and move on.
Even if time doesn't exist, the world's put a really simple but convienient way to tell how the world passes and how days pass.
2006-06-17 15:36:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jason 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Time is a human measurement of events and was created to help us mark seasons - mathematically time is a concept that coupled with other variable allows us to mark other human measurements such as speed and gravitational force. Time is the measuring stick of the cosmos like a ruler is the measuring stick of distance.
2006-06-17 15:53:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by Chief Mac 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Heck Yea! If time didn't exist, then nothing would be here. Nothing! There wouldn't be time to have anything happen
2006-06-17 15:35:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Hurricanehunter 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
of course it does exist, otherwise, u wouldn't be here in this forum, counting the minutes when ur gonna get the answer for ur question!
2006-06-17 15:45:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by I ♥ me 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
time bears a testimony to the fact that we are going forwards.
it just reminds us that we can never go back .
it helps the world to move at a brisk pace without any confusion.
2006-06-18 01:54:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, it's the 4th dimension to a 3D space.
2006-06-17 20:46:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by wefields@swbell.net 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
time is just someones view of what they think should be. time is a four lettered word for confusion
2006-06-17 16:41:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by cridernet_55 1
·
0⤊
0⤋