Knowing that we are traveling through space at astronomical speed we can accept the commonsense notion that ..

Question

....we are standing still as an illusion. Why then is it so difficult to accept that the commonsense notion that we are moving through time might similarly be an illusion? That perhaps we are not moving through time at all?

"*" Could it possibly be that you and all the experimenters and observers are unable to see beyond our event horizon? Perhaps it is only within our light cone that time can be measured in the manner you insist on. Once outside that restrictive zone all bets are off.

Anyway, I'm not claiming this is so. I'm simply saying that it cannot be disproved.

Of course time can be measured and worked with conventionally within our light cone. Such is the plan of the universe. Time is the way we separate and measure events, but that all takes place within our event horizon. That perspective is somewhat limited. Just as Newton's laws are still applicable even in our new relativistic universe. Applicable, yes. But only a special case, only true within a limited defined realm.

Isn't it true that elementary particles are not subject to time's arrow? And if tachyons actually do exist somewhere beyond our event horizon, outside our light cone, that would necessitate a redefining of the notion of time because is not that notion now linked to the speed of light in a relativistic world?

Answer 1

Because our understanding of time incorporates our memories of the past and our imaginings of the future so we envision ourselves moving from one to other. It may, indeed, be the case that we are witnessing time moving past us. It may also be the case that every possible event is happening continually and that we are moving from one to the other randomnly though it appears causally. IOW, it may be that after X we could move to A, B, C, etc. ad infinitum. Which one we do move to, say it's 'A' is absolutely random but perceive it as causal, that is, that X =caused= A.
Quien sabe? :-)
p.s. You would enjoy Suskind's book "String Theory and the Illusion of Creationism"

Answer 2

You see ..Time is linear as we know it !! We humans have devised a time schedule of the second that encompasses the revolution of our world of a day and night , this is what we know ... but perhaps in a different point in the universe ,the time is smaller than a second or perhaps longer ? so an illusion is only relevant from an out side point of view.

Answer 3

Maybe time doesn't exist.
When you ask, "What time is it?" by the time your answer comes it will be the future relative to the query, which is in the past. There can only be a past and future as long as there is a present. Therefore time doesn't exist...or does it? The idea of "moving" through time fits the above, doesn't it? Moving through time implies not stopping, which means there is no present but only what is ahead of and behind us.

Answer 4

tim eis an illusion my friend. Do a search on nuetrino's some time. They exist all around, at all places at once, throwing linear time out the window.

Einsteins relativity theory is coming closer to being proved everyday.

Answer 5

If we were not moving though time then it would still be yesterday. Time in the physical world is pertinent, accurate, and reliable. Time in the world of consciousness is relative. Time flies, time creeps like a snail. In that respect time IS an illusion.

Answer 6

I do NOT mean to be condescending at all, but I am afraid you have made an ill-formed question by unwittingly mixing and matching various distinct notions/views of time. To start with: Are you defining time as an objective thing - itself to be measured - or as part of a mental/emotional measuring system? If time is defined as the dynamics of movement amongst objects then I suppose it cannot be viewed as anymore of an illusion than say change, evolution, growth, speed, acceleration, and alike. Or are you calling time illusionary simply because it does not appear to be palpably tangible? … In all, I have a hunch that your insistence on time as an illusion must have originated in your counter-experimental ontological presumption. One that sees all time as being simply NOW in the realm of existence. In other words, all that there is, exists NOW somewhere; a curiously omnipresence recognition of time in the being and nothingness of all existence at once - and hence, effectively No Time at all. However, such a simultaneous Universal being-there-ness of time (or its illusion thereof) is in fact contrary to ALL our scientific theories and experimental observations.



“*” YES, I could have offered you a different point of view (in fact more than one), although I still say you are mixing and matching hypothetical, and in some instances, contradictory and mutually exclusive notions of time here. But frankly, I am at a loss here as how to even address your (Philosophy of) Science questions anymore:

If I answer with an Anomalous Transdimensional-type perspective (i.e. a totally far out approach) – you accuse it of being so much intellectual gibberish and otherwise “traveling crap”.

If I respond with a cutting-edge/ongoing research point of view – you dismiss it as too beyond of the beyond of an answer (as flattering a compliment as that may be) and one that is not “simple” and “elegant” enough.

If I go about it using an orthodox scientific outlook – you call it an unimaginative garden-variety vanilla response.

If I treat it with a purely esoteric / spiritual flavor – you call it “talking in cryptic riddles”.

If I try to be purely philosophical about it – you condemn it as being unnecessarily metaphysical, and not down-to-Earth enough.

If I answer playfully – you call it brain teasing and not being forthright enough!

If I try to be purely mathematical/technical about it – you still point the finger at it as having used impenetrable language / jargon.

If I use the combination methodology of employing some or all of the above strategies – you call it “a hodgepodge conglomerate of nonsense”.

So perhaps what you are actually looking for in response to your (science-oriented) questions are simple reaffirmations of your own beliefs (Please think about that, carefully). And that, frankly, is NOT something that you should always expect to get from a friend with any degree of “Integrity”. So maybe from here on, I ought to simply stick to answering your poetry/literary-related inquires – you seem to be much more objective and open-minded with respect to those.

P.S. I can see as part of your ongoing battle against the scientific establishment, your strong convictions in your 40+ years of work on the mathematical implications of “I Ching” (i.e. your intellectual baby – as most of us happen to have one or two), which may or may not exactly jive with the accepted scientific paradigm. To which I say, do what you believe in and stop worrying about what others may or may not agree with. If there is any deep underlying validity to your independent research, its truth will not remain suppresed forever by the opposing forces.

Answer 7

fur, Love your questions because of the fact it supplies me an excellent gamble to spout off slightly and particular study some thing on an identical time. What of the Akashic record, or “e book of stay. The Akashic information are atoms of Akasha what Aristotle referred to as aether. between the 5 kinds of atoms visualized as present interior the atomic theory of historic India, referred to as Mahabhuta. In Buddhism this is taught one reason that folk knew Gautama had attained enlightenment as a Buddha turn into because of the fact he turn into waiting to bear in mind all the main significant factors of all of his previous lives with the help of getting access to them on the Akashic information. interior the hot Age discourse the term Akashic information is often used. this is promulgated interior the Samkhya philosophy that the Akashic information immediately recorded are interior the atoms of Akasha. take a glance/see.

Answer 8

in the space-time continuum it is merely our "perception" of time which is illusional. time only exists in the present moment ie;
eternity is now.
if you could get outside of your "self" for a moment you could experience eternity.
it is self which seperates us from the universe.
if infinity is real then from the center of me/out in all directions is infinite and I am therefore the center of the universe yet it is the "I"
in that center which seperates. paradoxical at the least.

Answer 9

Time is the ultimate illusion.

Answer 10

Its not difficult, its soooo simple, but because of its simplicity its so hard to grasp. You could even say that time doesn't exist, relatively speaking it doesn't.