Everything is event driven

D

Designer2

Chrono Cadet
Everything is event driven

I find time slows down just before an event for example the pope resignation.
Then once revealed to everyone time speeds up again thus time is event driven not clock driven.
Specific event have to happen before changing into a new time line that is why
everything slows down before an even. Nothing else to do in time till after this
specific event. I also noticed this phenomenon before the US elections final count.
So I thing we should call this event lines instead of time lines.

Designer.
 
That is more a feeling that anything else I think. But you are right, time does not spend the same all the time. As the universe is bigger everyday and so as we are smaller, distances are bigger so in relation we spend more time.
 
Events blink in and out of time that either entangle together and resonate or detach and dissociate some events a recreated other die(destroyed) some static others unnoticed. It is like the GAME OF LIFE which is event driven with the illusion of time built into it. Think of each dot an event like a volcano going off person dies/begin born or a window breaking due to ball from a street. Now since everything is event driven time prediction are very hard to figure out right, even by a time traveler. History is not written in the game of life so why should our future be. The game talks about us LIFE. View the links below.

Conway's Game of Life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Animation of the game of LIFE.



So think of each dot at as event in time like a tree falling.
Designer
 
not feeling it Designer: I think your just describing the very natural process of the mind processing information differently in different situations. The speeding up of perception (and therefore the sense of things in slow motion) is a very well documented and well understood phenomenon that is not in any way mysterious and has nothing to do with time being 'event driven'. Are you putting a differnet spin on that experience or are you proposing something completely different to this?
 
This is how reality functions.

EVENT
At the Large Hadron Collider when the collision occurs the partials that comes out hits the detectors yearling data.
Without this event nothing would be detected event driven.

EVENT
Without this event other event would not occurs like research.

EVENT
But not if the Large Hadron Collider was not built then particles would not be collided.

EVENT
But note if congress did cut I believe the SuperCollider the Hadron Collider would not be built.
And to end it.

Theory
If the Hadron Collider being built the first time machine would not be built from the data.

Summary
Its everything above being event driven and really not at all time driven.
Lets say a bird nest in the Collider and damages it it is an event
and thus no research in the future.

There is a cascading butterfly effect after the bird that effects researchers
in the future. EVENT EFFECT THING NOT TIME. Don't look to time for answer
but EVENTS that the key to future predictions. They say that prisoners that come out
of jail haven't aged; this is because that haven't had much out side event effecting them
that would age them and thus note time. But note they did the time for the event. ;)

Then coming back to you point your mind will be event driven.
 
ok: but what is profound about that? Of course everything (ie every consequence) is event driven. Thats hardly a revelation. If I put my hand over a candle I get burnt. If I spill a cup, water goes on the floor, if a bird nests in the hydron collider, the janitor gets a bad appraisal and no bonus this year.

Sorry if Im being dim: but I dont understand your point, and equally, I dont understand what your last post has to do with your first post. They seem to me making to different propositions that arent related to each other. Not being critical, but I just want to understand whatever it is you are trying to say.
 
When events don't happen the illusion of time slow down time really does not exits a watch is a toy.
There is not a lot of events in a prisoners life so he does not age the illusion of time slows down.
Time moves fast when you having fun out side a prison.
My conclusion is with no events the illusion of time slow
Lots of event the illusion of time fast.
If you believe time is real then events change the speed of time
according to the above.

Ill go one even further let say there where only two objects in the universe that are stationary.
An event occurs and one of the objects accelerates away. The illusion of time will exits right.

Second scenario lets say we have two objects again and they don't move away and they just don't move
totally static we find there is then NO TIME. Since there is no change time does not exist since time measures change.

So time depend on events. Where event don't depend on time. Since no event no time!

This is what I am trying to get at.

This is my personal belief I hope you understand it.

Designer
 
I think I understand, but in saying that, I think I understand that you are simply describing the very normal human experience that time appears to by faster when your highly engaged in something than when you are bored. You cant exptrapolate from that all kinds of physics and conclusions about the nature of time: it just doesnt stand up to any examination.

for example: you say: "when events dont happen, time slows down". No: when events dont happen, your mind has nothing to distract it and its more concious of every minute. Nothing is happening to time; something is happening to your perception.... which is what you yourself actually say too. On that basis I dont think you are saying anything new or profound. Its the kind of thing a kid would say when bored on a long summer holiday.
 
I am talking logic not the mind.

Here another example.

Lets say there are two spheres objects spinning in oposite direction in space is there time. NOPE No time.
Sphere are perfect smooth nothing to distinguish motion no time. Time an Illusion.

Second scenario:

Two clocks in space not ticking voluntarily or non voluntarily thus no time same thing no time right. If I am wrong
explain the sphere problem.

Voluntarily or non voluntarily means pegged or unplugged.

There is a nuance I am not getting across; time is an illusion and clocks are toys.
Time cannot exist without events since time needs event thus determines its rate and speed.
I am not talking about toy watches as time though they have there own illusionary time separate from us.

Final Thought

Does Relativity exist without objects in empty space. NOPE. No relativity.
 
You are basically trying to argue a variation on "if a tree falls in a forest and no one see's it, does it make a sound" with the answer "no it doesnt. "

You are saying.. "if time occurs in a space, and there is no clock or event to mark it, is there any time?" and your answer is "no, there isnt".

Sorry, no disrespect, but that doesnt hold any water logically, and you cant build a model of space/time around it. You have totally confused the subjective experience of time (events, clocks, feelings) with the objective nature of time (time)
 
EVENT
At the Large Hadron Collider when the collision occurs the partials that comes out hits the detectors yearling data.
Without this event nothing would be detected event driven.
Click to expand...
 
EVENT
At the Large Hadron Collider when the collision occurs the partials that comes out hits the detectors yearling data.
Without this event nothing would be detected event driven.
Click to expand...

That's one of the principle differences between the Copenhagen Interpretation and Many Worlds Intrepretation (of quantum mechanics). In Copenhagen the observer, a somewhat vaguely defined term and subject to debate but includes mechanical detectors, is necessary for the resolution of the quantum event resulting in the collapse of the probability wave to a singularity - single outcome. In MWI no observer is necessary for the event to resolve. I in this case there is no collapse of the probability wave - multiple outcomes played out "somewhere else" - again vaguely defined as to what that actually means in terms of physical reality.
 
Designer2 said:
Lets say there are two spheres objects spinning in oposite direction in space is there time. NOPE No time.
Sphere are perfect smooth nothing to distinguish motion no time. Time an Illusion.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't time exist if those two Spheres were cubes instead; or even then would it still be an illusion? From what I gather, you're saying that if there is not an event to cause a difference in the universe, then there is nothing to distinguish the past from the present, resulting in time being at a standstill.

I can grasp that much, though I still do not understand what you mean by time slowing down before an event though.
 
Dexter

My theory is this

If there is no event time slow as if nothing is there as stated in all my thought experiments
above right. (two static spheres) or go to the extreme empty space no time.

In my thought experiment above when there is change time in created and moves.
(two moving spheres away from each other) or bouncing ball.

So time slow down when there are no events.

Another angle.

Let say there is a series of events in the future dependent on this one event 911 and everything is waiting
for that one event. For everything to sink up properly time must wait for 911 to occur before that future event
is realized and start running. Time must slow as a necessity for those waiting series of events.

PS
Yes I selected sphere deliberately.
 
Darby said:
That's one of the principle differences between the Copenhagen Interpretation and Many Worlds Intrepretation (of quantum mechanics). In Copenhagen the observer, a somewhat vaguely defined term and subject to debate but includes mechanical detectors, is necessary for the resolution of the quantum event resulting in the collapse of the probability wave to a singularity - single outcome. In MWI no observer is necessary for the event to resolve. I in this case there is no collapse of the probability wave - multiple outcomes played out "somewhere else" - again vaguely defined as to what that actually means in terms of physical reality.
Click to expand...

It's just a poor example I try to make it into a story.
 
Designer: just because you cant see motion on a sphere doesnt mean it isnt moving!!
You are just repeating the same point about a falling tree in the forest not making any sound, arent you?

Look, dispense with the 400 word responses: if you really have something to impart try and explain it simply.

But stop with this nonsense that time doesnt exist or changes speed just because you cant perceive motion or an event within it... and Darby is giving you far too much credit by replying with physics because physics are nothing to do with your proposition!
 
Then I will have to build it up this way.

If there was nothing in creation is there TIME.
Can time exist with nothing within it or through it?

Final point.

Time is quite intangible.
But is length width and height.

So if there is nothing in creation again
is there length width and height?

It not that tangible so does it then exits in nothing?

Designer

PS events determine the future not time
 
Designer2 said:
Then I will have to build it up this way.
If there was nothing in creation is there TIME.
Can time exist with nothing within it or through it?
Click to expand...

I would imagine it can quite happily. does time cease in a vacuum?


Designer2 said:
Time is quite intangible.
But is length width and height.
So if there is nothing in creation again
is there length width and height?
Click to expand...

Time is a concept, that describes a phenomenon that is measurable; so on that score, I'd say it isnt intagible at all.

If there is no creation there is nothing physical at all, but that doesnt mean there are no concepts. 1 is still 1 whether there is a creation or not. And trees still make a sound when they fall in the forest whether there is anyone there to hear it or not.

So, apologies Designer2, every time I consider your hypothesis I find your supporing presuppositions as questionable or run into logical brick walls even if I (for the sake of the arguament) run with the idea your putting out there.
Youre asking me to accept premises that are false.
 
Everything is event driven

Time is effected by events

1.Two stationary object in a void
2. EVENT 1 object A move away at the speed of light
3. Temporal relativity occurs.
4. EVENT 2 object A stops.
5. Temporal relativity stops.

Without events temporal relativity would not occur.

Thus events effect time and everything is event driven. Get the picture.

This who thread is about events so I met my obligation.
 
Designer2 said:
Everything is event driven

Time is effected by events

1.Two stationary object in a void
2. EVENT 1 object A move away at the speed of light
3. Temporal relativity occurs.
4. EVENT 2 object A stops.
5. Temporal relativity stops.

Without events temporal relativity would not occur.

Thus events effect time and everything is event driven. Get the picture.

This who thread is about events so I met my obligation.
Click to expand...

I think that the problem that you're having here is a matter of definition. You really haven't clearly defined what you mean by an "event" or "temporal relativity".

In your examples you have a single object moving and stopping (events) and the termination of temporal relativity (relativity). The temporal relativity part lacks something. It lacks an observer. Relativistic effects are what are recorded by a "stationary observer" in special relativity. The object under observation does not experience the relativistic effects. In fact, in special relativity, each one of them can correctly define the situation as the other being the moving object or the stationary object because the situation is relative to the perspective of the observer. Unsurprisingly, that's why it is called relativistic physics. Without an observer there are no relativistic effects. Without a second object against which to measure change uniform (unaccelerated) motion cannot be detected.

In modern relativistic physics the term "event" has a specific definition. Special Relativity is placed on a manifold that is named Minkowski Space. It is a 4 dimensional "world" (Minkowski World) with 3 space dimensions and 1 time dimension. In that world objects' histories can be traced by their unique lines, vectors, through spacetime (worldlines). Each point on the worldline is an "event" defined by four coordinates, one of which is time. Even if the object is at rest (delta (x,y,z,) = 0) relative to someother object the object's worldline continues to elongate because of the time component (delta (t) > 0.

Multiple events have seperation (the spacetime interval between two points on the worldline). The seperation is in terms of spacetime, not just space or time. The seperation between two events can be timelike, lightlike (null) or spacelike. Without going into the Lorentz Transformation let's look at the seperation as follows:

The speed of light is c = 300,000 km * 1 sec^-1 (300,000 km per second).From that we can "transform" 1 sec = 300,000 km and 300,000 km = 1 sec.

Now we can look at timelike, lightlike and spacelike and define them.

Timelike

We have an object moving at 1/2 the speed of light. It is travelling at 150,000 km * 1 sec^-1. Apply the transform.

It is moving 1/2 sec through space for every 1 sec of time. It travels through more time than space for it to move from event A to event B. It has a timelike seperation between the two events.

Even if this object was at rest it it takes more time than space to move from event A to B.

Lightlike (Null)

Our object is now traveling at the speed of light. It is travelling at 300,000 km * 1 sec^-1. Apply the transform.

It is moving 1 sec through space for every sec of time. For every unit of space that it traverses it takes exactly the same amount of time. Speed of light defined.

Spacelike

Last, our object is travelling at twice the speed of light. It is travelling at 600,000 km * 1 sec^-1. Apply the transform.

It is moving 2 sec through space for every 1 sec of time. It travels through more space than time to move from event A to event B. It has a spacelike seperation between the events.

Note: I didn't show it but in the above examples you can just as easily and correctly state the situations in spatial distance seperation instead of temporal seperation. Just use the other half of the transform. Also note than I've purposely left out all relativistic effects in the examples. They are there in the real world but for this post unnecessary to make the point. :)
 
Back
Top