what is time when there is none?
132418
Time is unpredictable in the absolute: If I roll \na beachball 10 yards in 1 minute you cannot predict \nhow long it will take that beachball to roll 10 yards \n(as long as you know I am rolling it): You can only \nmake the prediction if you are too stupid to know \nI am rolling it. \n\nThis means I can warp Time, and thus... Time is not \ncontrolled by the laws of physics = it does not "exist" \n(since everything that exists is controlled by the laws \nof physics, not my own arbitrary laws). \n\nOr, it may take a planet 365 days to travel once around its \nstar, but if another planet unexpectedly passes near enough \nto our planet to slow it down, it may take 366 days or even \n400 the next orbit (our predictions using Time are always \napproximations: NOTE the role played by "our" ignorance).... \n\nHow do we tell the past from the present, \nor from the future? (Since we cannot, really, we \nusually do it quite arbitrarily: If we see dinosaurs \nwalking about it's the past--even if we might \nreally be walking around a future Jurassic Park. \nOr we just might remember... back when we were \na leaping tree swinging from plane to plane like \nTarzan--Waitaminute: Wasn't that a dream?...) \n\nLet's postulate that existence is an icecube: \nLet's take that icecube and melt it. (past=icecube, \npresent=pool of water) Now take that pool of water \nand reconstitute the icecube (icecube=future). \nHow do we differentiate past from future? Given \nthe same temperature both will melt at the same rate \n(e.g. the second icecube will not seem older than \nthe first one). The two will seem identical. \n\nSurely, you say, although they look identical to us \nthe future's subatomic particles are older than \nthe subatomic particles of that previous icecube \n(of the past)....!!!!!! \n\nThe subatomic particles would remember and \nthe second icecube would be newer than the first: \nYes, but existence is both what is apparent to us \n(and both icecubes would seem identical to us), \nand what is not: indeed the subatomic particles \nwould know the first icecube is older than the second), \nalthough what's that to us? (The subatomic particles \nwould never be able to tell us this, and so we would \nreally never be able to tell the past from the future.) \n\nNow let's say the Big Bang universe always collapses \nto an always identical singularity and always \nexpands to an identical universe: Again, even if \nsomething remembers which universe is older, they \nwould all seem identically aged to the observers \nwho are observing them at identical moments in \ntheir expansions. That makes Time meaningless. \n\nAnd, if you're one of those guys who'd rather \nknow things theoretically anyway, then you have no \nuse for the icecube... so replace it with whatever \nsubatomic primordial particle you'd like (as long \nas you can deconstruct it and reconstruct it again \nso that the reconstructed particle is identical to the \ndeconstructed one). In fact, this is easier still, because \nyou won't have to wait around for the icecube to \nform again... But you will still face the dilemma that \nyou will not be able to tell the past from the future \n(remember: we will always suspect that "something" \nwill know past from future, it's just that we won't know). \n\nThe point: If we cannot tell the past from the future \nwhy are we using it to construct reality?!?!?! \n\nTo say that Time exists we have to KNOW it does \n(but we do not know). When psysicists require the \nexistence of Time for the construction of one of their \ndimensions it's as if they were requiring the existence \nof the Easter Bunny. It may be charming, but it's \nalso quite crazy and self-defeating. \n\nIn practice (and forever) there is no past and there is \nno future: Only the present exists. And in that present: \nexistence is constructed (or described, whichever you \nprefer) by shapes and th
418762
Time- and who knows where it goes- don't know where it came from- D
415817
You can't move through something that doesn't exist! Time is not a NATURAL feature of the universe but simply a concept invented by our species to separate events into past, present and future. There is no Cosmic Master Clock that keeps track of absolute, universal time. There is no physical "past" trailing along behind the "present," nor any physical "future" waiting up ahead for us to get there.
477227
No, time and light are not the same thing.  You can have time without light.  You're probably thinking of mass and energy.
480196
You have probably figured out that no number will make this statement true. But don't forget about zero. \nYou will also find problems where even zero does not work. In those cases, "no solution" is the correct answer.
570258
The proper time is given by the formula \n\nT0 = T x square root of {1 - (v/c)^2} \n\nThis means a clock moving in any arbitrary manner moves slower than a stationary clock.\n\nIt took me a long time to understand your question. Now I do understand it. \n\nSome shrewd person could have understood sooner than me.\n\nI think time moves slowly for me. That is why it took a long time for me to understand it. \nI got the answer. Time is dilated for me. That is why it took a long time (Slow)
609856
Does any body really know what time is?  Does any body really care about time?  As I was walking down the street today, being pushed and shoved by people trying to beat the clock, that day, that day.....does anybody really know? Does anybody really care?
405874
Actually you are on the deep end of the thought spectrum. I like it – Deep Thinker.\n\nTime is basically a small equation of the essence of God’s eternal clock. Time doesn’t exist in eternity. Time ends, eternity doesn’t. \n\nWhether high or not, I think that your post is a great question, now, continue to think deep, just minus the blunt, man. ;-)\n\nBe blessed.
493293
What comes once in a minute, twice in a moment, but never in a thousand years?\n\nI thought it was silence( you'd think so too)\n\nAnswer: the letter "m".
6981
Time is just a concept, it does not really exist. We track time by the movement of celestial objects in the universe and light but time is abstract.
70156
Einstein-"Time is an Illusion, although persistent still just an illusion." \n\nwhat he is talking about is that physical unverse exists in a single infinitesible moment just as much as it does over the span of a million years. Time presents our senses with the concepts of mass and form. Time only exists so that we may perceive the universe and of course if we could not perceive the universe it would not really exist would it? Do you beleive in God now?
605911
Time does not really exist.  It has a temporal existence that is passing and fading and decaying.  Put simply, there will be a last day, just as there was a first and as such time will have no claim to true existence.  Time will be swallowed by timelessness, as it was before time.  \n\nTime can only exist as timelessness moves aside, and creates a void of timelessness in which time may exist temporally.  Timelessness is the absolute from which time is derived, and upon which time is contingient.\n\nHowever, if you belive that you exist.  then you can say "i am."  You have temporal existence.  But only as the ABSOLUTE "I AM" moved aside for a while so that you could exist within the void of Himself.  You can only say that you are because the Great "I AM" made a place for you by getting out of the way.  \n\nThe Lord is the Absolute "I AM" from which you derived and upon which your ability to say "i am" is contingient.  You would not exist had not God existed before you and moved himself through compression to create a void in which you may temporarily exist.   The only reason you can say "i am" is that God says "I AM."\n\nFurthermore, your temporal existence is the PROOF that absolute existence is the true reality.  Want to disprove God's existence?  Then you must make yourself (and everyone else) non-existant, because each breath you take .. and each moment that someone can say "i am" is the proof of an absolute reality that says "I AM."\n\nGod is beyond the cosmos, and has moved aside to create a void of Himself in which you now exist - the cosmos ... a temporal void.
46187
hay ther is no time on the moon the time on the moon is what time it is hear. so what i am saying is what time it is down hear that is the time on the moon.\n\nexampel\nso if it is 6:00 the time on the moon is 6:00.
537426
If you have ever seen the movie IQ there is a excellent answer to your question. Its a comedy with Walter Matthau as Einstein and some of his scientific collegues and also Meg Ryan and Tim Robbins. Anyway 1 of Einsteins collegues says to his friend. \n\nCollegue 1) "We are wasting time, come on,serve already" \n\n Collegue 2) "thats rediculous, how can you waste something that doesnt exist" \n\nCollegue 1) "What, time doesnt exist? since when?"\n\n Collegue 2) "I dont know, if time doesnt exist then there is no when"\n\n Collegue 1) "There you go, another crazy theory"\n\n Collegue 2) "Then tell me the exact time... right now... you see you cant... because as your telling me, the future has already become the past therefore there is no present therefore time doesnt exist"\n\nIts a funny movie, i recommend it :)
448685
the word is 'nothing'\n\n=)
382360
The answer is NOTHING.
359659
I have the time, but i don't have your question