Is time moving?

[cbrescobar]

I suggest that time is moving at the speed of light. Then if that is so if you go faster than the speed of light then you will go into the future? No, you just traveled faster than time did. Inside a black hole, theory suggests that time is torn apart through the singularity and the extreme force of gravity. I am not so sure gravity even affects time at all, (or maybe it is the only thing that does affect it) because if you are outside the black hole and not in it, then the time on your watch would work as normally it would. Humans know time in this way: the minutes, the hours, it takes the earth to spin on its axis one complete revolution. However time is more like a limit or a prison even. So, the "time" it takes sunlight to reach the earth is exactly the same speed of light, well then time must be going the exact same speed? So if that is true and the universe is the age that scientists believe it to be 13.7 billion lights years old, then if you travel 13.7 billion light years in the exact direction the big bang started from you will have reached the beginning of time. (but will you have had to start traveling that direction the speed of light from here 13.7 billion years ago? probably so) Go 13.7 billion light years in exact opposite direction or any direction other than back to the starting point then you should be to the edge of the universe supposedly right? Now say if you went just a tad further than precisely 13.7 billion light years say 14 billion, then you have outran the inflation rate of the universe and who knows where you will be if you can even go that far. (so, then that means the center of the universe is where? the exact location the big bang happened?) Does time even have a limit, like past 13.7 billion years or the edge of the universe? So then the past is the beginning of time (13.7 ago), the present is right now as you are reading this and the future is every moment after this one, and this one, and this one and so on.. So using Hubble you are looking in to the past, we see the present all around us, .. and the future you cannot see as it is constantly being created or is maybe just the measurement of time from the beginning of everything to right now. Is time then just a measurement of how fast something moves? So if we are in the present and we are every second that passes one second out of the past and moving into the future then are we not also going the speed of light? No, we can't be and if time is going that fast then all you have to do is speed up, way up, i mean way way up and then say turn around get back to earth as fast as you can (you left earth to travel very fast for this experiment) and see that you aged a week and everyone else aged 100 years or so. That's time travel? You didn't travel into the future at all, you just sped up (towards the limit / rate of time and light) while everything else stayed the same. So it seems time travel is not possible at all, but didn't Einstein say it was possible?
Imagine time is a rock and that gravity is a slingshot and space is well space. Now put time into a black hole (the only thing strong enough to contain it) and then imagine that the black hole is pulling back on the slingshot and pulling harder and harder and it can hold it as long as it wants to, but if it were to release its grip, then time would fly out going the rate of the speed of light and move through space as it normally does.
The only way to time travel is to go faster than light or perhaps something else entirely. Probably in my opinion would be to not do whats impossible like going that rate of speed but rather find a way around it, but then the only person who has is God right?
Anybody out there have an idea of time other than a measurement or the 4th dimension? Thanks

[Higher_Order]

An idea that I've been thinking about (get ready to tell me whats wrong with it ) is whether or not time even has speed. Most speeds I've seen were relative to light, but I think that light isn't time, or even a subsection of time, rather closely related. This would mean that light's speed is completely indepentant from time, and that the relationship between time and light is due to the fact that they have "weight" (or possibly interaction) in the temporal dimension (time is a completely different dimension from the spatial). This would mean that time can't move, or have position, because of its lack of a relationship with the spatial dimension.

But if this is true, than the spatial dimensions would have to have some sort of interaction with the temporal dimension, (distorting the spatial dimension with mass would distort the interaction, thus speeding up would cause the rate of time to "flow" to change, and the speed of light would also change because our interaction has changed) this would cause the "flow" of time that we know, and all we have to do to move within the temporal dimension (could it be possible if it isn't space, and therefore doesn't have position) is to "break" our relationship that holds us still (speeding up to become so massive that we rip the spatial dimension, thus breaking the temporal interaction).

Even to me however, there are several holes to be filled (changing position in a timporal dimesion that doesn't have position, what is the interaction with light, etc.) but other than that, it seems like the start to a viable idea on the relationships of light, time, and us.

[cbrescobar]

I think we both did the same tap dance around the subject of light speed, Higher_Order. So what you are saying more or less is that time is independent of space? That would be the same as saying a baseball zooming into the bleachers is independent of the air its travelling through. So by attaching a speed limit to how fast light is going we are able to measure the time it takes for light to reach from one point in space to the earth. Light is pure energy. The same way electricity "flows" through copper wire very fast, it flows through rubber just the opposite. Light or (photons) are virtually weightless and travels fast because space offers the least resisitance. Space IS time. You calculate the rate at which photons move in it, based on the fact that whatever time and space is, space seems to be constant and is the container or the constraint or "weight" which you referred to in your post. If space IS time, then i ask again..is time moving?

[Higher_Order]

How you interpreted what I said is perfect. Except for one thing, and that is that time (and therefore space) aren't moving.
Instead exists this sort of "Interaction", an isomorphic bridge between space and time, instead of speed. Light is the purest form of the temporal dimension, possibly "projected" into our spatial dimension, and because of this, is independent of this interaction. That would mean that the interaction is one way, from spatial to temporal, and therefore anything coming from the other side isn't affected by this reaction.

So I believe that the answer to your question is "no". Time is broken by moving faster than the speed of light, because light is moving the fastest possible speed without breaking this bridge (This is because if it moved faster, than the bridge would be broken and it wouldn't be projected. Similar to your analogy to the baseball.), the illusion lies in that moving faster than it breaks the bridge, not that moving faster than it directly breaks time.

I suspect that this is due to energy limits that all things are limited to - they can only transport so much energy at once, after that, they just simply cant, and break down.


Sorry if you cannot understand this, I've been up for around 14 hours now, and I'll try to explain it better later if necessary.