Dear Sirs,
Is it the undetermined notion or we can explain it through other undetermined notions? I ask myself and answer the following. If ones says me to remember a duration of 5 knocks of metronome I do this :). So I can remember the time! :) Or this is not a time but just we call as "time"? :(
So I repeat the question. What is time in our mind/consciousness?
Related to this question is the more physical question about the nature of "ultimate clocks" which might reside inside "ultimate elementary particles". For inspiration for new ideas about this question see the outstanding work of Martin Rivas:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299636714_Kinematical_Theory_of_Elementary_Spinning_Particles_Lecture_Notes
Research Kinematical Theory of Elementary Spinning Particles. Lecture Notes
Dear Karl G. Kreuzer,
I did not understand at this stage (I`ll read the source) you but I am grateful for your NEW information about time.
Dear Sirs,
I thought you remember me the S. Hawking`s short history of time book :)! There relationship between time and memory is described...
Dear Anatoly,
Loosely speaking, apart the 5 knocks of a metronom which one can claim to have heard (in the past) and which one can claim to be able to remember (in the future) there is the question of why a metronome can knock at all, i.e. why are there some (at least 2) 'states' and a sequence of 'state transitions' (at least 5) of the metronome. And how does this knocking go together with our believe that 'time' should be or must be a dense continuum (real numbers) and that apart from 'past' and 'future' there is 'now' and maybe a mystic 'eternity'? One can ask the interesting metaphysical question whether or not 'time' is more than what can be read off from 'clocks'. And one can ask the physical question whether or not there is a most fundamental type of a 'clock'.
I think that the individual feelings of human beings about 'time' (which is related to the possibility to 'store' and to 'remember' something) should not be considered to be independent from the physical aspects of the notion of 'time'. In the mentioned work of Rivas there is a new model of the electron developed which allows to consider an electron to have an intrinsic dynamical behaviour, and thereby the electron itself can be considered as a kind of clock. This model is involved with an enlargement of classical ideas of dynamical systems (center of mass and center of charge having different positions, equations of motion of higher order, kinematical groups, etc.). Furthermore it is argued that concerning the description of dynamical systems in 'spacetime' a Finsler metric would be more appropriate.
I personally consider Rivas work as one of the great milestones of (theoretical) physics of the last and present century, which in particular might lead to a new era of well-founded theories concerning quantum physical phenomenons, and maybe even perhaps to new attempts to setup a well-founded physical theory of consciousness of human beings (or even perhaps of robots?).
Seems to me time is a SEQUENCE of my feelings. Is it possible to estimate time if there were not any feelings, not any sequence? I think it is not. Remember if you read about astronauts tests. If you are alone in the deep space (say, in the special basin) without gravitation, communications, light, etc. I read the astronaut personality disappears :). It is the very hard test...
What do you think the first: time or sequence of feelings? Maybe we should take a sequence as the undetermined notion and deduce the time from that? Any references?
"take a sequence as the undetermined notion and deduce the time from" ?
YES !
Publications (in German) of
Peter Mittelstaedt
http://www.peter-mittelstaedt.de/
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Mittelstaedt
are useful, if one want to setup the notion of "time" in this way.
Dear Karl,
I did not expect that :). But I practically do not understand German. Could you write any English articles? Thank you.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology