Originally Posted by Ark
Originally Posted by Gatwick
Very good point, yet if time isn't right, why does the sun set and rise at almost the EXACT same time every day and every season. It is the right time for us. SO basically, it is the right time. I'd also say I agree with Code on this
To answer your question, the reason the Earth is so reliable has nothing to do with "time" it has to do with movement. Planetary rotation, and orbit.
I though in the time until I came back to the thread, I think I thought of a pretty solid point. Time must be motion. Think about it. The reason ages ago, people had such a short grasp of time, and the space age brought about such new thougths of time is because before, people were limited to the time on the Earth. Time on Earth is based on the motion of the Earth rotating, and of the Earth moving through space around the sun. Take a rocket off Earth. When you break out of orbit, time is no longer based on Earth's movement. It's on your movement. Your time from one destination to the other. Such as that. Other times surrounding you when you are free of orbit (basically your own celestial body) is other celestial bodies. The time the stars image, which is based on light, gets to you. The time it takes for a free moving body like a comet to reach you. That brings up another question... if someone where to go to a place completely devoid of time, would the live for an eternity? If someone has to way for time to affect them, how do they die? Could such a place be "heaven"?
Now I'm all caught up with this. I think i've sorted it out... somewhat. It leaves a lot of open questions though. Time is motion, however motion is energy. Engergy is matter, so time, motion, and and energy all related to matter...
Gah! And where the hell do Tachyons fit into this? If tachyons are real, this proves the Einstein wrong! Energy is supposed to be mass times the speed of light squared, but if tachyons gain speed when they loose energy, and exceed the speed of light while doing so, the Theory of Reletivity isn't the Theory of Reletivity wrong?
Ok i think i can tackle the first part. the second part i may even lose myself so bare with me.
Time itself is not man made. Before there were men time passed. The dinosours existed for a TIME, and there was a time between their extinction and our birth that passed. Since man was not arround that proves time was present. If thre was no existince of a linear time we could in essence exist at all points of the universe's existince simultaneously...i could wittnes the universe's birth, my birth, it's death, and my death, and everything in between at the same...umm..."moment"....since i can't do that that also tells me that there is a natural...umm..."flow"...to the events occuring in the universe. Does that make sense?
What is man made, however, are the units mankind has assigned to this natural flow (which i will now refer to as time). Humans are very objective and need to put things into relitive terms that we understand. So we assign values to time that we can experience and understand. We know the earth rotates around it's axis completly the same time everytime....and we know that 365.4 of these rotations is needed to completly traverse our orbital path. That is pretty easy to measure and actualy rather useful to us. Unlike say the time it takes for the sun to make revolution about the axis of the galaxy which is about 250 million yers (one galactic year).
Keep in mind that this is not the only way to measure time. other cultures have done it different (though i will leave it to you to research it) simply because there was something else that it made sense for them to measure it by. i think the egyptians at one point measured time based on the flooding of the nile, though i could be wrong so please don't quote me.
TACHYON'S are not an easy topic to discuss. Mainly i think because they are still really really hypothetical. When talking about these things you need to mention Causality. Basicaly this says that if a tachyon existed and came into contact with noromal, linear matter there would be no way to tell the difference between the matters future and present. Basicaly that piece of matter would exist and experience it's entirelinear existince at all times of it's existence (whoa trippy). another thing to point out is that these things exist in a way that they can never ever slow down to light speed or below.
What the hell all this means...i have no idea. i do think, however that this doesn't disprove relativity. i think relativity for is linear "things" is valid. Bt for not linear things like tachyons, they simply exist outside of the constraints of the rules of einstien.
Hmm trying to decide if that made sense to me. hope that wasn't just random babbel.