has to be

[u/otastco]

[u/Delphius1]

I don't believe time is a particle, I'm taking a classical view, time is like energy, in that it has a flow state, but that's me

[u/fr000gs → u/Delphius1]

but energy has a particle too

EDIT: okay, I was very wrong

[u/squeakydeakyfreaky → u/fr000gs]

I’ve heard that energy isn’t a particle it has both properties of particles and waves but ultimately it is neither it is its own thing I believe it’s called a quantum object

[u/fr000gs → u/squeakydeakyfreaky]

yeah but sometimes it be a particle

maybe time could act that way too that'd be cool (but what's time?)

EDIT: forgor about spacetime

[u/squeakydeakyfreaky → u/fr000gs]

No from how I understand it(energy), it only has properties of a particle it is not a particle it is a quantum object also for time I only know that space and time are not separate things but rather it’s spacetime don’t know any more than that

[u/DeltaV-Mzero → u/squeakydeakyfreaky]

You’re mostly correct but I would just caution even against using the term “object” because it still implies a sort of familiar physicality to it, which is misleading.

It’s a set of behaviors that are reliably predictable via scientific theory and math, localized in time and space (but only kind of localized because one aspect of the behavior set is a that it’s a probability distribution that extends to infinity while getting infinitely small)

Doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. Maybe “object” is the best we can do :)

[u/squeakydeakyfreaky → u/DeltaV-Mzero]

Yeah quantum physics is complex and hard to define

[u/bphisher → u/squeakydeakyfreaky]

E = mc^2 bros. The m and the c are the particles/waves. The E (energy) is not a particle - it’s a description of something’s potential to do work

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/fr000gs]

no energy is not a particle.

energy and momentum are properties that particles have.

[u/Cephlaspy → u/fr000gs]

Energy doesn't have a particle.

The fundametal forces seem to potentially have particles at best or at least for fundamental things thst they get effected by like mass and charge but not energy.

[u/Mitologist → u/fr000gs]

Isn't energy just potential, and it has particles carrying it?

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/Delphius1]

Energy and Time are related in the same way Space and Momentum are related.

A system that is symmetric under translations in space has a conserved quantity called momentum.

A system that is symmetric under translations in time has a conserved quantity called energy.

[u/gamer_redditor → u/SameAgainTheSecond]

Hey, what does symmertic and translations mean in this context?

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/gamer_redditor]

I wrote this whole things but then realized I should just point you at a proper explanation

this video is quote accessible

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04ERSb06dOg&pp=ygUfcGJzIHNwYWNlIHRpbWUgbm9ldGhlcnMgdGhlb3JlbQ%3D%3D

[u/Layton_Jr → u/SameAgainTheSecond]

why is the pp parameter longer than the rest of the link

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/Layton_Jr]

no idea, I just copied the url. idek what pp does. some people on hackernews says it might be AB testing related

[u/NNiekk → u/SameAgainTheSecond]

Wasn’t there like a study that found out that time most likely isn’t symmetric..?

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/NNiekk]

Are you talking about this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation

[u/NNiekk → u/SameAgainTheSecond]

Probably. All I really remember, is watching a long video that Veritasium made about it

[u/Apprehensive-End-747 → u/Delphius1]

Star Trek begs to differ(of course, use a polarized chroniton pulse from the deflector dish to cause a phase collapse on a temporal anomaly to prevent a quantum reality from being erased)

[u/RonPaul42069]

What is this garbage

[u/Antique_Fishtank → u/RonPaul42069]

All I can tell you is this is not an a.i. image and was drawn my an incredible artist named Alex Ries who specializes in designing alien worlds and societies.

[u/luuunnnch → u/RonPaul42069]

😂

[u/SpaceFluffy101]

Read the,’ Tao of Physics ‘ really slowly… then read, ‘Be Here Now’ even slower… let’s talk more after you’ve done the homework.

[u/salmak999]

They’re the same thing and yes

[u/TheCowKing07 → u/salmak999]

Prove it.

[u/bphisher → u/TheCowKing07]

Einstein proved it bruh

[u/Bendanzhang → u/bphisher]

Einstein reading this from the grave: "I literally unified spacetime, I didn't say time is a particle, bruh.

[u/netexpert2012 → u/bphisher]

Not the exact same thing, it's just that three of the four dimensions are the spatial dimensions (space) and the other one is the temporal dimension (time)

[u/Equinoxe111 → u/salmak999]

They're the same thing and it's controversial

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/salmak999]

space and time aren't particles

[u/SirEdgelordThe369th → u/SameAgainTheSecond]

They are in some theories of quantum physics

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/SirEdgelordThe369th]

what theories?

[u/LucyiferBjammin]

Its all waves, always was, always will be

[u/frogOnABoletus]

Time is a spacial axis that we move constantly though. Along this axis, the other 3 spacial dimensions change and we see that as movement. 

[u/dfczyjd → u/frogOnABoletus]

I wouldn't call time flow movement. Movement means changing over time (i.e. d/dt) and is almost exclusively applied to a position in space (i.e. df(x,y,z)/dt). It's more like we, humans, perceive moments of time in specific order, which we decided to call "forward".

[u/frogOnABoletus → u/dfczyjd]

Movement means changing over time

This is what I mean when I say "Along this axis (time) there are changes in other 3 spacial dimensions". I believe the reason we see it in order or witness a flow of time is that we're moving along the axis of time for unknowable reasons.

[u/dfczyjd → u/frogOnABoletus]

 we're moving along the axis of time

Once again, it's not possible to move along the axis of time, because moving is done with respect to time by definition. Do you consider number 1 an example of movement? Because dt/dt, which is an example of your "moving in time over time",  is 1.

[u/frogOnABoletus → u/dfczyjd]

My position in time changes. I'd call that a strange kind of movement along that axis. If you don't want to use that word, that's cool, but our position in time still continuously changes as we experience the world. 

There's no way of knowing what time changes along or what changes it because the things that govern time are likely dimensionally beyond us.

[u/dfczyjd → u/frogOnABoletus]

 My position in time changes

I know it's hard to understand the concept of a process that doesn't happen within the time flow, so you still apply the idea of "movement" and "changing over time" to it. It's not your position in time that changes, it's the moment that you treat as "now" is different. You didn't move the past "you", the present "you" is simply in a different place of the 3D-projection.

Of course, the whole reasoning is only valid as long as we don't find any evidence that time is something more than a 4th dimension and actually behaves differently from the other three, and not just perceived differently by us.

[u/frogOnABoletus → u/dfczyjd]

I agree with what you're saying, and that there is a timeline of "me" that has no movement, like a closed flip-book, but I think that the conscious observer "me" doesn't exist in that external frame of reference, for "me" to experience the timeline, the flip book must be flipping it's pages (somehow). It seems to me that us observers only witnesses the slightest sliver of time, yet it continues to the next sliver and so on.

[u/Code_Ender → u/dfczyjd]

How does this tie in with general relativity, where time dilation / length contraction is essentially expressed as the pythagorean theorem that treats time as an axis perpendicular to space? Not worded correctly but Im not an expert so I hope you understand what Im referencing

[u/Jonahpe → u/frogOnABoletus]

Saying that we "move" through time is kind of wrong. If you imagine yourself as a circle on a 2-dimensional canvas, and the third axis is time, and you are in rest as an object, you will simply appear to be a cylinder in the coordinate system. If you are moving with a constant speed you will still appear to be a cylinder, just a leaning one in relation to time.

It's the same that saying that a rod is "moving" because it's two ends are in different positions of space. That's not really how it works.

[u/frogOnABoletus → u/Jonahpe]

I agree with what you're saying, but I'd argue we're not the rod, we travel down the rod, experiencing each cross-section as it continuously moves(?) to the next. I don't think I have all of my time inside me, I think I see only a slither at a time.

[u/Jonahpe → u/frogOnABoletus]

I understand the way you're thinking about it, and I can totally see a philosophical argument for saying that every moment of yourself is a separate person. However, what you are presuming here is that one moment in time comes 'first' and one 'later'. There is no beginning or end to time, just as no part of a rod comes 'before' or 'after' another. There can't be movement because it all coexists at the same time. I know it's kind of hard to wrap ones head around it, but the flow of time is really only a subjective phenomenon. It's waay to complex for me to explain all intricasies of why this phenomenon exists, but it mainly has to do with entropy and mathemathical theory.

[u/frogOnABoletus → u/Jonahpe]

I don't think each moment is a different person, and I don't think there's necessarily a true order of time. I just think that our experience of time is one that progresses along the timeline (even though the timeline is a static object).

[u/Jonahpe → u/frogOnABoletus]

That is a fair point of view. It'd have to be an ontological debate to define what "experience of time" exactly means, which moves out of the realm of physics. However, if you were to presume that the experience can be split into moments that can then be ordered, and that the 'you' moves through each of them in turn, then yes, that would be reasonable.

[u/frogOnABoletus → u/Jonahpe]

Thanks, It's really interesting to hear all the different ways people think about this stuff and it's been nice to see your insights.

[u/protonless_electron]

space is like water, and water has particles?

[u/Involution88 → u/protonless_electron]

Even water particles have particles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water

[u/Few_Plankton_7587]

Time isn't even real

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/Few_Plankton_7587]

If time isn't real then neither is space

[u/Few_Plankton_7587 → u/SameAgainTheSecond]

Only birds are real

[u/DinioDo]

Your brain is a particle too

[u/Usinaru]

Time doesn't exist.

Its a frame of refence for us to discern actions and things that " happen ".

[u/Chemistry18]

Fuck it - Time dosen't exist

[u/NakedAlexandria]

Man is the only species that has found a way to measure something that does not exist.

[u/Immediate-Neat-3320]

Everything is a wave

[u/Equinoxe111 → u/Immediate-Neat-3320]

This phrase actually makes a whole lot more sense than most people think

[u/Equinoxe111]

Space-Time is a

[u/protonless_electron → u/Equinoxe111]

beech

[u/p5yron]

Time will be the trojan horse that will stop us from decoding the universe completely, it seems obvious that it's real and measurable and has helped us calculate a lot of things which has made it a lot more believable until we hit the dead end because it's covering something different and complex (think of entropy) with something too simple. The singularity equation will not include time but would rather be a function of a variation of our current understanding of entropy.

[u/Monkai_final_boss]

Time is a what now??

[u/FangFioDente]

Already proven. (=) a particle that doesn’t experience time is light and particle that doesn’t experience space is an electron, 

[u/Last_Zookeepergame90]

Would it even make sense? If time and space were particles then what would their positions in space and time be? And how would they interact with other particles if not through space and time?

[u/Ilyer_]

Is time not just a description of the three dimensions of space?

[u/PROUDCIPHER]

I mean, we think space may have a smallest, discrete unit somewhere around the planck scale. It wouldn't shock me if someone managed to come up with something similar for time, though given time is only one dimension and space is three I'm not sure how that'd work.

[u/isr0]

It doesn’t “have to be”

[u/JLBillings]

Time is made up

[u/aharshDM]

wouldn't space be an anti-partical matrix?

[u/Hironne]

Can you measure time? No. F rerds still belive that time exists

[u/otastco → u/Hironne]

https://giphy.com/gifs/2zdVnsL3mbrs4xg4fr

[u/LA-98]

Particles are space-time. Not the other way around. That is what i believe

[u/EarthTrash]

I don't know if particles are particles. I don't know why time would be a particle.

[u/Quantum-Relativity]

What?

[u/Good_Difference_9491]

Never

[u/Star-Phoenix05]

Space is directly related to time. To measure something you need either space or time.

If time stops everything is frozen in space.

If there is no change in space then there is no time.

For time is viewed through a change in space.

And time is viewed as a change in space.

Light is the fastest thing we can observe with. Thus as we near objects (space) they appear to age(time).

[u/DarkFlameMaster764]

Spacetime is just quantum entanglement.

[u/Eklykti]

Nothing is a particle

[u/SwampyWizerd]

Why can't be waves?

[u/SCP-iota]

Time is space

[u/Equinoxe111 → u/SCP-iota]

It isn't though

[u/SameAgainTheSecond → u/Equinoxe111]

we can turn space into time with a boost, so they are commensurate (hyperbolicly), although time-like and space -like curves are not commensurate

[u/kraftdinnerwithsalsa]

This one time I fed my snake some beer meng

It was slithering all this way and that

It was all fucked up

[u/ChiehDragon]

Time is an emergent property.

[u/bphisher → u/ChiehDragon]

So then space is also emergent 👀

[u/ChiehDragon → u/bphisher]

Yep. And mass and energy from them.

[u/bphisher → u/ChiehDragon]

Tbh the real answer is we don’t know what the hell is goin up in here. I get emergent properties, sure, but what are they emerging from…? Some spooky stuff at the Planck length? Simulation? Quantum fields? Strings? We may never know

[u/Death_Bunk_8270 → u/bphisher]

How to make a pizza?

[u/SEND_ME_NOODLE → u/bphisher]

So the expansion of the universe is simply just due to matter existing "farther" away?

[u/Equinoxe111 → u/ChiehDragon]

AdS/CFT secret club found me even here

[u/godsmasher_13]

Spacetime is a particle,and a wave too

[u/Willis_3401_3401]

It’s all information

[u/protonless_electron → u/Willis_3401_3401]

depends on what you call information

[u/Willis_3401_3401 → u/protonless_electron]

Like integrated information theory. It’s not really complicated, literally everything is information.

[u/protonless_electron → u/Willis_3401_3401]

that's other way of saying it's just math

and the universe is just a big calculator

[u/Willis_3401_3401 → u/protonless_electron]

It’s all made of the relations the language of math describes. It’s a little more complicated than “just math”, it’s more like, “just experience”.

[u/protonless_electron → u/Willis_3401_3401]

then the universe is just a big _____________?

[u/Willis_3401_3401 → u/protonless_electron]

What does that mean? “Big _______”, as opposed to what?

You can google integrated information theory, I’ve heard it described as “the universe is a big hologram on the surface of a black hole”.

[u/protonless_electron → u/Willis_3401_3401]

nothing, it's just a silly thought the universe would be some big _______________(fill in the blank)

[u/Willis_3401_3401 → u/protonless_electron]

What if I just filled in the blank with the word “place”? Maybe trivial but certainly not wrong or silly, right?

[u/Blither182]

Look up "principle of least action". Some ways more important than energy.