The other day I was riding my bicycle and I remembered riding the same route 30 odd years before. I have aged
since, but I didn't grow older. I remember riding then, on my Rayleigh Rapide. And now I was riding there on my Easy
Rohler. How could it be that in both cases, I rode there, on that track and each time I was there NOW.
It's always "now" when I live. I have a past. I did things in the past and while doing them, it was always "now". So what is time for a strange beast?
I used to have two rabbits. I studied them in relation to "time". For rabbits there seem to be two kinds of "time":
What is time?
Time is a derived unit. It is based on the day. A day is what passes between two identical stellar positions with
respect to the sun. A year is what passes between two identical stellar positions in orbit around the sun.
What we call "time" is the quotient of a distance and a speed. In case of the day, the distance is 360 degrees and the speed is the angular speed of earth. In case of the year, the speed is the orbital speed of earth and the "length" of the orbit.
Time is a strange property. Earth doesn't care about it's position in orbit or it's angular position in the day. But man do. Time seems to be a useless property to boost mans ego.
The metric system
The metric SI system is based on four units:
|SI Unit||What it is|
|kg||The kilogram is the unit of mass. Every object on earth has mass, be it minute. Every object has an associated mass and the kg is the unit of that mass|
|m||The meter is the unit of length. Every object has finite dimensions|
|A||The ampere is the unit of electrical current. No we have left the world of logic. The ampere is not a logical unit. An object cannot have a current. What is the current of the electron or proton? What is the current of a brick? All of these objects can have a charge but none can have a current.|
|s||The second is the unit of time. A second is 1 / (60 * 60 * 24) (or 1/86400) of a day. Of course the second is defined better nowadays. But still, can an object have time? Can a brick have time? Or an electron? Only man needs time to measure his mortality.|
How about the second?
The second is a derived unit. A second does not exist. It is a measure without unit. It is more of a scalar than a unit. No particle can have a time. It can have a half-time but that is something completely different and distinct.
How about the Ampere?
The ampere is a derived unit. It is defined as a charge flux of 1 Coulomb per second. A particle cannot have an ampere. It cannot even carry an ampere. Ampere is a statistical unit, based on the interaction between many particles in an electric field. A better unit for electricity would have been the Coulomb, which is now defined as 1 As (Ampere.Second).
The impact on the SI units
It seems that half of the SI units has significance, 25% of the units is doubtful and the remaining unit is
probably a mistake.
Mass (kg) and Dimension (m) seem to be fine. Ampere is close. It would be better to forget about ampere and replace it with Charge, with the unit Coulomb. For the french it wouldn't matter. Both Ampere and Coulomb were frenchmen.
The problem is the fourth SI unit: time. The problem with time is: it has only meaning for a human. For particles, time is useless. A brick doesn't die so it needs not know the time.
Lucky for us, there is a property that is related to time, but now with a significance for bricks, electrons, trains and even humans: speed. Objects always have a speed, charge, dimension and mass. Which brings the new SI units to be
If one knows the exact position of a particle, one does not know it's speedTime is not an issue in quantum mechanics. Time is only an issue in big objects that can be seen by the naked eye.
The impact on science
Time plays a major role in physics. Consider one of the basic laws in nature:
F = m . aThere is no time involved in this formula? Look more closely. Force equals mass times acceleration. But the problem is, acceleration is defined as
a = d (dx/dt) / dtThe acceleration is the second order derivative of place in time. So even F=m.a is hit by the better SI units. So we need to come up with a new definition of 'a' but no based on any parameter, not involvong the 'time' factor.
Impact on astronomy
Astronomers are concerned with just one thing: how old is the universe? And what happened before that time? The big
bang happened. They think. But what was before the big bang? I guess this is what happened in the big bang:
It doesn't make sense but neither makes the Big Bang Theory. Time exists only in our heads. No heads is no time.
Planets and milkyways have speed. No more. They move with speed and after crossing over a distance they consumed
'time'. But the universe can do perfectloy well without time. Time is a secondary unit. A resultant.
All major astronomical theories are based on time and its finiteness. It's rubbish. There is no time in the universe. And so all theories need an update.
A timeless universe
Now suppose there is no time. What would be the result of a timeless world? Acceleration suddenly looses all significance. Any object will reach any speed, given enouigh 'time'. In fact, we just abandoned the idea of acceleration. And hence we discarded the idea of 'force' as well. This is strange. You still need the force to act upon a body to give it speed, momentum and absorb energy. How is the force translated into these properties when time is not an issue?
Time as a tool
Apparently we need time as an abstract unit for doing the math. Time is a mere katalyst. It's a handy scalar similar to what we do in math when solving complex differential equations when we're using the idea of 'substitution'. Now we can say
t = x / vand then use the chain-rule for the differentiations.
Pagina gemaakt op 6 June 2014,