Time cannot exist without matter (mass) and motion

[Lakshya]

Hey guys, today I found a great thought experiment to prove that time can't exist without mass and motion. It can be found by proving photon's rest mass = 0. I don't know the actual derivation. So, I have made my own derivation (this is the one I made to prove photon's m = 0 to my friend). Let's start:
E=mc^2 (Rest energy equation)
E/c^2=m=0 (To prove)
We know that c^2 is a constant so if we want to prove m=0, we will have to prove E=0. Let's take another formula:
E=hv
So, we can prove it by this equation. As we are taking the photon to be at rest, there is no frequency at rest. It will have no frequency. So, we will get E=h*0=0. Putting it in the previous equation, we get m=0. That's how I proved it. But today I thought that in this way everything at rest will vanish from the universe.
Okay let's take this experiment. Suppose we stop every matter in the universe. Then everything will vanish according to the above proof. So, anybody outside the universe will never be able to sense that there's a thing like time.
And this state of stopping everything can be achieved by stopping time. Everything will come to rest and will vanish from the universe.

Hence, we can derive that mass and motion can only exist when time exists or conversely time only exists when mass and motion exist. If time exists and mass and motion don't exist, then we can never feel time. We get that feeling when anything comes into motion. So, both are true.

Thouhts please.

[dipayankar]

That was good Lakshya.. However in the fabric of space time, time is relevant only with motion. And for motion, you require mass / energy..

Hey guys, today I found a great thought experiment to prove that time can't exist without mass and motion. It can be found by proving photon's rest mass = 0. I don't know the actual derivation. So, I have made my own derivation (this is the one I made to prove photon's m = 0 to my friend). Let's start:
E=mc^2 (Rest energy equation)
E/c^2=m=0 (To prove)
We know that c^2 is a constant so if we want to prove m=0, we will have to prove E=0. Let's take another formula:
E=hv
So, we can prove it by this equation. As we are taking the photon to be at rest, there is no frequency at rest. It will have no frequency. So, we will get E=h*0=0. Putting it in the previous equation, we get m=0. That's how I proved it. But today I thought that in this way everything at rest will vanish from the universe.
Okay let's take this experiment. Suppose we stop every matter in the universe. Then everything will vanish according to the above proof. So, anybody outside the universe will never be able to sense that there's a thing like time.
And this state of stopping everything can be achieved by stopping time. Everything will come to rest and will vanish from the universe.

Hence, we can derive that mass and motion can only exist when time exists or conversely time only exists when mass and motion exist. If time exists and mass and motion don't exist, then we can never feel time. We get that feeling when anything comes into motion. So, both are true.

Thouhts please.

[RascalPuff]

Dear Lakshya:

You're right on time - it's synomymous with motion (Timotion)

- Best regards,
- RP
http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie

[Lakshya]

That was good Lakshya.. However in the fabric of space time, time is relevant only with motion. And for motion, you require mass / energy..

I have just shown a proof of your statement which we used to derive by common sense.

Didn't find any mistakes yet.
C'mon guys. Give it your full force.

[neutralino]

Hmm, I can't seem to delete this post. It seems pointless to try and point out various errors when other users are agreeing with the incorrect reasoning!

[RascalPuff]

Hmm, I can't seem to delete this post. It seems pointless to try and point out various errors when other users are agreeing with the incorrect reasoning!

Dear Neutralino:
Please state your case.

Best regards,
- RP

[neutralino]

1. It makes no sense to talk of a photon at rest, since by definition photons travel at c.
2. At rest is a difficult thing to talk about. You need to say what your are describing an object to be at rest with respect to. For example, if I stand still, I am at rest with respect to the earth, but not with respect to the sun.
3. One cannot talk about anybody outside the universe. By definition, all observers are contained in the universe.
4. Time is not synonymous with motion; the standard description of spacetime describes space and time being combined into one entity, but this says nothing about motion.

[RascalPuff]

1. It makes no sense to talk of a photon at rest, since by definition photons travel at c.
2. At rest is a difficult thing to talk about. You need to say what your are describing an object to be at rest with respect to. For example, if I stand still, I am at rest with respect to the earth, but not with respect to the sun.
3. One cannot talk about anybody outside the universe. By definition, all observers are contained in the universe.
4. Time is not synonymous with motion; the standard description of spacetime describes space and time being combined into one entity, but this says nothing about motion.

These qualified contexts address the relativity of motion.
"There is no space empty of field". - Einstein
And, there is no field at rest.


Best Regards,
- RP
http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie

[dipayankar]

I dont think there ia any evidence of absolute rest in the UNIVERSE. The Universe in its entity is probably in motion with something else.

1. It makes no sense to talk of a photon at rest, since by definition photons travel at c.
2. At rest is a difficult thing to talk about. You need to say what your are describing an object to be at rest with respect to. For example, if I stand still, I am at rest with respect to the earth, but not with respect to the sun.
3. One cannot talk about anybody outside the universe. By definition, all observers are contained in the universe.
4. Time is not synonymous with motion; the standard description of spacetime describes space and time being combined into one entity, but this says nothing about motion.

[RascalPuff]

The apparently endless issues of 'absolute rest' and 'motionless' are, until further notice, forever moved by the fact that Absolute Zero Kelvin has yet to be observed or achieved in the lab, no?

Best regards,
- RP