I cant understand how time is dependent on space because the big bang is an unfinished theory?

Question

This has been bothering me for a while, how can "time" be dependent on space? I know "time measured by earth revolutions" can change with velocity &/or space travel some how (actually I do not understand it, but can get my head around it). But what about actual "time"? Wouldnt it take me the same amount of "time" to count to 5 regardless if I was moving at the speed of light or not? (& pretending for the sake of the argument that I could talk & was conscious whilst travelling at such a speed).

And the big bang just CAN'T be responsible for time & space.....what about the "time" before the big bang, when the building blocks of the universe (carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, oxygen etc etc) were gathering enegy to create such an explosion? And where did these materials come from before that? And in what kind of "enviroment" (for want of a better word) did this big bang explode in? If it wasn't space? what was it? nothing? a solid nothing? what?

And if the universe eventually dies & "rips itself apart", how would that impact time? If a ghost could count to 5 in a human voice ( once again for the sake of the argument...after the event of the universe collapsing) wouldn't that take "time"? And what would remain if it were not "space"?

Answer 1

You are correct. The Big Bang theory is unfinished, as with possibly all theories. There may yet be clues about what caused the Big Bang, if anything.

Answer 2

From your own point of view, it would take the same amount of time to count to 5 yes, however someone viewing from the outside would see you take a much greater time. One thing to note however, is that it is physically impossible for anything with mass to travel at the speed of light because at this speed space collapses to a single point. This brings me to the next point. At singularities (points with unimaginably high matter or energy densities) such as the big bang or black holes, time slows to a stop, and the laws of physics as we know them break down. So to ask about the time before the big bang is meaningless since, time was created in the big bang (or if there was time before the big bang, it was essentially erased at the big bang moment). There was nothing outside the singularity at this point. Not even empty space, because that actually is a thing. There was literally nothing. Don't worry, no one can really wrap there brains around it well, and its impossible to picture, but that is the theory.



Now for the last question it is a little bit hard to answer, because we do not know how (or if) the universe will end. The possibilities are that the universe will settle to a steady state (incredibly unlikely), that the universe will continue to expand infinitely, to the point where the expansion could possibly even overcome the weak and strong nuclear forces ripping apart all matter, and the third option is that gravity eventually slows the expansion to a stop, and brings everything back towards each other in what is called the "big crunch". If the universe expands forever, all matter will be destroyed, and the universe will essentially become cold and lifeless, utterly chaotic, however time will continue to exist forever and ever without end. However if it comes back together into a big crunch, it will create another singularity, similar to that of the big bang, and space, time, and the laws of physics will break down, and cease to exist, removing all traces of our universe. There would be no space, and no time. These terms would again become meaningless.



Hope I helped!

Answer 3

*sigh*



* time all over the universe is flexible, there is no standard time. gravity and acceleration (really the same thing) affect it everywhere. Time on a mountain on earth is different from time in a valley.



* there were no atoms b4 the big bang, it was undifferentiated energy, there were not even protons until the universe had cooled a bit. We don't have the physics yet to explain exactly what it was like b4 the bang



* the universe will most likely expand until it just becomes a cold dark place, there is nothing to prevent someone from counting in such a universe

Answer 4

Gintable is absolutely correct. The reference frame is what you want to be thinking about. Technically, if you were driving in a car, you could say that you're staying in the same place and the earth is moving around under you. It's a question of perception.



I try to think of it like this. If I were looking at a clock and moving backwards from it at an incredible speed, and assuming that somehow I were able to still view this clock somehow, the light reaching me from it would start to have a hard time catching up... as I, myself, approached the speed of light. Thus, the second hand on the clock would appear to be slowing down. When I would attain the speed of light (assuming that that in itself is possible) the second hand would stop. According to theory, if I surpassed the speed of light - and I don't claim to understand this at all - the second hand would start to move backwards.



To yourself, real time would be real time, as Gintable states. To others, and in the clock analogy, time would appear to be warped.



Your friend,

-J

Answer 5

In our experience, time and space have consistent meanings. Everything that happens takes time and we can all agree about time and space measurements. When we think about larger contexts we simply scale them up and assume they must work the same way. Everything we know has a beginning and the distance between two points is always measurable and meaningful.



I don't understand relativity, but I do understand that my perspective is based on my experience and my assumption that I can extrapolate my experience to anything else. Whereas this extrapolation works in my context, that context only seems to me like a sufficient basis for expanded assumptions because I live here. As it happens, my understanding of reality is local and not scalable.

Answer 6

Time isn't dependant on area. Time is a ingredient of spacetime. You actually can not separate area and time, they are the comparable 'ingredient'. out of your point of view, in case you count variety to 5, that's going to take 5 seconds, sure. If, besides the undeniable fact that, you're shifting faraway from somebody at almost the cost of light, to them that's going to take plenty longer than 5 seconds. there became no time earlier the huge Bang, and no count if it form of feels intuitive or to not you, it is in fact the component of foundation. the huge Bang did not only precipitate count and capability, it led to spacetime itself. you're asking super questions, yet they tutor a undesirable loss of study on the subject count. shop reading. ------------------------ "ok...Can somebody clarify what "enviroment" the huge bang happened in, if it didnt ensue in "area"?" In some hypotheses, it did not ensue everywhere. In others, that's basically a small subset of a greater physically powerful set of places. Your question boils all the way down to "the place is the universe?" to which the respond is, relies upon on which hypothesis seems to be the ultimate suited one.

Answer 7

Rachel, afraid your mistaken on several points, for which there isn't really enough space here to explain. Suggest you try and read a few books/articles on the subject (an intro to special relativity may be a good start)..then get back with a few specific questions?

Answer 8

Time always progresses at the same rate in an observer's OWN reference frame. When you go about your activities, the time taken that you perceive is in YOUR OWN reference frame.



It is OUTSIDE OBSERVERS' who observe time to be dilating as they watch you do your actions.