Return to

Level1 Philosophicum: [Is time just a human construct?]

This is the first philosophicum thread. The topic we are discussing is:

Is time just a human construct?

Anyone who has an interesting view point on this topic, please chime in! Please use the philosophical methods in this thread wherever possible: questioning, critical discussion, rational argument, and systematic presentation

The idea behind this thread is the following:

Here is the companion thread for general discussions:
Level 1 Philosophicum

Here is the proposal and poll thread if you have an idea for the next topic:
Topic proposals and polls


The discussion in the lounge up to this point. (for reference)

Actually its a Java class

Copyright © 1993, 2018, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Use is subject to license terms. Also see the documentation redistribution policy.

1 Like

I would think that by looking at the decay of uranium,

Around 99.284% of natural uranium’s mass is uranium-238, which has a half-life of 1.41×1017 seconds (4.468×109 years, or 4.468 billion years). … The decay of 238U to daughter isotopes is extensively used in radiometric dating, particularly for material older than ~ 1 million years.

Not so much the part of carbon dating but more in the sense of the decay, it strongly implays passage of something. Sure the word “time” is a construct but so is the person Eric Steegers i’m a collection of the world i saw around me as a child and my upbringing. But here i am typing. Sure the holografic univers (i realy like that btw) but thats for a other day to discus.


A bit of the track, but you did put in some thoughts to get there :grin:

1 Like

Hey, who needs to think when we have the Oracle


I’m just wondering wheter the flow forward ‘in time’ as we measure it, is actually a seamless flow or rather ticks as ruled in quantum.

Other than that, ‘time’ is just our own comprehension of a flow we’ve observed.
With our limited senses and knowledge.

How about this, since nothing can be smaller than a plank that means the universe must be composed of a natural number of planks because you cant have half a plank. Does that mean the universe itself is a discrete structure?

this channel has a lovely lady presenter that also grabs your brain not just your…

little higher up the chain

this is quit deep, watched it 3 times to get a grip on it.

a little collection.

1 Like

When it comes to time I always think of a logical system that is stateless vs having a state. This to me is the difference between regular expressions vs context sensitive systems on the Chomsky Hierarchy.

1 Like

That is what Einstein sugested, but that was more out of his hatred for chaos and his need for a static universe. He even said God doen’t roll dice. I think the plank distance wil find its match by smaller lenghts (its suposed to be the shortest lenght light can travel)

bit more of a normie explenation.
I do think its some sort of a discrete structure that ripples in gravity and unseen other forces.

1 Like

Wow that is a little mind bending, i trip up on the term grammar and its sort of binairy. Need to read and watch up on this.

Singularities aren’t ‘frozen’ in time even tho our calculations can’t comprehend what’s happening in them, yet they still flow through towards the future.

Yeah the thing about time slowing down/stopping at the edge of a black hole is quit fasinating, and stil the hole is moving trough space and being influenced by the galaxy around it.

1 Like

But on topic Time is real, the perceived movement/passage is an ilusion. It is more the observation of happenings that gives the notion of time moving.

Time is a flow, but there might still be flow without time as we measure it.

Most scientist present it as a “salami” thats just there and we see slices of it, but this hurts my brain to get this as i see the sun and the stars move at the horizon. The impresion of movement is so strong and the linkage of time is so ingrained in our psyche we can’t hardly decouple it.

Check the movie ‘Arrival’, it had a nice point in the extraterrestials having a different sense of time.


I would like to remind folks that when a statement is made, the burden of proof falls on the ones who are making the claim.

The claim is time is real.
A religious person claiming god is real would sometimes say “well you can’t prove god isn’t real”, and such a statement is ludicrous, because you can’t really prove in that sense that something isn’t real.

So I would invite the people who’ve already commented to present why time is real, the same way you would for the already mentioned gravity, for instance.

1 Like

I was also thinking of that yesterday, my counter argument would be that is no different from the other arguments. A change in the state of things does not prove time is real.