Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
Policy Update - Rules changes incoming for AI content - Read Here
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
>>211215
>>284465
Again, NSFW.
Have you put that text into a macro you can post as a comment with a single keypress yet? Seems like this issue is brought up with discouraging regularity…
Regarding the old zen question, of whether a tree falling in the woods makes a sound if no one is there to hear it, may seem unanswerable by any one person. However, science can show us that every action has a reaction, and that the consequences of even unobserved events can continue to be tracked by their consequences at indeterminate points in the future. Thus, with an incredibly high degree of probability, things that we do not directly observe still happen.
The speed of light is a clock that all things can be judged by, as it remains constant in all reference frames. Just because time does not pass at the same rate in all reference frames does not mean it doesn’t exist. On the contrary, the fact that it changes in entirely an predictable manner after repeated testing and observation goes to show that it exists as a phenomenon independent of our perceptions.
Also, as Background Pony right before me stated, it is a common misconception about quantum entanglement that it allows information to be transmitted faster than light. It does not. There are several different competing theories for what actually happens, with the Copenhagen interpretation generally being the most widely accepted.
Some theories postulate that quantum states are deterministic, and some postulate that they are non-deterministic. However, in either case, information is not transmitted faster than light. In the deterministic case, the quantum state is simply encoded at the moment of entanglement, and decoded on observation. In the non-deterministic case, the quantum state is shared between two particles, but is totally random, and thus has no information imparted on it, nor can any information from a different reference frame be pulled from it.
Quantum entanglement cannot transmit information faster than the speed of light, and causality is still very much intact. Time is a lot more than just a “thought experiment”. The concept of time is heavily present throughout all branches of physics from quantum mechanics (the Hamiltonian is the time evolution operator) right through to general relativity (space-time).
Due to the various hardware faults and our host’s ineptitude from twoish months ago, the database went to hell at some point. While we managed to fix 90%+ of all broken images, some remain broken on the view page and need to be fixed directly in the database.
There are roughly 1k such images shotgunned around the booru. These are broken because they were duped multiple times and merged in more than one direction (A into B, then C into B, then B into D, for example),
Report them?
As the previous Background Pony said, time is really just a thought experiment that’s been incorporated into our every-day life, because of no other reason than the fact that it’s convenient to chronologically measure the passage of events.
Space-time as a concept has nothing which demands the existence of time as anything but an imaginary concept we assign for our convenience in ordering events despite our existence been but a sliver of actual behaviours or realities.
And the fact you ignore quantum entangling and the fact it transmits information faster than light just goes to demonstrate that: on the very large scale, where relativistic effects are shown and the “space-time” gets warped we are noticing no actual modification of space but time, because we conflate time with motions of any sort.
Even today, all time is is an acknowledgement of changes of state of motion between objects, and in relativistic situations the rate becomes different, and in quantum ones the rates start losing sense.
If we take the whole universe as the scope, the notion of non-determinism become primordial because there is no real “clock” so to speak that exists (a Newtonian notion which relativity killed, but then we just said there were local “clocks”, like if instead of aether we now had time).
With the quantum insanity we can observe, it’s entirely possible for causality to be seemingly broken, rendering the notions of some sort of “time” as normally defined a mere convenient thought-experiment and nothing else.
(All NSFW)
>>165307
>>165308
>>165309
>>165310
>>165311
>>165312
This is incorrect. Space-time is as real a phenomenon as any in our universe, assuming our universe is real at all. Between the universal constant of the speed of light and relativity, linearity is largely irrelevant to the passage of time outside of a local frame of reference. Time does not require an observer to exist.
Besides, the deterministic nature or lack thereof of the universe as a whole is also irrelevant. Even if the universe were deterministic, there is no way that any single observer could collect all necessary information, thanks to the limitations of said universal constant. To say nothing of having the ability to process all variables, given the limitations in mass and entropy of the universe.
I would question the veracity of said assertion bases solely on the fact the notion of time exists merely as a way humans have developed to codify the progression of events in a linear fashion, ignoring all other paths particles are deemed to be possible to undertake which are clearly non-linear and non-deterministic.
Maybe you should use those.
this only happened like 2(?) months ago