A Little Weird » Forums » Could We use Time as a Source of Energy?

A Little Weird

reality bizarres the standard

You are not logged in - Join for Free - Login Forum Home » Weird Discussions » Could We use Time as a Source of Energy?

Page: 1, 2 - Next

Could We use Time as a Source of Energy?

Author | Message
--- | ---

Akio

I was Wondering whether it would be possible to use time as a source of energy, purely for Psychic abilities such as Telekenisis, or whether we are using something outside of time as a resource? Maybe we are drawing from an energy that has long passed, or possibly one that has yet to be?
This is just the tip of the Iceburg, What Oppinions do You have about the relations between time and energy?
~Akio~
I was Wondering whether it would be possible to use time as a source of energy, purely for Psychic abilities such as Telekenisis, or whether we are using something outside of time as a resource? Maybe we are drawing from an energy that has long passed, or possibly one that has yet to be? This is just the tip of the Iceburg, What Oppinions do You have about the relations between time and energy? ~Akio~

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Anonymous Dark

Eh? Time isn't energy. Energy isn't time.
Eh? Time isn't energy. Energy isn't time.

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Akio

@Anonymous Dark
Well,what is time then? theoretically, if any type of link between times was possible, would it then also be possible to take energy from a physical event in time, and harness psi-energy, or even normal energy from that event?
for example, If a rock was falling in 20 B.C off a cliff in present day Ireland, would it be theoretically possible to harness energy from that rock falling to make something move where you live in the here and now?
moreover, what would be the repricussions of doing such a thing, and, for further inquiry, what would our lives ten look like because of it?
Would it even be possible to corrupt an Experiment, and therefore our own concept of science because of it? If it was, what kind of effect would it have, would it be corrected? Could there have been someone who got a false test result that changed our concept of reality that was then fixed later on in time that we don't know about because we didwhat we did?
These are questions I ask myself on a day to day basis? What would your answer be to these?
@Anonymous Dark Well,what is time then? theoretically, if any type of link between times was possible, would it then also be possible to take energy from a physical event in time, and harness psi-energy, or even normal energy from that event? for example, If a rock was falling in 20 B.C off a cliff in present day Ireland, would it be theoretically possible to harness energy from that rock falling to make something move where you live in the here and now? moreover, what would be the repricussions of doing such a thing, and, for further inquiry, what would our lives ten look like because of it? Would it even be possible to corrupt an Experiment, and therefore our own concept of science because of it? If it was, what kind of effect would it have, would it be corrected? Could there have been someone who got a false test result that changed our concept of reality that was then fixed later on in time that we don't know about because we didwhat we did? These are questions I ask myself on a day to day basis? What would your answer be to these?

Last edited by Akio, 4 years, 7 months ago
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

ErikJDurwoodII

No. The energy of the distant past has already been re-utilized in other events. Energy is never "lost;" it's always being used at all times.
However, I do see where you are going. Don't think of time as being an energy, rather, think of the "velocity" of time as HAVING energy. According to science, there only exists one "moment" of time. One "frame" if you will. Physically, current theories suggest that quantized time is: 1.8755459 × 10^−18 C or about 5.4 × 10^−44 seconds.
The past is done, the future hasn't happened yet.
However the energy of the past exists as energy that, many say were started by the Big Bang, continue to "push" time forward.
Now that's physical time. When time as a constant changes, everything relying on it does as well. Time on a mental level is more elastic. Not being constrained by the energy of physicality, the mind can work ahead or behind to manipulate information. Using this, we can use the "velocity" or "stress" of the time-domain to perpetuate our own changes.
That's how the theory goes at least.
Obviously, more experimentation is needed. ^__^
No. The energy of the distant past has already been re-utilized in other events. Energy is never "lost;" it's always being used at all times. However, I do see where you are going. Don't think of time as being an energy, rather, think of the "velocity" of time as HAVING energy. According to science, there only exists one "moment" of time. One "frame" if you will. Physically, current theories suggest that quantized time is: 1.8755459 × 10^−18 C or about 5.4 × 10^−44 seconds. The past is done, the future hasn't happened yet. However the energy of the past exists as energy that, many say were started by the Big Bang, continue to "push" time forward. Now that's physical time. When time as a constant changes, everything relying on it does as well. Time on a mental level is more elastic. Not being constrained by the energy of physicality, the mind can work ahead or behind to manipulate information. Using this, we can use the "velocity" or "stress" of the time-domain to perpetuate our own changes. That's how the theory goes at least. Obviously, more experimentation is needed. ^__^

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Antisankari

"The past is done, the future hasn't happened yet."
Can be disputed.
If the future has not yet happened, then there should be no source, from which to draw information in cases such as clairvoyance experiments.
If the subject predicts the future correctly, thre are only two possibilities.
1) The future has already happened and information about it can be retrieved.
2) The subject forces the future to end up in a way his subconscious desires.
"The past is done, the future hasn't happened yet." Can be disputed. If the future has not yet happened, then there should be no source, from which to draw information in cases such as clairvoyance experiments. If the subject predicts the future correctly, thre are only two possibilities. 1) The future has already happened and information about it can be retrieved. 2) The subject forces the future to end up in a way his subconscious desires.

Last edited by Antisankari, 4 years, 7 months ago
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

SheepKing

Antisankari, Unless predictions of the future from the subconscious are based on some odd probability engine that we don't really know about. I'm sure there are more than three options.
Antisankari, Unless predictions of the future from the subconscious are based on some odd probability engine that we don't really know about. I'm sure there are more than three options.

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Wandering Wolf

@Akio
Even if one could draw energy from the past, a paradox would likely be created. If you managed to take the energy, it would have to be stored in some non-existant dimension until the time in the future was chronologically reached. I think that we should be glad that we are (at least currently) unable to alter time.
In the ultimate (spiritual/metaphysical) sense, it is believed that time only exists as the present moment, as Erik basically stated himself. When we are dealing with time at a scientific level, however, things can get a little complicated.
Antisankari:
If the future has not yet happened, then there should be no source, from which to draw information in cases such as clairvoyance experiments.
If the subject predicts the future correctly, thre are only two possibilities.
1) The future has already happened and information about it can be retrieved.
2) The subject forces the future to end up in a way his subconscious desires.
Theory number 2 seems unlikely, but possible, assuming that this is a more messed up universe than we originally thought.
Concerning theory number 1:
I once read in a book about psychic abilities that it is theorized that the past, present, and future all exist at the same time (possibly in different dimensions, although they did not say) and are all continuing on independently.
It is a radical theory, but it would explain clairvoyance and other forms of precognition.
It would basically mean that the past and future (being anything exactly before or after the present moment) exist independently in different dimensions and are changing constantly.
Changing in that the past will keep getting larger while the future remains infinite, assuming that time is everlasting (meaning that it had a beginning and continues through infinite), of course. The latter would conflict with my own beliefs regarding time, however.
Time seems to contradict itself quite a lot.
Good luck resolving this dilemma everyone.
@Akio Even if one could draw energy from the past, a paradox would likely be created. If you managed to take the energy, it would have to be stored in some non-existant dimension until the time in the future was chronologically reached. I think that we should be glad that we are (at least currently) unable to alter time. In the ultimate (spiritual/metaphysical) sense, it is believed that time only exists as the present moment, as Erik basically stated himself. When we are dealing with time at a scientific level, however, things can get a little complicated. [quote] Antisankari: If the future has not yet happened, then there should be no source, from which to draw information in cases such as clairvoyance experiments. If the subject predicts the future correctly, thre are only two possibilities. 1) The future has already happened and information about it can be retrieved. 2) The subject forces the future to end up in a way his subconscious desires.[/quote] Theory number 2 seems unlikely, but possible, assuming that this is a more messed up universe than we originally thought. Concerning theory number 1: I once read in a book about psychic abilities that it is theorized that the past, present, and future all exist at the same time (possibly in different dimensions, although they did not say) and are all continuing on independently. It is a radical theory, but it would explain clairvoyance and other forms of precognition. It would basically mean that the past and future (being anything exactly before or after the present moment) exist independently in different dimensions and are changing constantly. Changing in that the past will keep getting larger while the future remains infinite, assuming that time is everlasting (meaning that it had a beginning and continues through infinite), of course. The latter would conflict with my own beliefs regarding time, however. Time seems to contradict itself quite a lot. Good luck resolving this dilemma everyone.

Last edited by Wandering Wolf, 4 years, 7 months ago
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

ErikJDurwoodII

"If the future has not yet happened, then there should be no source, from which to draw information in cases such as clairvoyance experiments."
It hasn't happened until it happens. Note I said "Now that's physical time...Time on a mental level is more elastic"
You see, physicality is a one frame game. But fanning out from the present is a multitude of lines of probability. What has occurred in the past will describe the possible states of the future. Just like we can use spatial-temporal reasoning to do problem solving everyday, supposedly, we can extrapolate possible future events and scenarios from "playing forward" physical time. This is external to physical time where "The past is done and the future has not happened yet."
You have to keep in mind in this world-view, the physical and non are separated on a level where what applies to the physical may not to the non; including physical constants like time and space.
"If the future has not yet happened, then there should be no source, from which to draw information in cases such as clairvoyance experiments." It hasn't happened until it happens. Note I said "Now that's physical time...Time on a mental level is more elastic" You see, physicality is a one frame game. But fanning out from the present is a multitude of lines of probability. What has occurred in the past will describe the possible states of the future. Just like we can use spatial-temporal reasoning to do problem solving everyday, supposedly, we can extrapolate possible future events and scenarios from "playing forward" physical time. This is external to physical time where "The past is done and the future has not happened yet." You have to keep in mind in this world-view, the physical and non are separated on a level where what applies to the physical may not to the non; including physical constants like time and space.

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

X-Master

And it can be said that time flows backwards, in the sense that it might be that a handshake occurs from the future to the present in which the future is shaping the present and the present is shaping the past. Of course this is all conjecture, and I figured it would give you something to think on.
And it can be said that time flows backwards, in the sense that it might be that a handshake occurs from the future to the present in which the future is shaping the present and the present is shaping the past. Of course this is all conjecture, and I figured it would give you something to think on.

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

ErikJDurwoodII

Sure, it can be said, but there is little evidence to suggest it is true. ^__^
But there are some theories that allow for such temporal transactions. Unfortunately, that luxury winds up breaking everything else...
Still, I'd be interested to see some experiments to attempt to test it.
Sure, it can be said, but there is little evidence to suggest it is true. ^__^ But there are some theories that allow for such temporal transactions. Unfortunately, that luxury winds up breaking everything else... Still, I'd be interested to see some experiments to attempt to test it.

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Akio

Okay Erik, Just so I'm clear about what you're saying.
You're saying that, on a Mental Scale, Time infact is in an infinite loop, where the Past,present,and future are one, however; on a Physical level, It is a straight line, and the future infact has not happened yet because we have not experienced it, therefore, it is a one frame thing.
Now, going off of what I am understanding of what you are saying. If you look at time as a whole, meaning the combination of mental and physical concepts of time. Could we then think of time as an ever expanding circle, like a ripple in a pool of infinite size and dimension?
Please forgive me if my understanding is flawed, I think I understand what you're saying, but I like to be sure. <(^_^<)
Okay Erik, Just so I'm clear about what you're saying. You're saying that, on a Mental Scale, Time infact is in an infinite loop, where the Past,present,and future are one, however; on a Physical level, It is a straight line, and the future infact has not happened yet because we have not experienced it, therefore, it is a one frame thing. Now, going off of what I am understanding of what you are saying. If you look at time as a whole, meaning the combination of mental and physical concepts of time. Could we then think of time as an ever expanding circle, like a ripple in a pool of infinite size and dimension? Please forgive me if my understanding is flawed, I think I understand what you're saying, but I like to be sure. <(^_^<)

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

ErikJDurwoodII

I wouldn't conceptualize time as a "loop." Time is not that easy to conceptualize with a physical representation. In the mental, all time and space are one. Everything all at once. Obviously this goes beyond physical abstraction.
Time the mind and the universe is a complex concept that has many people thinking of explanations. It's a hard thing to explain in language as it transcends semantics.
With the "space and time as one" concept, a natural thought is to think "well then the future has already happened just as the past has." This causes one to think of experience like a stylus on a record player gliding through time on a predetermined path.
Studies show that may be true, but only partially. Understand, that it is action that creates history. Real physical changes that "writes down" the changes made to space and time. Under this concept, each person's observation of time draws their own "time-line" Their own historical path through history. The rest of the universe manifests as you observe it during the time and relative spatial location in said universe. Others alive and observing in the same time-frame, have time-lines that run parallel to yours. The universe is "shared" among us all. Now, if you take a "top looking down" view of time and space, all people, alive, dead, or yet to be, are all at once living their time-lines simultaneously in their respective "time-frames."
As confusing as it sounds, it fits together quite nicely. Read about the 10 dimensions of quantum mechanics.
Now we think "well crap, our futures are determined and there's nothing we can do." Not true. Even if there is a future being lived right now, it's not YOUR future. Your time-line, your "universe" is being lived by you and you alone. The probable events of the future are probable because of the availability to information to describe it. Since your mind is NOT part of the physical time, it is not a predetermined event. What you think and in turn what you DO is not predetermined. And that causes changes in what "would normally happen given the history."
Think of it this way.
Take a look at this graph. The past and future fan out from the present. That "hypsersurface of the present" is home to all of our "observer points" as are the observer points of people in the past and the present as you move along the time dimension. As energy changes through time, information present in the current formation is more prevalent than the information of the past.
An example, the water in my cup that I got from the tap could have been moose testicle sweat or glacial spring water. But after centuries of evaporating, condensing, ingesting, processing, evaporating, condensing and mixing, what the water "was" is so diluted (no pun intended), it makes little real difference in the water of today. Of course without it, it wouldn't be here as it is, but at a point, the history "fades into time" as just potential. But the observers in that time-frame will interact with it creating new (old) information pertinent to their experience.
The same goes for the future. Whatever happens in the future becomes less "relevant" to our present the further out it will occur. Our changing of the past will have less and less effect on the distant future the further out it goes. But that's proportional to the amount of change, which is proportional to the amount of energy spent.
Still, it's an interesting thing to think about, but it takes a lot of sobering scientific and philosophical journeys to even begin to comprehend the ramifications.
I wouldn't conceptualize time as a "loop." Time is not that easy to conceptualize with a physical representation. In the mental, all time and space are one. Everything all at once. Obviously this goes beyond physical abstraction. Time the mind and the universe is a complex concept that has many people thinking of explanations. It's a hard thing to explain in language as it transcends semantics. With the "space and time as one" concept, a natural thought is to think "well then the future has already happened just as the past has." This causes one to think of experience like a stylus on a record player gliding through time on a predetermined path. Studies show that may be true, but only partially. Understand, that it is action that creates history. Real physical changes that "writes down" the changes made to space and time. Under this concept, each person's observation of time draws their own "time-line" Their own historical path through history. The rest of the universe manifests as you observe it during the time and relative spatial location in said universe. Others alive and observing in the same time-frame, have time-lines that run parallel to yours. The universe is "shared" among us all. Now, if you take a "top looking down" view of time and space, all people, alive, dead, or yet to be, are all at once living their time-lines simultaneously in their respective "time-frames." As confusing as it sounds, it fits together quite nicely. Read about the 10 dimensions of quantum mechanics. Now we think "well crap, our futures are determined and there's nothing we can do." Not true. Even if there is a future being lived right now, it's not YOUR future. Your time-line, your "universe" is being lived by you and you alone. The probable events of the future are probable because of the availability to information to describe it. Since your mind is NOT part of the physical time, it is not a predetermined event. What you think and in turn what you DO is not predetermined. And that causes changes in what "would normally happen given the history." Think of it this way. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/World_line.png[/img] Take a look at this graph. The past and future fan out from the present. That "hypsersurface of the present" is home to all of our "observer points" as are the observer points of people in the past and the present as you move along the time dimension. As energy changes through time, information present in the current formation is more prevalent than the information of the past. An example, the water in my cup that I got from the tap could have been moose testicle sweat or glacial spring water. But after centuries of evaporating, condensing, ingesting, processing, evaporating, condensing and mixing, what the water "was" is so diluted (no pun intended), it makes little real difference in the water of today. Of course without it, it wouldn't be here as it is, but at a point, the history "fades into time" as just potential. But the observers in that time-frame will interact with it creating new (old) information pertinent to their experience. The same goes for the future. Whatever happens in the future becomes less "relevant" to our present the further out it will occur. Our changing of the past will have less and less effect on the distant future the further out it goes. But that's proportional to the amount of change, which is proportional to the amount of energy spent. Still, it's an interesting thing to think about, but it takes a lot of sobering scientific and philosophical journeys to even begin to comprehend the ramifications.

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Vimick

Erik you are a genius.
According to science, there only exists one "moment" of time. One "frame" if you will. Physically, current theories suggest that quantized time is: 1.8755459 × 10^−18 C or about 5.4 × 10^−44 seconds.
planck time?
An example, the water in my cup that I got from the tap could have been moose testicle sweat or glacial spring water.
lmao very nice analogy
I for one just believe time is a fabrication of our own to help us be more organized. It's all just an illusion >.>
Erik you are a genius. [quote]According to science, there only exists one "moment" of time. One "frame" if you will. Physically, current theories suggest that quantized time is: 1.8755459 × 10^−18 C or about 5.4 × 10^−44 seconds.[/quote] planck time? [quote]An example, the water in my cup that I got from the tap could have been moose testicle sweat or glacial spring water.[/quote] lmao very nice analogy I for one just believe time is a fabrication of our own to help us be more organized. It's all just an illusion >.>

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Antisankari

Planck time is supposed to be the smallest amount of time possible to be measured.
In the spirit of atomism, it could be called a "single unit of time".
Shit... Should have read the context... Instead of asking for a meaning, you were referring to it.
Planck time is supposed to be the smallest amount of time possible to be measured. In the spirit of atomism, it could be called a "single unit of time". Shit... Should have read the context... Instead of asking for a meaning, you were referring to it.

Last edited by Antisankari, 4 years, 7 months ago
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Linked

@Vimick: "I for one just believe time is a fabrication of our own to help us be more organized. It's all just an illusion >.>"
Thats exactly what i think.
So if time is just a conecept of our minds, then our minds can form time into what ever we want it to be. Just like a statue is the product of a sculptor, and can be made into what ever the sculptor wants it to be, or the way a painting can be what ever the painter wants it to be.
@Vimick: "I for one just believe time is a fabrication of our own to help us be more organized. It's all just an illusion >.>" Thats exactly what i think. So if time is just a conecept of our minds, then our minds can form time into what ever we want it to be. Just like a statue is the product of a sculptor, and can be made into what ever the sculptor wants it to be, or the way a painting can be what ever the painter wants it to be.

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Vimick

lol yeah anti i was just asking erik if thats what he was refering to i know what it means :P
lol yeah anti i was just asking erik if thats what he was refering to i know what it means :P

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Akio

Ah, I Think I'm understanding your understanding of this.
This Idea that things become less relevant the further from the present. It makes perfect sense to me.
You see it in this way because you only are in one point in the present, one path, if you will, but there a million ways to get to that point in your life and a million different outcomes. The further you go, the more outcomes there are possible, and therefore the less relevant each one is.
However, This fanning of the future and past is essentially an illusion, but only seems like this to us because we are in one path at any given time.
When you look at in a 3rd person view, It seems more like a huge layout of different events, things thatcould happen, things that will happen, and things that might happen in the future. and things that have been, could have been, and might have been in the past. but in this same point of view, there is no present, because the veiw is from beyond the grasp of time.
What do you think?
Ah, I Think I'm understanding your understanding of this. This Idea that things become less relevant the further from the present. It makes perfect sense to me. You see it in this way because you only are in one point in the present, one path, if you will, but there a million ways to get to that point in your life and a million different outcomes. The further you go, the more outcomes there are possible, and therefore the less relevant each one is. However, This fanning of the future and past is essentially an illusion, but only seems like this to us because we are in one path at any given time. When you look at in a 3rd person view, It seems more like a huge layout of different events, things thatcould happen, things that will happen, and things that might happen in the future. and things that have been, could have been, and might have been in the past. but in this same point of view, there is no present, because the veiw is from beyond the grasp of time. What do you think?

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Vimick

You see it in this way because you only are in one point in the present, one path, if you will, but there a million ways to get to that point in your life and a million different outcomes. The further you go, the more outcomes there are possible, and therefore the less relevant each one is.
i'd say more than a million, more like an infinite. that sounds closer :P
your theory sounds simple and nice. but with something as relative and intangible as time though, its better off not dwelling on what it is or what causes it or all the inner workings of it and just accept it for what it is
[quote] You see it in this way because you only are in one point in the present, one path, if you will, but there a million ways to get to that point in your life and a million different outcomes. The further you go, the more outcomes there are possible, and therefore the less relevant each one is.[/quote] i'd say more than a million, more like an infinite. that sounds closer :P your theory sounds simple and nice. but with something as relative and intangible as time though, its better off not dwelling on what it is or what causes it or all the inner workings of it and just accept it for what it is

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Akio

infinite is more accurate. I'd agree on that.
But, why do you think that It's better off not dwelling on what it is, what causes it, or the inner workings?
How can you Accept something for what it is if you aren't sure what it is?
Also, what I said, was just a watered down version of what Erik said, my reflections of what Erik is saying, and how I am interpreting it ^_^. The only reason I do that is so that when I say something that may seem a little off the wall, they understand where I'm coming from and don't argue that I am misunderstood and use a point that I already agree with as backing.
The simple fact of the matter is I agree and Support everything that Erik has said so far. all I've really been doing throughout this thread is post my updated concept on the subject matter. Maybe I should post more on things that give more information, instead of my concepts, but I have found that saying stuff like that pushes the discussion further, and the further the discussion goes, the more knowledge we can all gain from it.
infinite is more accurate. I'd agree on that. But, why do you think that It's better off not dwelling on what it is, what causes it, or the inner workings? How can you Accept something for what it is if you aren't sure what it is? Also, what I said, was just a watered down version of what Erik said, my reflections of what Erik is saying, and how I am interpreting it ^_^. The only reason I do that is so that when I say something that may seem a little off the wall, they understand where I'm coming from and don't argue that I am misunderstood and use a point that I already agree with as backing. The simple fact of the matter is I agree and Support everything that Erik has said so far. all I've really been doing throughout this thread is post my updated concept on the subject matter. Maybe I should post more on things that give more information, instead of my concepts, but I have found that saying stuff like that pushes the discussion further, and the further the discussion goes, the more knowledge we can all gain from it.

Last edited by Akio, 4 years, 7 months ago
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Vimick

How can you Accept something for what it is if you aren't sure what it is?
cause it hurts my brain trying to figure it out :(
[quote]How can you Accept something for what it is if you aren't sure what it is?[/quote] cause it hurts my brain trying to figure it out :(

Posted 4 years, 7 months ago

Page: 1, 2 - Next

Add Reply

You are not allowed to post. Please login (or join for free).

All Content, Images, Video, Text, and Software is © Copyright 2007-2009 Sean Connelly and their respective authors. All Rights Reserved.
Best viewed with Firefox, with minimum resolution of 1024 x 768. Microsoft can suck my balls.
A Little Weird is proudly powered by WordPress - Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).