YES and No.
Since in general the term ‘time‘ actually contains two things that do not really belong together, namely time-change and time-duration, I have to differentiate.On top of that, our minds certainly do not understand time, and the subconscious controlling part of the brain certainly does not, because that part of the brain only arranges the incoming facts to such an extent that our mind is able to take the decisive action. without demanding too much awareness of it. In particular, it should be noted that not even the scholars distinguishes the differentiable things of time, why should other normalos use the mind, if not the scholars.
For on the one hand there is a cause for the change of the present and on the other hand, the duration of time is only an unconscious product of our brain.This is how a dispute arises that you can pursue (here) on Quora, which currently drives both lay and professional physicists to white glow, but does not in any way stimulate reflection, but nevertheless provides good entertainment here on Quora.
So, time exists exclusively in our head and interprets both a spatial distance and a change of the present to a common ‘time‘ concept, which we scientifically generalize most reprehensibly without knowing it to us will bedo not use our minds for this.
Therefore, instead of the term‘mind’ I now interpret some unconscious function of our brain incl.Memory, because ‘mind‘ comes from conscious understanding, which is obviously not the case with most self-appointed Einstein inquisitors, because they believe only what they have been taught and never question or question.do not use the mind or simply do not grasp the contradictions or ignore them, because otherwise they are considered lepers by the other inquisitors. After all, they absolutely want to be recognized as competent scholars. So the Einstein inquisitors are not about understanding, but only about being someone.
But with such a question you openly call “to think about “what is obviously a mortal sin in the special Einstein-faith community of physics.Because if time is only in our head, then it probably cannot work or be stretched in the whole universe.
And now to the differentiation of the concept of time.
The change of time seems to be subject to a constantly repetitive circular function, where, figuratively speaking, at 12 o’clock the present always becomes the past and the future becomes the present.This is the time-change, which now exists as a singular time point in our memory. However, the present lingers and that is the duration of time within which something that exists presently can work. The change in the substantial existential state takes place in the present, by producing the future state, and then changing. In reality, this means that the old present no longer exists, but in our minds we have stored the old present in our memory. Nature can only change what exists, however, because it cannot create a new world every time, because it does not have to remember, because the past does not affect the present anyway and thus the world would be asomal, as before the Big Bang.
And with that saving we now create two points, one of which no longer exists, and now call this distance, to the old point, generalized time, although we certainly differentiate between time-point and time-space.But it is never the presence of effect, but the past. So how should that time have any effect, for this time exists exclusively in our minds, we only apply it to understand. The physical process of changing the state of space, we recognize only by the fact that the observed object moves.
To understand how long this dwell time takes, take a spatial distance as a scale on which a pointer moves at the speed of light, because the speed of light is absolutely constant.And just as you are starting to think seriously about the scale, you come across the phenomenon of the endless division of a track and then at some point you have to decide to quantify the track for good, so as not to hang yourself in the nirvana of endlessness. That last possible step must therefore describe the smallest possible distance, but also the smallest possible time-duration, because one cannot divide the duration of time into endlessly smallest pieces, i.e. do not stretch endlessly to justify the phenomenon of time dilation.
So, you can’t contract routes or dilate time without contradicting the speed of light.The process of changing the length or duration can therefore only result from a reduction or an enlargement of both quantified sizes exist, these two sizes together I consider as Planck’s pixels. The distance and time then always change synchronously with the same mathematical signs, in which the corresponding pixels change the place, which we then ultimately understand as a movement.
So movement is just a change of position in space.Thus, no pixel disappears, but it is just somewhere else. For example, a pixel can slide from the X axis to the Y axis, reducing the distance on the X axis and increasing on the Y axis. So you have to imagine that only the amount of pixels changes, but never the pixel itself, because that is constant and that together results in the constant that we know as the speed of an effect.
Each effect emanates from a spatial point simultaneously in all directions and thus describes in space a spherical sphere of action, which I then consider as an object that moves.The effect is the curvature of the three dimensions we know into a fourth. Later I describe this as photon (light) and thus the movement of a point is also the speed of light. The light, as a photon, is the only one in the universe that can move at this speed, all other, lower speed are due to the mass, which I can only describe later. Thus, the photon is to be regarded as a general basic particle from which all objects of this universe consist.
And the photon is now the only thing that can move there and this circumstance is the reason for the only determining speed par excellence.Thus, the smallest possible path of an effect is determined by a path, which we ultimately always use mathematically as the radius of a circular function. Because every object is an sphere of action.
Nevertheless, the ratio of the circumference to the radius is mathematically a floatpoint size, whereas the radius itself can only be an integer positive Planck unit.Because a negative circle causes problems, especially with regard to the duration of the time required for this, which then has an akausal direction of movement. Because a process of movement can only be forward-looking.
From a three-dimensional point of view, a negative circle seems to me to be totally absurd and illogical, which I now call 3D logic.But a 4D logic allows a completely different perspective and then a negative circle is rather necessarily logical, because then there can be no real straight line, as we understand from the 3D point of view. Because the end of a straight line is then always twistedly connected with the beginning, as for example with the m枚biusband of the painter Escher.
The 4th dimension of 4D logic is not the time coordinate, but an additional spatial dimension, which until now is considered to be a time-duration, but is not distinguished from the time-change, although from a scientific point of view it was a blatant error not to Distinguish.
The problem is that on the one hand the time-duration is a distance between two time-points and on the other hand, a point of it is no longer in the present, but in our memory as a past stored distance to the present.
From this point of view, the past point must not have any effect if it does not exist concretely in order to work.
But since there are real effects, it can now be concluded that the duration of time is only an ingenious illusion of the brain, which twists things so much that we do not have to think about it in order to understand it.As our brain already does, because real everything is on the head in the eye and our brain twists everything so that is always down where we feel it. And in the other case, there is always outside where we experience the present and inside is always the past direction from which we came. unintelligible???
When you see the Big Bang as radiation in the sky tent, you see the original point source at every point in your sphere of vision, i.e. from the inside.
And if you were at the bang now, you would only be able to look at it from the outside. Is this the fault of the temporal or spatial distance?
This reveals an absurd notion, but otherwise works superbly, if it is not thought too hard, because time is only a spatial curvature that is suitably shaped by your mind without having to understand it.Once you’ve seen that, you’ve got to realize that our brain can give us something really brilliant, which really exists as a spatial size, but we can’t capture it because of a lack of messages in the eye.
Therefore, the time-duration is not the time coordinate, but the substantial lyrically existing size that is necessary to characterize the space in order to be considered as an object of motion.It is a real spatial dimension, because all other dimensions are only virtual names in our memory. This additional spatial dimension now replaces the time duration and now allows the one-way freedom of the direction of the movement without contradiction. In this way, the actual time coordinate will now only determine the pixel of the desired spatial present, the dimension of which only functions as a counter of the present, which has only a chronodirectional freedom of movement.
This amount now carries a few meters of text further in my blog under the post What is a 4D movement, what keeps it so stable at light speed and what causes the length contraction?What does this ultimately have to do with the quantum of action?