How (not) To Stop Time
Sven Gelbhaar & Dustin Redmon
05.04.2019
Hello once again, dear reader. Today we’ll look at a simple equivalency in
Physics which confused us (well, Sven anyway) for a while. Someone suggested
that time stops without speed and displacement/distance; that time didn’t exist
before the Big Bang took place. Let’s just jump right in. We all know,
algebraically, that:
6 = 2 * 3
therefore:
2 = 6 / 3
and:
3 = 6 / 2.
In physics we have the following equation:
Velocity = Distance / Time
so therefore:
Distance = Time / Velocity
so it follows that:
Time = distance / velocity
This paper aims to prove that the passage of time continues despite the lack
of its constituents (distance and velocity). Let’s say that something is
absolutely still, so velocity equals zero, time continues to churn on even
though time should equal 0 (time = distance * 0). The same holds true for when
something is attached to the observer, in which case distance = 0. Again,
algebraically this should dictate that time is equal to zero as well. One could
take it even a step farther and say that time for the observer, regardless of
anything else, should always remain zero because the distance and velocity of
the observer relative to them-self is always equal to zero. However, we age, we
do things (doing something presupposes time), we think, we feel, etc. The
passage of time definitely continues despite so much as both of its factors both
being equal to zero.
To measure (the passage of) time the pertinent factors are certainly necessary,
and the perceptual time-shift/delta between objects falls to nothing when
relative speed and distance approaches zero, so that’s something, but time as a
dimension does not cease to be just because there is nothing to measure. Just
because the batteries wear out and the clock stops doesn’t mean that time
itself stops. This way leads to madness.