Time in Experience and Science<strong> </strong>

Becoming is the sine qua non of science, and indeed, of knowledge itself.

6th International Conference of the Balkan Physical Union BPU6, Istanbul – Turkey 22-26. August 2006, Book of Abstracts , 2006

Physicists think that they are the ones who will have the last say about time and answer the questions: what is time, how is it manifested, how is it measured, as well as a series of other questions that appear when we think about time. Biologists, psychologists and philosophers do not believe that physicists have a monopoly on the topics dealing with time. Dissentions of the kind have led us to consider time as a phenomenon that needs to be studied in a multidisciplinary scientific way. Time is a subject of scientists, artists, philosophers, theologians, spiritists, as well as all the others who build the form and define the content of human spirit. Science is the leading category of human mind and leads civilization to factual truths. This is an attempt to give the reasons for establishing the science of time.

2009

Scientific methods are now considered to be so fundamental to modern science that some people, especially philosophers of science and practicing scientists, consider earlier inquiries into nature to be pre-scientific. Traditionally, historians of science have defined science sufficiently broadly to include those inquiries.Thus the journey of science that began as an integrative understanding of nature has deteriorated into an unhealthy amalgam of &#39;subjects&#39; that maintain a parochial disdain for each other. The positive note is that we have diagnosed the problem and that is the first step towards treating the malady. The following words of the great scientist Albert Einstein should guide us in our pursuit of knowledge: “A little knowledge is dangerous, so is a lot of knowledge, but the main thing is never to stop questioning.”However, today&#39;s Science Education, particularly in India gives scant importance to both observation and enquiry. In fact, both these necessary capa...

paper, 2019

History of philosophy of Time is full of separate attempts with different views to solve the problem of time. some of these attempts just disband the issue and some of them give up it with no answer. Yet the nature of time and its properties is a mystery and open question for both philosophy and science. for years by mistake people were think the problem of time is the issue of philosophy and some other else were believed that it belongs only to physics category, But now it is clear dissolving this problem is impossible without help of all categories where were challenge with time; for example physics, philosophy, language, psychology and so on. We consider three categories of all areas above to explain the conception of time and its problems: By help of physics, philosophy and psychology.

Qeios, 2024

Philosophy is the mother of all sciences, and when a modern science such as physics finds itself in times of trouble, struggling to rid the scientific view of the universe of the extant conceptual vagueness or theoretical indecisiveness, it turns to philosophy, just like grown-up people turn, in their dark hour, to their ageing parents, seeking helpful advice and hoping to hear words of wisdom. And because Aristotle was the father of philosophy, it is only natural to pay homage to him as one of the greatest thinkers of all time: as once observed by a colleague, "Everything was said by Aristotle". Alfred Driessen's article Philosophical Aspects of Time in Modern Physics is a good example of such homage, making up, at least to some extent, for what he characterizes as unawareness, on the part of scientists, of the philosophical discussions about the foundations of their science, the concept of time being such a foundation (along with the concept of threedimensional space) of physics. Driessen's goal is to show that the stunning developments in 20 th century physics, marked by the advent of general relativity and quantum mechanics, call for a revision of the concept of time that seemed to be well-understood and explained in classical physics, and even though it may sound paradoxical, the Aristotelian approach may "lead to a novel understanding of time in modern physics" (p. 1). But why should a physicist challenged with a specific problem turn to philosophy at all? Because, in most general terms, philosophy may be defined as the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, while physics is the science of matter, motion, and energy (Brown & Weidner 2024) as the fundamental constituents of reality. This poses the following questions, fundamental both for philosophy and physics: What is knowledge? What is reality? What is existence? Literally, science is knowledge (from Lat. scire 'know'), and we all know that "knowledge is power". However, we have a very vague idea of what knowledge is or what it is to know (Kravchenko 2024). We know, thanks to F. Nietzsche, that "cognition comes through comparison", and comparison implies the observability of the compared. Yet, as Driessen notes (p. 1-2), observables are a problem in general relativity (cf. Panagiotopoulos et al. 2023), and in quantum mechanics, Heisenberg's indeterminacy principle highlights the fundamental limits of the observer. This seeming weirdness motivates Driessen's objective to try and solve the puzzle by putting the pieces together and getting a complete picture. In other words, he advocates for what seems to be a holistic approach summed up in the famous aphorism attributed to Aristotle: "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts".

Time, Nature’s Best Kept Secret, 2020

Einstein once said that gravity is nature’s best kept secret, but I think we understand gravity better than we understand time. The purpose of this paper is to define the nature of time and determine if Modern Physics uses the concept correctly. In relativity, time and spacetime are treated like material substances or fields that can be warped, twisted, shrunk, expanded and given a shape. In Einstein’s world, time is not something that flows like a river, but is more like a frozen lake (block time) that does not flow at all, so that past, present and future are merged into one solid block of time. If this is so, then the future is set in stone and all events are predestined and predetermined. Actually, if past, present and future are one, then the past and future do not exist and we live in eternal present where nothing moves, and, for all intents and purposes, time does not exist. The essence of time is that something changes and moves. How could Einstein speak of time slowing down or speeding up - if time did not flow. In this paper, time is defined as a psychological, metaphysical phenomenon, rather than a physical phenomenon. Change and motion are observed in the physical world, and time is inferred from that change. So, humans have created an ideal standard time by which to measure various rates of change. In the same way that humans created standard measuring sticks (yard sticks, meter sticks) to measure objects of varying dimensions, they have created devices that ideally tick at a constant rate to standardize time. Thus, time is metaphysical (in the mind) whereas change is manifested in the physical world at varying rates. Change is observed; time is inferred.

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 2007

Responding to Hasok Chang's vision of the history and philosophy of science (HPS) as the continuation of science by other means, I illustrate the methods of HPS and their utility through a historico-critical examination of the problem of ''time's arrow'', that is to say, the problem posed by the claim by Boltzmann and others that the temporal asymmetry of many physical processes and indeed the very possibility of identifying each of the two directions we distinguish in time must have a ground in the laws of nature. I claim that this problem has proved intractable chiefly because the standard mathematical representation of time employed in the formulation of the laws of nature ''forgets'' one of the connotations of the word 'time' as it is used in ordinary language and in experimental physics. r

Time & Society

A considerable attention has been given recently to the analysis of the temporal dimension(s) of science and the impact of the changes therein on scientific work. One of the questions that has emerged from the rapidly growing discussion is whether and (if so) how these changes affect not only the general structural aspects of scientific practice but also the very content of scientific knowledge. In this study, I critically examine these epistemological considerations in the available body of work on scientific temporality and argue that while there has been significant progress in our understanding of the manifold temporal layers of scientific practice, the analysis of their epistemic impact has remained rather limited in certain aspects. In particular, whereas the recent studies of academic time successfully overcome the binary perspective of “fast versus slow” academia, their considerations of the epistemic role of scientific temporality in particular seem nevertheless still couch...