A question of the nature of time

Alferd Packer · Post by **Alferd Packer** » 2002-10-14 03:31pm

What is the smallest possible measurement of time that presently avails itself to us? Furthermore, is time finite in the sense of a smallest possible incrementation, or can you always come up with a smaller, more prescise measure of time?

Thanks in advance for the enlightenment.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-14 03:35pm

Nano sec

salm · Post by **salm** » 2002-10-14 03:46pm

if there is a smallest distance ->smallest amount of matter - it´s likely that there´s a smallest amount of time. that would be the tick of time light needs to travel over this distance.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2002-10-14 03:53pm

Alferd Packer wrote:What is the smallest possible measurement of time that presently avails itself to us? Furthermore, is time finite in the sense of a smallest possible incrementation, or can you always come up with a smaller, more prescise measure of time?

Thanks in advance for the enlightenment.

The smallest possible measurement of time currently available, IIRC, is a single oscillation of a cesium atom. The nanosecond doesn't even come close - A slow Pentium IV processor has a 1 GHz clock speed, which means that it processes one 64-bit "word" per nanosecond. And that's just a moderately fast, commercially available microprocessor for home computer use. There are processors available for commercial use which can process thousands of words per nanosecond.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2002-10-14 03:58pm

The smallest possible increment of time is the Planck Time, which is 1 times 10 to the negative 43rd power seconds. That is the amount of time it takes a photon to travel one Planck Length (1.6 times 10 to the negative 35th power meters).

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2002-10-14 04:23pm

Wait. Is this a measurement of time that we have a word for or that we can measure?

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-10-14 04:27pm

That is simply the smallest possible unit of time. It's mathematically derived and demonstrated through Hawking radiation.

Singular Quartet · Post by **Singular Quartet** » 2002-10-14 08:37pm

I don't care because Time and sapce are relative, so it doesn't entirely matter...

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-10-14 10:25pm

The speed of light is the same in all frames of reference.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-14 10:43pm

Except in Star Trek, where you can make a "fissure" in it

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-10-14 11:40pm

I need a fissure in time so I can go back and tell myself not to open an E*Trade account.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

A question of the nature of time

A question of the nature of time

Re: A question of the nature of time