{"id":2952,"date":"2010-07-05T09:37:40","date_gmt":"2010-07-05T08:37:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.rogerdarlington.me.uk\/nighthawk\/?p=2952"},"modified":"2010-07-05T09:39:54","modified_gmt":"2010-07-05T08:39:54","slug":"what-is-time","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.rogerdarlington.me.uk\/nighthawk\/?p=2952","title":{"rendered":"What is time?"},"content":{"rendered":"

This weekend, I attended a one-day course on time at the City Lit<\/a> in central London. It was a brave attempt to tackle a complex subject from both a scientific and a philosophical point of view with different lecturers for the two perspectives and then a general discussion.<\/p>\n

The scientific section concentrated on the theory of the ‘big bang’ for the creation of the universe and, in scientific terms, the beginning of time. We estimate that the ‘bang’ was 13.7 billion years ago and that the Earth is around 4.5 billion years old. I am quite familiar with modern concepts in cosmology, so this part of the day was fine for me.<\/p>\n

The philosophy section was a struggle though. The lecturer quoted Kant and Wittgenstein and I found their propositions very difficult and, in so far as I understood them, not useful. The lecturer argued that we cannot measure time or prove any theory and that time is simply a scheme we impose on reality. Therefore there is no answer to the question what is time.<\/p>\n

It seems to me that science and philosophy attempt to answer different questions. If I want to know whether a particular aircraft is safe to fly, I might ask a scientist or technologist. But, if I want to know whether it is ethically correct to fly in an aircraft at a time of global warming, I might consult a moral philosopher.<\/p>\n

There’s a discussion of both the scientific and philosophical views of time on Wikipedia here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"