Lets Play a Game YCM

[Willieh]

Actually' date=' it's impossible to stop time.

 

Even if you [i']could[/i] stop/start time, there would still be an elapse of time between when you stopped time and when you started it again. Basically, the idea of stopping time is like an oxymoron.

 

We know it's not possible, except here we are asking one of those "What if..." questions.

 

I'm saying that time can't be manipulated, even in a "what if" situation. Time is just a measurement.

 

The thing is about a "What If" situation, is I can say this:

 

What if it could? And if it could, what would happen in the situation stated by Icy?

 

Everything would be frozen.

 

But time wouldn't be stopped. You can't freeze time.

 

Thing is, in this situation in the thread, you can. It is a "What If". So, since everything time is frozen, everything else would be also, which means you would be stuck in a permanent time stop.

 

I don't think you get what I'm saying. Even if time "stopped", there would still be a time lapse between when timed stopped and 50 years after when time stopped. So it's IMPOSSIBLE to stop time in ANY situation. Even if everything in the universe and beyond was frozen, it would still be frozen for a certain amount of time. Be it forever, or 50 years. You can't stop a measurement.

 

So your saying, that when time is unfrozen, we would leave off at 50 years into the future, and have some sort of time lag, and everything would catch up immediately after time is unfrozen?

 

No. If we were unfrozen 50 years in the future, we would probably return to normal. But there would have been an elapse of 50 years between when we were frozen and when we return.

[-Griffin]

In my, probably wrong, mind, time is just a measure of relativity. If matter does not act, it does not exist, so cannot move, there can be no "equivalent 50 years," and so on.

[Akira]

Depends, since you seem keen on the idea of the use of imagination here, there are many ways to answer. If we look at time scientifically and assume that it is caused by the continued movement of matter, then it can be said that suspending all matter nullifies the concept of time. Not to mention that the idea of time is a fabrication of the human race anyway. However, if this is said to be true, then who's to judge what constitutes 50 years or not? Under these circumstances, trying to answer the question becomes almost paradoxical, so we consider time from a different point of view: non-scientific.

 

In this case, we can imagine time to be like a universal clock that keeps ticking in the background regardless of what happens. Looking at it this way (taking the entire universe into account) brings us back into perspective of how insignificant we may be considered to be in comparison with all else that exists. So in this case, I'd say that time would pass as normal, but we as humans would be completely unaware. So long as the movement of matter stopped and started instantly without transition, it could happen at any time without us being able to tell. We measure the age of things by examining the change in their subatomic structure anyway, so there wouldn't even be any evidence if everything really had ceased to move.

[Cyber Altair]

My huge dick can block time, I doubt I can for 50 years.

[Pikachu]

Hmm, this is interesting.

 

If time stopped, time would never move forward. 50 years could never have passed.

 

Of course, if you mean 'the whole universe stopped for 50 years', someone must had stopped it. But in theory, this is impossible, because the whole universe stopped, and no one could resume it. To everyone, no one could know it was 50 years. So basically, time cannot be stopped by anybody, and it shall remain impossible.

 

The answer also depends if you say 'which' part of the universe is stopped, but I shall presume you meant the entire universe. That is, unless, you would like to change it.

[Dweller of Parables]

2 solutions.

 

If time were to stop and you are the only one to move for the 50 years, there was progress. So yes.

 

If time stopped as a whole and you stopped moving as well as every object, mass, etc., then no.

[Encalade Shinamisu]

I believe, in most prospects, this is a question that can only be best answered based on who's judging. However, If I am the judge of that, I believe that if time 'allegedly' stopped for 50 years, time would indeed go on.

 

Although time measures what has passed and keeps an approximation of how long ago or ahead something is, unfortunately, it is a concept made by humans. If time were to stop for 50 years the way you say it, 50 years would have still gone by according to humans. ALthough it might make the species seem selfish, Humans are the ones who determine how time is measured and how it goes on so...

 

If humans happened to notice, we would still count time regularly, some even saying, 'Time stopped 50 years ago'. Because of anyone being able to say that, technically time passed. It just happened to pass in a frozen frame of our Existence, where just about everything stopped. But somehow, we can still say 50 years have passed.

[Luna Lovegood]

Ok. If time stops, it doesn't move forward for 50 years, so the answer is 'Undefined'

[Guest Welche]

Once time has stopped, you cannot measure the amount of "Time" that goes by. It cannot in fact be time that is passing, rather it must be a stronger universal force, one that cannot be stopped. If I do not post, you cannot say that I have posted 50 times.

 

If we are looking for an explanation for this, we say that time is omnipresent and the it is not time which we are stopping, but actually the movement of everything, but time which is stopping.

[Mehmani]

It would in our so-called system of time, but it would seem like a miniscule amount to our 'frozen' selves.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Akira is the closest...

[Christian Exodia]

Just blowing my two cents.

 

Time is but an invention to tell where we are, all the things. If "time" were to stop for 50 years, humans would be talking, moving, all that, but time would not go by. We wouldn't age, or anything.

 

So, time, I say, is irrevelant. There is more the one kind of time, so we don't even know what year it is, we may even be wrong on minutes & hours. We can never tell, we just follow what we've always done, we may never know if time was right.

 

So my answer: It is irrevelant. It may happen, but we won't feel it, or care. We may even be 50 years ahead, so we could may even not have lost any time at all. Time is irrevelant.

[Snitch]

duration =/= occurrence.

 

you may or may not understand that.

[.Requiem]

Would our perception of time stop or everything would stop moving at all?

[Alex DeLarge]

most people are saying that we cannot define the 50 year period, therefore we would stay frozen indefinitely, I have another theory as to why this may happen in this scenario. because time has stopped everything including the sun and moon. the position of the moon may change in the future.due to the moon being one of the things that controls the tides.this would cause huge tsunamis all over the world, wiping out the future human race and leaving the humans frozen in time with no way to age if time did unfreeze thus rendering life pointless

[Willieh]

Akira is the closest...

 

The second paragraph of his post was pretty much what I said...

 

The first paragraph is inconsequential. Regardless of whether or not changes occur, time would still move forward...

[WTF]

maybe time for you would still move forward. But the space time continuem is a tough thing to learn.

[Sorrow.]

You would see nothing because as time stops so does light making forth a blinding yellow color. You wouldn't age, you would stay in the same position forever and you have ended life because the air does not move and you could not breathe....

[Felix Culpa]

Well, time, my friend, is a perception of the mind. That is why I can say whatever time I feel like it being. It is currently 29:21. Congratulations. And as for your "50 years" no. It would not. Matter not moving cannot be achieved.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

If something's stopped it cannot move forward.

 

mirite?

[Willieh]

maybe time for you would still move forward. But the space time continuem is a tough thing to learn.

 

It doesn't really have that much to do with the SpaceTime Continuum. It's really a question of whether or not you consider the fact that time is both physical and subjective. From a subjective standpoint, time would stop as soon as everything in the universe became frozen. But physically, time would still be moving regardless of whether or not things are changing... because time measures distance that objects move through the past/future. You CAN'T stop moving into the future at a steady rate, because even if you never even moved a nanometer; you'd still be moving forward in time.

 

So regardless of whether or not you THINK you're moving forwards in time; you are.

[Dark]

If time were to stop, for what would be considered 50yrs. Would time have moved forward at all?

 

No.

 

Let's back up my one-worded answer with some examples.

 

If you were playing a Mario game, and you touched not a single button, would Mario move except for his death animation? No. In this sense, Mario is considered as time. The pressing of a button is a parallel to the continuation of time. When the button is not pressed, and time is stopped, Mario (and therefore time) will not move.

 

Let's say I was a magician. And I can freeze time at my will. And unfreeze time. So, I go to Hawaii and find where Icyblue lives. Then, using magicks, I freeze time. Basically, I stopped anything from moving. On a universal scale. But I can move, because I am a magician. So I take a cup of water and turn it over on Icy's head. I get the hell out, and unfreeze time. The cup of water spills on Icy's head, and he wonders how it got there. In the time where time was frozen (badly worded), I did things. But Icy had no awareness of what I did. He could not see, hear, taste, touch or smell. And because his body was 'frozen', he could not age.

 

I'll post any more examples I can think of.

 

But I have a nitpick with your original question. How can time be frozen for a period of 50 years? If time is frozen, and you say 50 years goes by, you are automatically saying that time is moving forward: by 50 years. If time really was frozen, time would not go by.

[Willieh]

If time were to stop' date=' for what would be considered 50yrs. Would time have moved forward at all?[/i']

 

No.

 

Let's back up my one-worded answer with some examples.

 

If you were playing a Mario game, and you touched not a single button, would Mario move except for his death animation? No. In this sense, Mario is considered as time. The pressing of a button is a parallel to the continuation of time. When the button is not pressed, and time is stopped, Mario (and therefore time) will not move.

 

Let's say I was a magician. And I can freeze time at my will. And unfreeze time. So, I go to Hawaii and find where Icyblue lives. Then, using magicks, I freeze time. Basically, I stopped anything from moving. On a universal scale. But I can move, because I am a magician. So I take a cup of water and turn it over on Icy's head. I get the hell out, and unfreeze time. The cup of water spills on Icy's head, and he wonders how it got there. In the time where time was frozen (badly worded), I did things. But Icy had no awareness of what I did. He could not see, hear, taste, touch or smell. And because his body was 'frozen', he could not age.

 

I'll post any more examples I can think of.

 

But I have a nitpick with your original question. How can time be frozen for a period of 50 years? If time is frozen, and you say 50 years goes by, you are automatically saying that time is moving forward: by 50 years. If time really was frozen, time would not go by.

 

Here's where your theory is flawed.

 

Time is still active, regardless of whether or not everything is frozen. In your example with Icy; how long did it take you to turn the cup over? In your Mario example, the little timer in the upper right corner is a better representation of time. Because regardless of whether or not Mario moves, the timer still keeps counting down.

[Dark]

And what if I paused the game, in the Mario example? I feel that's a better representation of freezing time, as you are literally stopping the counter. Mario cannot move while the game is paused, nor can the enemies move, nor can the counter move. Thus, when the game is paused, time is frozen until the game is unpaused. And once it is unpaused, Mario starts in the same location where he was before. And so do all the enemies. And everything is unchanged.

 

In the Icy example, it depends how you measure time. If you consider "time" as being measured by, let's say, a stopwatch, then it took me 0 seconds to place the glass on Icy's head. If you consider time as not being measured, then how can any time pass by, ever?

 

I guess the Icy example was pretty shitty, as I was moving in it. I stole it from a sci-fi movie.

 

What my main argument is, is that if you were able to freeze time, and unfreeze it "50 years later", everything would remain unchanged. Thus, time would not have passed by.

 

Again, what does Icy mean by "50 years later"? Time is frozen. :/

[Guest JoshIcy]

Again' date=' what does Icy mean by "50 years later"? Time is frozen. :/

[/quote']

 

*laughs* This is Theoretical Science (for lack of a better term). You're supposed to have a good grasp on what's possible, and what CAN be possible. Learn their difference. And the answer(s) to this question may become clear.