Slashdot Mirror


Can Time Slow Down?

Ponca City, We Love You writes "Does time slow down when you are in a traffic accident or other life threatening crisis like Neo dodging bullets in slow-motion in The Matrix? To find out, researchers developed a perceptual chronometer where numbers flickered on the screen of a watch-like unit. The scientists adjusted the speed at which the numbers flickered until it was too fast for the subjects to see. Then subjects were put in a Suspended Catch Air Device, a controlled free-fall system in which 'divers' are dropped backwards off a platform 150 feet up and land safely in a net. Subjects were asked to read the numbers on the perceptual chronometer as they fell [video]. The bottom line: While subjects could read numbers presented at normal speeds during the free-fall, they could not read them at faster-than-normal speeds. 'We discovered that people are not like Neo in The Matrix,' Eagleman said. 'The answer to the paradox is that time estimation and memory are intertwined: the volunteers merely thought the fall took a longer time in retrospect'."

72 of 444 comments (clear)

  1. i thought time slowed down enough for a 1st post by m1ndrape · · Score: 5, Funny

    damn you agent smith, no wait, damn you oracle...no wait....damn you all!

    *shakes* fist

    --
    Donald Ray Moore Jr. (mindrape)
    Suspected Terrorist
  2. Newsflash. by Cowclops · · Score: 2, Insightful

    First on today's news: Time doesn't slow down for non-relativistic cases.

    And in other news: Water is wet.

    Film reel at 11.

    1. Re:Newsflash. by ResidntGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, shut the fuck up. You'd have said the same thing if they'd reported that the brain went into overdrive and could read the faster-than-normal numbers.

      --
      ResidntGeek
    2. Re:Newsflash. by Knuckles · · Score: 3, Funny

      I just tried it. People lie to you.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    3. Re:Newsflash. by commisaro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It may seem obvious, but it is important in science to test even the most "obvious" assumptions. Otherwise it is easy to come to false conclusions, and pseudoscience abounds.

    4. Re:Newsflash. by jasonmicron · · Score: 2, Funny

      Time itself does not slow down

      Ahh, but it can. Crank up that falling airplane to near the speed of light. Before it hits the ground, we all will be one second older than the occupants.

    5. Re:Newsflash. by tzhuge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even though you've been modded Troll, I pretty much agree with the sentiment expressed by your post. This meme of 'that study's conclusion is so obvious; what morons funded it' is getting really tiresome. It wasn't that long ago when it was obvious that the Earth is flat and sailing far enough takes you off the edge.

    6. Re:Newsflash. by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Your higher brain functions work to make your consciousness a seamless experience. Your lower brain functions, more concerned with survival, do not attempt to do this. Thus, when the body is in a fight or flight mode, time seems to speed up, slow down and become disjointed. This is how your primitive lower brain functions work, they don't care about making it seamless, they care about processing the data your senses are giving as close to real time as possible so you survive.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    7. Re:Newsflash. by ResidntGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The study was measuring the PERCEPTION of the passage of time. If you could have definitively predicted the results of this study beforehand, then congratulations! You know more about neurology than anyone on earth!

      --
      ResidntGeek
    8. Re:Newsflash. by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 2, Funny

      Um, no. Though the time is takes to open a bag of Doritos does seem to expand to approximately infinity, for some reason.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    9. Re:Newsflash. by SL+Baur · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except there wasn't any scientific evidence back then to know whether the Earth really was flat or not. Sorry, no. As the other posters wrote, the Greeks measured the curvature of the earth to a pretty good estimate 2000 years ago. It was this reason that Columbus couldn't find funding. Everyone who knew better, knew you couldn't possibly sail all the way to Asia without killing everyone and they were correct. Finding something in the middle was an accident.

      The speed of light in a vacuum may be constant, but once other effects start getting involved the picture changes. I think this was an interesting experiment, though I'd like to see it repeated under the same and different conditions. You can't prove anything scientifically unless the experiment is repeatable (by other people).
    10. Re:Newsflash. by timster · · Score: 3, Informative

      the only way for time to slow down is to travel faster than the speed of light

      Whoops -- a simple mistake but a big one (like saying that you have to factor prime numbers to break encryption). No, all travel at any speed causes time dilation. The effect simply isn't significant unless you're travelling at a significant fraction of the speed of light.

      Of course, to be pedantic it's all relative (and that's where the equations get wacky).

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    11. Re:Newsflash. by GooberToo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, it also ignores the fact that the headline is wrong. It was not testing time, it was testing the ***human perception*** of time, which is certainly a candidate for good science. Regardless of the outcome, no physics equations would have changed.

      So modding him "troll" or "idiot" would be appropriate. ;)

    12. Re:Newsflash. by bkr1_2k · · Score: 4, Funny

      At speed of light (or near) by the time we age one second the plane will have already buried itself into the ground killing all occupants. So you're right, we'd be one second older, but mostly because they'd be dead. So time doesn't really slow down, death speeds up. Your argument fails.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    13. Re:Newsflash. by masterzora · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You're not being pedantic enough. If one travels faster than c, one goes backwards in time. If one travels at c, time is constant in that reference frame while time passes in other frames. If one travels less than c, time dilation occurs.

      My point? While you are correct in pointing out that any travel will cause effects, but significant effects are observed only for a significant fraction of the speed of light, you didn't mention that the original poster was even more wrong than you said since faster than light speeds cause time to reverse, not to go slower (though, obviously, your velocity at that point also changes how quickly time reverses).

      --
      Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
    14. Re:Newsflash. by dacut · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ah, but the mass of the plane also increases as speed increases. At a mere 0.99999999999999999999c, the relativistic mass of a 300,000 kg 747-400 exceeds the mass of the earth. So the plane doesn't crash into earth; earth crashes into the plane.

    15. Re:Newsflash. by I_Love_Pocky! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "true velocity"

      Lol. Relative to what? Using the word "true" implies some kind of universal reference frame.

  3. Short answer: No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Long answer: Noooooooooooooooooooooooo

  4. dupe by Sylvak · · Score: 4, Funny

    I remember reading this here a year or 2 back.

    1. Re:dupe by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

      It only seems like it was a year or 2 ago. Actually, you're just remembering this article from when you read it 10 minutes ago.

  5. Stupid Question by Zashi · · Score: 5, Funny

    What a stupid question. Of course it can. Ever had to sit through 3 meetings in a row?

    Turns a matter of hours into a matter of weeks.

    --
    Skiffy is Spiffy, but Ort is tort.
  6. Hmmm... by geekmansworld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sounds a bit weak to me. Though such an event can be frightening or exhilarating, you KNOW that it's coming, and you KNOW that it's perfectly safe. To me, the experience of going over a roller coaster hill is different than the experience of being involved in an auto accident. I say more research is required.

    1. Re:Hmmm... by Karl0Erik · · Score: 4, Funny

      Exactly. I suggest strapping chronometers to people's windshields and involving them in accidents without asking them.

    2. Re:Hmmm... by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I also am unclear as to what they think they're testing. They're faced with the question, "Does time really seem to slow down?" and in response they test, "Are people able to see and process things faster?"

      It's not clear to me what that the test answers the question. Does time *actually* slow down, and in a Neo-like state we can stop to look around while bullets are flying at us? Of course not. But do things *seem* to move more slowly? It seems so.

    3. Re:Hmmm... by thrawn_aj · · Score: 3, Informative

      Before I get flamed, allow me to clarify the obvious: time doesn't slow down because humans feel endangered. Our perception of time may slow down because of psychological and physiological conditions.

      If I read the summary correctly, they have shown (to a limited extent) that EVEN our perception of time does NOT change during such events. What they concluded therefore is that our MEMORY is more to blame for compositing (AFTER the fact) an apparent slowdown or speedup of time during the event.

      FTA:

      'The answer to the paradox is that time estimation and memory are intertwined: the volunteers merely thought the fall took a longer time in retrospect'." [emphasis mine]

      So, the posters so far have been stating the obvious, but seem to have missed this point. The researchers were trying to TEST the long-held conventional belief that our perceptions do slow down or speed up during certain special events. They seem to have come up with a startling result - our perceptions stay pretty much the same, our later MEMORIES seem to be edited after the fact to make it seem that we perceived time differently during the event. Brains are so devious. *cackle* *rubs hands in glee*

    4. Re:Hmmm... by gunnk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The same thing crossed my mind and I wonder if they didn't miss something important.

      What they test was weather you can read numbers faster during high-adrenaline moments. That does NOT test how fast you perceive time to pass. The maximum speed with which you can read numbers flashing by is dependent on multiple things:

      1) The speed and method the eye itself uses to capture "frames" of image data.
      2) The speed of any low-level image "pre-processing" that may occur outside of the brain (i.e.: in the eye or the nerve centers near it). I don't know that this happens, but our sense of touch definitely does (reflex responses) and we definitely blink in response to objects approaching our eyes. If pre-processing does occur, this would occur before passing the information on for higher-level analysis by the brain.
      3) The speed at which the brain is processing the data.

      The experiment shows that the slowest of these three steps doesn't get faster during times of fear.

      I've had the time-distortion experience. I remember thinking "whoa..." at the time because it seemed to take forever. I wonder if crisis speeds the thought process so that we can better think through the situation. The "overclocking" makes everything seem slower. However, that isn't the same as time being relative -- I can't move faster and I can't take in data faster. I can just THINK faster for a brief period of time. That's not a cure-all, but it's still an advantage in an emergency.

      --
      Life is short: void the warranty.
    5. Re:Hmmm... by F34nor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well that doesn't matter for shit either way because in events like that your memory is terrible. In experiments where they simulated bank robberies the witnesses have terrible recollections of the perp etc. People are fucking terrible memory devices and that's all there is to it. Unless you've been trained for situational awareness or use mnemonics you're just pissing most of the data down the drain.

      I expect this experiment is spot on and here's why. Knowing things are going to be ok sitting on your ass in front of a PC is one thing. Seeing someone pull a pin out of a carabineer and watching that platform race away from you at 1 G of acceleration is fucking terrifying. When I bungee jumped, forward was fun. I did a nice swan dive and tucked the cable between my legs for the bounce back. Going backwards scared the shit out of me. I screamed like a little girl and felt the muscels around my collar bone twinge in a way that hurt me to my ribs, I pawed the air in front of me felt like everything in the universe was deeply deeply wrong. I could see the cable attaching me to the bridge but the thought of the rock I could not see behind me was more powerful. In this experiment the cut the rope for all intents and purposes, and I think that would be out of this world terrifying.

      Now if you don't think the good neuro transmitters kicked in give them a dose of DMT before they go. But then they might not be able to read for all the self replicating machine elves.

    6. Re:Hmmm... by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The question is whether that apparent slowing is something you experience at the time and can take advantage of (i.e. if time slows to one-third speed, can you read numbers or dodge bullets three times as quickly?) or if it's an illusion your memory retroactively imposes.

      Still, I think those are multiple different questions:

      • Is the apparent slowing something actually allowing you to do *something* better in that short period of time?
      • Does the apparent slowing allow you read numbers more quickly?
      • Does the apparent slowing allow you to dodge bullets?
      • Is the apparent slowing only an illusion?

      It seems that the people performing the study want to claim they've answered all of these questions, but from my brief reading, it seems to me that they've only even tried to answer the second question. (I'm pretty sure we can answer "no" to the third question, though, even without this study.)

    7. Re:Hmmm... by bkr1_2k · · Score: 2, Funny

      The tape player wasn't broken. Time really did slow down just for you and the universe was just trying to catch up so you didn't cause a time-warp.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    8. Re:Hmmm... by hazem · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And it also is flawed because it only addresses one part of what could be going on.

      Using as a metaphor the eyes as a video camera with some "shutter speed" and your memory being an analog tape that records events, all they tested was if the shutter speed of the eyes increases under stress. What they didn't address is if the memory tape gets sped up while recording - making things seem, at least in hindsight, to have taken a long time.

      If the shutter speed is the same but the tape goes faster, you would still see just as many numbers as the non-stressed environment but you would remember seeing each number for a longer time. Many of the posts here (and my own experience) indicate that the perceived slow down seems to happen but that the subject does not feel they can act any faster compared to outside events. This would actually support the 2nd idea - that maybe memory-recording neurons are firing faster during the stressful event - but that the senses themselves are not particularly enhanced (at least in a time-wise fashion).

      That said, I agree with what you're saying. Simulated life-threatening is different than real life-threatening. It's like the guys saying waterboarding is not torture because they underwent it in training. Well, undergoing it in a controlled situation by guys from "your side" is very different than being in a secret prison, cut off from the world, done by guys who don't mind if they kill you. I also imagine the time perception is different there too.

    9. Re:Hmmm... by Khyber · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Now if you don't think the good neuro-transmitters kicked in give them a dose of DMT before they go.

      DMT is responsible for dream states, so DMT altering a potential memory isn't that far-fetched. Now, tell me this, how do you explain the lack of real time compensation when there are people out thre that in a huge brawl just weave their way thru EVERYONE and still kick the shit out of their target? (Witnessed this at a club in Memphis, guy goes nuts, crowd goes nuts and flees, guy going nuts just slips effortlessly thru the mob-mentality crowd without being knocked over and smashes a Hennessey bottle right into the offending party's head after wading thru about a thousand people, drunk as fuck, without being knocked over? Actually, better example. I've done Muay Thai for several years, and one year was professional (that was a big mistake, in retrospect,) and I'm not joking, when you get in the ring, it's either you see the move in slow motion and react, or you just don't see it at all and your ass is flat on the mat with a countdown ringing above your head. Seriously - read a book named "Nanotime" and ponder that book upon completion. You'll see the lines and connections drawn match up pretty well with the "Life flashes before my eyes" people.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  7. I dunno... by gardyloo · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...if I believe that conclusion. When I was browsing on Slashdot one April, and everything turned pink and ponyish, I swear that day lasted several months, at least.

  8. A more interesting question by bogaboga · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I have always wondered why we have 24 hours in a day, 60 minutes in an hour, 60 seconds in a minute and so on. What criteria were used to put these metrics in place? By the way, when did time as we know it, begin?

    What would be the problem with metric time for example?

    1. Re:A more interesting question by brewstate · · Score: 2, Funny

      An even more interesting question is who paid for this study. I have a bridge to sell them.

    2. Re:A more interesting question by eln · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thank the ancient Babylonians, who used a base 60 number system. They came up with the concept of 60 seconds to a minute, 60 minutes to an hour, 24 hours to a day.

    3. Re:A more interesting question by jandrese · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The advantage of using 60 is that it's an abundant number so it is easy to split your hour in 2 parts, or 3, or 4, or 5, or 6, or 10, etc... This comes up a lot in the middle ages when people need to precisely measure stuff but have only relatively crude instruments with only integral markings on them. That's also why there are 12 inches in a foot instead of 10, because it's a lot easier to split 12 into 3 or 4 parts (a common operation) than 10.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    4. Re:A more interesting question by Chysn · · Score: 2, Informative

      > What would be the problem with metric time for example?

              You don't say what you mean by "metric" time, but my guess is that you're asking about using a temporal analog of the current systems of linear distance, weight, volume, etc.

              If that's what you mean, the problem with that is that our current time system doesn't just measure one thing. It tries to measure the rotation of the earth in one day, and then it tries to measure the time it takes to make a trip around the sun. Even if we throw out the half-assed attempt to cram the lunar cycle into the mix, we still have two values whose quotient is not an integer. That means that any metric time system is going to need to go through the same periodic adjustments that our current system goes through.

      --
      --I'm so big, my sig has its own sig.
      -- See?
    5. Re:A more interesting question by bogaboga · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You don't say what you mean by "metric" time, but my guess is that you're asking about using a temporal analog of the current systems of linear distance, weight, volume, etc.

      What I mean is something like this:

      • 100 seconds in 1 minute

      • 100 minutes in 1 hour
      • 100 hours in a day etc

      By the way do the 12 months in a year have anything to do with the 12 hours in a day?

  9. It makes me wonder by nickj6282 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    About the true meaning of "retrospect". Since all the signals our body produce take time to register in the brain, wouldn't all events by some strange definition always be "in retrospect"?

    I have been in a few car accidents in my time, and I can say that time really does seem to slow down in that moment. I don't know if it's just the way I'm remembering those moments in time or if, at that exact moment, I really did feel like time slowed.

    I wonder if the experiment mentioned was skewed by the fact that the subjects were never in any actual danger. They knew that they were in an experiment and there was little chance of harm. In a real-world situation, the potential for danger is real.

  10. Time doesn't slow down but our perception does? by zalas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think our perception of the passage of time in the past is purely based on our memories. Thus, certain things that are very memorable will probably mess around with our perception of the flow of time during that moment. For example, if you remember nothing after passing out from drinking and wake up the next day, you probably wouldn't feel like you actually spent all that time lying on the floor.

  11. I dunno.... by framauro13 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I question the testing method. It should include subjects sitting in a cubicle after 4:30pm on a Friday.

    --
    In an effort to conform with internet communication standards, please note that the above comment is 100% biased opinion
  12. Slow down?!? What?!? by jbarr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Heck, at 42, time is moving forward faster than it ever has. Days, weeks, and months are going by quicker than I ever remember, and I see NO sign of it slowing.

    Seriously, though, I see it as a matter of perspective. When I was younger, "Are we there yet? Are we there yet?" seemed to be the mantra because it seemed to take forever for things to happen. Maybe it's because I have adopted more patience over the years, so the waiting isn't as noticeable.

    --
    My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    1. Re:Slow down?!? What?!? by BigBlueOx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Days, weeks, and months are going by quicker than I ever remember, and I see NO sign of it slowing.

      My favorite theory about that:
          at age 5, 1 year = 1/5 of your life
          at age 15, 1 year = 1/15 of your life
          at age 40, 1 year = 1/40 of your life
      and in our heads we measure time relative to our lives.

      Well, I like it, so it's true.

    2. Re:Slow down?!? What?!? by yourlord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have a pet theory on that effect, as I've noticed the exact same thing. When you are 5 years old an hour is a LONG time. A week is almost eternity. At 20 an hour doesn't seem as long as it used to. I'm now 36 and time is flying by. Years are clicking off the way weeks seemed to when I was 5-10..

      It doesn't bode well as if you extrapolate this phenomenon out to the age of 70 then the last decade of your life will go by in what seems like a month.

      I attribute this effect to the amount of time your brain has experienced. When you are 5 years old, an hour or a day is a much larger portion of the total time frame your brain has to relate to than when you're 20, 30, or 70.

      At 5, a month is 1/60 of your brain's entire time reference. At 40 it's 1/480 of it. In relation to your brain's total time reference, an hour is much more significant at age 5.

      It's just a personal theory.

  13. Research or Disneyland ride? by thatseattleguy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Clearly, I'm writing grants for the wrong kind of research. This would be one hell of a lot more fun than playing with infectious diseases.

  14. OMG! It actually does work.... by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's why I can type all this and then hit

    And then I get this message!

    Slow Down Cowboy!
    Slashdot requires you to wait longer between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.

    It's been 0.2 seconds since you hit 'reply'.

    Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
  15. Time distortion is a hypnotic phenomena by nido · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The human perception of Time is a subjective experience. With training, one can either speed up or slow down how fast things seem to be going.

    What usually happens is that the boring minutes seem to drag, and the pleasurable moments pass too quickly. One can use hypnosis/etc to switch this around, so that boring hours can seem to pass in minutes, and the good times seem to last forever. Bandler addresses this in his Design Human Engineering system. Milton Erickson, M.D. (psychiatrist who specialized in fixing people with hypnosis) also used time distortion in his work, iirc (and was the original inspiration for much of the NLP founders' developments). Any good book on hypnotic phenomena should cover time distortion too...

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  16. Re:Understatement of new Millennium by FroBugg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm glad you've taken a break out of your busy schedule of ending world hunger, finding a replacement for oil, and curing every disease to comment on Slashdot. It's good to have you here.

  17. Only proved tachypsyche is not cognitive by redelm · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ... this experiment has to be the dumbest ever. Made without a shred of preliminary investigation. "Tachypsyche" produces tunnel vision under extreme fight stress. It is well known to martial artists and some gunfighters. It probably should be research, but not with counterproductive tools.

  18. Re:Understatement of new Millennium by jeffmeden · · Score: 2, Funny

    Don't thank me, my boss mandates slashdot breaks every few hours so that we don't get burned out.

  19. Somewhat flawed study by Trecares · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Time won't slow down, and those people knew they weren't in any danger. It would have not been the same. They might have gotten scared, but I don't think that their perception would actually have changed because mentally, you know there's no immediate peril.

    What I think actually happens is that the mind starts working faster. Sort of like increasing the sampling rate. But your perception of time doesn't change, so things appear to happen more slowly. But until they remove that element of safety, it won't be a reasonably valid study. At least not ethically anyway.

  20. That was never "obvious". by khasim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Greeks knew the world was round.

    The Church declared that it was flat. Despite the obvious fact that it was round.

    1. Re:That was never "obvious". by Bandman · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know about that, but I know they had an issue with a heliocentric universe.

    2. Re:That was never "obvious". by masterzora · · Score: 2, Informative

      I find that hard to believe given that the Bible also states the world to be round. Maybe you're thinking about heliocentricity?

      --
      Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
    3. Re:That was never "obvious". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I have a problem with the heliocentric UNIVERSE!

    4. Re:That was never "obvious". by JaWiB · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A common misconception is that the Catholic church initially opposed Copernicus' Heliocentric model, when in fact it was the scientific community that was skeptical (and I think didn't fully accept it until Newton) Also, it's rather ironic that people now believe the church had a problem with the model because it put us out of God's center of attention or something, but the center of the universe was actually regarded as the "lowest" place (look at how Dante put Hell in the center of the Earth, and hence the center of the universe)

      That said, the Catholic Church later censored Copernicus because of certain passages that it interpreted literally that seemed to conflict with his model (the one I remember offhand is about the sun being held in place for a certain period of time...)

    5. Re:That was never "obvious". by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Informative

      They accused Galileo of heresy and placed him under permanent house arrest specifically for following Copernicus' model.

      Actually? No. Galileo met resistance from the church because of his belief in a heliocentric model, but he was not arrested for it. Far from it, in fact. He was a good friend of the Pope and had his ideas seriously considered for a time. Eventually he was instructed by the Pope to keep his writings in the theoretical realm and to present both sides of the argument.

      Where Galileo eventually tripped up was that he used the character of Simplicus to represent the Pope's opinions in his writings, effectively calling the Pope a simpleton and fool. This didn't go over very well with the Vatican and he stood trial for heresy. His sentence was actually one of imprisonment, but (perhaps as a last gesture from a former friend) his sentence was reduced to house arrest.

      As much as I disagree with the Catholic Church's actions both past and present, I do wish that people would stop using Galileo's arrest as an example unless they well and truly understand the history behind the affair.
  21. A shocking result by mattpalmer1086 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I agree that some kind of life-or-death situation needs to be involved. I have experienced time-slowdown (or rather, perceptual speed-up) twice in my life, both in very threatening situations. Both times the feeling was coupled with a deep sense of calmness.

    The first time, I was attacked by a soccer hooligan, who smashed a bottle on my head with no warning, from behind. I remember turning round and seeing the thug waving the broken bottle - but everything had gone into slow motion. I could literally read every move he was going to make and counter it, with no apparent effort on my part, matrix-style. After I'd disposed of his bottle, I threw him around, then I played with him a bit without hurting him (much). I had the sense that I was far back, watching it all.

    Afterwards, I was quite shocked at what had happened - I am not a fighter, I am really quite a wimp. Thinking about it later, it made sense to me, that some kind of fight-or-flight instinct had kicked in, allowing me to react instinctually much faster than normal, with my normal consciousness somewhat suspended.

    The second time it happened, I was in a car that went into a 360 spin down a hill, eventually crashing into a lamp-post, totalling the car. Again, I felt calm, I could see everything that was happening as if in slow motion, but there wasn't anything I could do, so unlike the fight situation, I can't judge whether this perception had any practical effect.

    I find it interesting that you can't count numbers any faster in threatening situations - but I would wager that only certain, survival oriented abilities are accelerated in threatening situations. I wouldn't have been surprised if the ability to read numbers was actually worse in those situations! More research is clearly needed...

    1. Re:A shocking result by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree that some kind of life-or-death situation needs to be involved. I have experienced time-slowdown (or rather, perceptual speed-up) twice in my life, both in very threatening situations. Both times the feeling was coupled with a deep sense of calmness.

      Happened to me, too. I was in the passenger seat of a car when I noticed a flare lying on a stretch of dark highway. My friend, the driver, hadn't noticed it. I was wondering what the heck it was doing there when all of a sudden, ahead in the car's headlights, I saw something in the road.

      What went through my head next was something like: "Oh man this isn't going to be good am I going to die now? I better have my seatbelt on at least yes I do that's good then too bad it's only a lap belt I'm probably going to hit the dashboard man that thing looks like it's made out of reinforced steel that's going to hurt I wonder if I should try to brace myself on something ahh I'm involuntarily turning my head does that make me a wimp? anyway oh well I guess I've done everything I can do to get ready it's been a pretty good run here goes nothing."

      A split-second later our '72 Chevy Nova smashed straight through two cars, which had been parallel-parked across the two fast lanes of the freeway, at 65mph. (The driver had never seen the cars, either -- I think he maybe should have been wearing glasses.) We tore the two cars in half -- ripped their backs off and kept going -- blew out all four of our own tires, and yes I did indeed smash my face up against the steel reinforcement of the dashboard. Other than that, we were fine. I peeled my baseball hat off the shattered glass of the windshield and we got out of there, moments before another car smashed into the back of our wreckage at speed and turned the Nova into a crumpled-up cube.

      All I could think was: "Cooooooolll."

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  22. Re:Seconded... by Sanat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In truth, time is an illusion, however in the Earth plane we use it as a point of reference

    About 15 years ago my friend Rick and I were out deer hunting and both of us got big deer (Missouri corn fed ones) and we were hauling them out of the valley on a 4 wheeler. They were tied on the front carrier.

    There is one point where the edge of the bedrock stick out and it is always wet and icy in that vicinity. I told Rick that we better walk the 4-wheeler out in this area but he is one of those large barrel chested men with mammoth arms and he just put his hand on the front of the 4 wheeler and held the front down as i was cautiously driving up the steep slope. I had gone about 15 feet when he slipped on the ice and let go and the 4 wheeler immediately flipped backward throwing me down 15 feet onto my back with a 4 wheeler and an additional 450 lbs of deer tied on falling toward me.

    Suddenly everything moved in very slow motion as it came towards me ( just as you experienced with your shot) and I merely lifted my legs up and positioned them and had plenty of time to catch the 4 wheeler's seat with my legs and toss it about 20 feet away.

    To my perception all of this took about 10 seconds to accomplish. To Rick's eyes it happened in a flash and he could not comprehend how my reflexes were so quick... in reality they were not. I simply was on a different timeline than he during that moment.

    I agree that Time is only a perception.

    --
    And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
  23. Re:Seconded... by Xformer · · Score: 4, Funny

    In truth, time is an illusion...

    Lunch time, doubly so.

    --
    All I want is a kind word, a warm bed and unlimited power.
  24. Invalidating this experiment... by dex22 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Perception is a perceived experience. Time goes forward at an undetermined rate. These are fundamental. What isn't is the eye's ability to see fast-changing light patterns. Nothing presumes that even if perception of time changes, the eye has the ability to speed up and see something which is otherwise a blur.

    This isn't a measurement of perception, but of the characteristics of eye refresh rates under stress.

    I would have loved to have been on the IRB Board that oversaw this study, and read the protocol...

    1. Re:Invalidating this experiment... by vpdath · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please read the paper before jumping to conclusions: "A critical point for the logic of this study is that flicker fusion frequencies are not limited by the retina, since retinal ganglion cells have extremely high temporal resolution. For example, in cat retinal ganglion cells, temporal resolution is ~95 Hz for X cells and ~120 Hz for Y cells under photopic illumination [14]. In primates, neurons in temporal cortex are able to temporally follow complex stimuli presented at 72 Hz [15]. Additionally, given the effect of many medications on the psychophysical flicker fusion frequency [16], it is clear that the limits of temporal resolution are central, not peripheral"

  25. Completely absurd experimentation method by tygt · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If time perception slows down - in other words, if your brain goes into overdrive and processes events more rapidly - during extremely stressful situations, you're not going to be able to measure it in an experiment where the subject doesn't experience extreme stress, and a safe simulation of free-fall is unlikely to be stressful enough, especially when the subject has been assured that they're in no danger.


    Danger is what it's all about, or perception of danger. The adrenaline rush of the free-fall experience is only there because subconsciously you're still somewhat afraid, but the whole mind isn't involved in the fear.

    This would be like saying "Can people exhibit super-human strength under extreme stress?" (eg the "mom lifts car off of baby" stories) and testing it by saying "ok so pretend that your baby is under the car and lift the car up ok". Sure buddy.

    Next waste of time and money....

    1. Re:Completely absurd experimentation method by verbatim_verbose · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think it requires actual belief that there is danger involved -- just that there is enough stimulus to fool your instincts into reacting as if there were. Falling backwards 150 feet sounds like a good way to do this.

      If time perception only changed when you actually thought there would be danger involved, roller coasters would be far less interesting.

  26. The church never said it was flat! by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Two monks did, though. Very convenient that they did, because it gave a man with an axe to grind (whether it was against religion in general or the Vatican in particular) a way to discredit the Catholic Church.

    Read Late Birth of a Flat Earth, one of the essays in Stephen Jay Gould's book Dinosaur in a Haystack. I'll not spoil the story for you by quoting any more than this: the supposed Dark and Medieval consensus for a flat earth - is entirely mythological.

    (One thing missing from the article. No seafaring nation could ever have believed that the world was flat. Ships fall below the horizon. Distant lands fall below the horizon. Any sailor afraid of "falling off" would be ... well ... a farmer.(

    HAL.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  27. Re:Example: Filipino Time by SL+Baur · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, that's true. I first encountered it after spending several years in Japan where if you're 30 seconds late to a scheduled bus/train stop, you've missed it. It was quite a shock.

    Time does seem to move differently there. I want one of those test boxes to try out on myself.

    Since that article was written, they've started working on the next generation. One of the songs they teach children in elementary school now goes in part "Be on time, be on time, that's the true Filipino Time ...". Of course, some things will never change. The AL in PAL still means Always Late.

  28. Be my friend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Next time I go to a soccer game, I'm definitely inviting you along. However, I'll be the one doing the driving.

  29. Re:Film at 11 - but Fox made it, so... by ravenshrike · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We still don't know how the mind works, because these people were in a perfectly safe situation and KNEW IT. Now, if they had pretended to have been doing another experiment and then shoved them off the ledge suddenly, the experiment would have been valid. As they did not, a crucial difference(that of possible threat to life) between the experiment and most car accidents is present.

  30. Re:Film at 11 - but Fox made it, so... by fyngyrz · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...plus, they could have done a 2nd study on sudden stress induced heart failure in the general population. Bonus, eh?

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  31. Re:Seconded... by aethera · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wow, I had a shockingly similar experience about 10 (oh god, TEN!) years ago. Complete with the lightning like reflexes. I was working a a backpack and canoe guide in the Adirondack mountains, but had been asked to ride with group going on a three day mountain bike trek because they were down one staff member and I had the necessary first aid skills. On the last morning of the ride one of the kids bikes broke. I don't remember what, I think something with the rear sprocket. Rather than stop and make repairs, we just traded the bike I was on for the bad one. I rode on the bad bike with little problem, though I remember not being able to change gears. Anyways, as the ride went on, I pretty much forgot about being on a hobbled bike. We were less than a mile from being back when the trail made a sharp sidling cut down a really steep hill (actually the side of a sandy esker). I got about half way down when the chain came totally off the bike. The soil here was so loose and sandy that braking was useless. Here's where time stopped. Over maybe fifteen feet of distance at breakneck speed I analyzed my options. I couldn't shift my weight enough to ditch into the hill, I was gradually cutting sideways of the trail despite my effort, and if I ditched to my right I was going straight down an almost vertical run into the lake. Out of option I realized I was headed straight at a monster Canadian Hemlock. A beast of a tree, probably a 36 inches across. I don't know exactly what happened next, but the bike smacked into the tree, the next thing I knew I was going over the handle bars. I remember pushing off, flipping once in the air, hitting the ground tucked, somersaulting twice. In the second roll I distinctly remember thinking I needed to stop before I went much further. So, I sprang up out of the roll, jumped a little in the air to break the backward momentum and landed with a perfect plant, two feet square on the ground and my handy over my head in the air. I didn't have a scratch on me.
        When we all recovered enough to take a look, the front reflector bracket of the bike had driven into the tree like a nail, the front wheel egg shaped, the forks bent back 6 inches and the rear wheel in the air up off the ground. It took two of us to rip the bike reflector out of the tree it was in so deep. I had that fork for a few years, and still have the chain. I wore in like a necklace long before it was cool. We used to joke that it was the same way if I had wrestled a bear or wolf I would have worn the teeth or claws. I never did figure out how I managed to go over, around or through that hemlock, but that will have to be a question for more advanced temporal physicists. I should have taken it full in the face, and can't figure out from my roll and trajectory how I could have gone to either side of it. And if you don't believe me, I took my wife there hiking several years later and there was still bits of plastic reflector stuck in the tree.

  32. putting the fi in scifi by revxul · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are these people stupid? Talk about a frakking waste of money.

    --
    Truth, Just Us, And Hatred For All Mankind!