because physics isn't about imaginary things weeaboo faggot

>>8049816
>"I don't understand what imaginary numbers are"
It is just to say that there are multiple "directions" of time.

>>8049811
>Imaginary time allows you to make sense of time "before" the big bang, time within black holes, quantum wave-particle duality, and many other things.
I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

>>8049818
> ignores the part where physics is not about imaginary things
wew lad...

>>8049827
literally first google result
>The concept is useful in cosmology because it can help smooth out gravitational singularities in models of the universe (see Hartle–Hawking state), where known physical laws do not apply. The Big Bang, for example, appears as a singularity in "regular time." But, when visualized with imaginary time, the singularity is removed and the Big Bang functions like any other point in spacetime.

There is no such thing as time, time is an emergent perception of human biochemical consciousness. Everything in the "lifetime" of the universe happens in the same instant.

>>8049848
No. Clearly time is a real concept. You can make the argument that events and world-lines are fixed, but states clearly do evolve.

>>8049848
>>8049853
>debating whether or not physics is real
Time is a physical model. We use physical models to describe nature, not to explain it. Time is a model that has always worked out in practice, so it is real until someone can demonstrate a situation where it does not work.

>>8049838
Virtual particles, forces, quarks, etc

>>8049910
You just destroyed all of modern physics, you genius. You should tell all those physicists at Harvard, Stanford, Caltech, MIT, Oxbridge, and Princeton how time isn't real and watch them grovel before you.

>>8049982
What?
I literally said time is real.
>so it is real until someone can demonstrate a situation where it does not work.
Maybe you wanted to quote the other guy?

Look up Matsubara time, OP.