Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: amrit on 06/04/2009 11:16:52
-
we observe that clocks run in space only
we have no evidence that space-time is physical reality in which clocks run
my idea is that clock's run is time itself
cosmic space itself is timeless (atemporal)
time as a clocks's run is relative
it speed depends on strenght of gravity field
about that idea you can read below
http://www.wbabin.net/sorli/sorli15.pdf
yours amrit
-
Hi Amrit,
Posts that consist of very little but a link art not acceptable here. If you wish to discuss something, please put the info you would like us to read in the post.
Also, please try to find the right board for the topic. I suspect this is a new theory of yours, and so should go in the new theories board. As you've supplied no information, it just looks like spam.
Please modify your original so that we can discuss your ideas here.
-
As a user of IE8 I cannot read this and I am not that sorry!.
-
The link between space and time is tested literally millions or even billions of times everyday- people running particle accelerators have very, very obvious data that shows that among other things, particles get more massive, decay more slowly at higher speeds and are unable to exceed the speed of light.
-
The link between space and time is tested literally millions or even billions of times everyday- people running particle accelerators have very, very obvious data that shows that among other things, particles get more massive, decay more slowly at higher speeds and are unable to exceed the speed of light.
I would not agree
time is clocks run in space
space-time is a math model only
there is no experimental evidence that space-time is physical reality
-
I've seen pictures from the cloud chamber with my own eyes, and the physicists there pointed out the very obvious features that were due to relativity. [::)]
-
we observe that clocks run in space only
we have no evidence that space-time is physical reality in which clocks run
my idea is that clock's run is time itself
cosmic space itself is timeless (atemporal)
time as a clocks's run is relative
it speed depends on strenght of gravity field
about that idea you can read below
http://www.wbabin.net/sorli/sorli15.pdf
yours amrit
I've started reading that document, and I have a first question. It's written:
"This understanding of time resolves the problem of twins. They do not
live in time; they live in space only. A brother in a high-speed spaceship is
getting older slower than his brother on Earth, but both are getting older in a
physical space only and not in time."
What means "both are getting older in a physical space only and not in time" ?
"Getting older" is not an attribute of time?
-
Indeed. The "getting older" is a clock, a biological one.
-
I think we have to run faster than clock [;D] [;D] [;D] [;D]
-
The link between space and time is tested literally millions or even billions of times everyday- people running particle accelerators have very, very obvious data that shows that among other things, particles get more massive, decay more slowly at higher speeds and are unable to exceed the speed of light.
I would not agree
time is clocks run in space
space-time is a math model only
there is no experimental evidence that space-time is physical reality
Your thinking appears to be very muddled and not very well informed.
If you are intending to come up with a better way of describing the World as we see it, you will need to do better than to reject, with no evidence, the present view, which is backed up with loads of evidence.
-
we observe that clocks run in space only
we have no evidence that space-time is physical reality in which clocks run
my idea is that clock's run is time itself
cosmic space itself is timeless (atemporal)
time as a clocks's run is relative
it speed depends on strenght of gravity field
about that idea you can read below
http://www.wbabin.net/sorli/sorli15.pdf
yours amrit
I've started reading that document, and I have a first question. It's written:
"This understanding of time resolves the problem of twins. They do not
live in time; they live in space only. A brother in a high-speed spaceship is
getting older slower than his brother on Earth, but both are getting older in a
physical space only and not in time."
What means "both are getting older in a physical space only and not in time" ?
"Getting older" is not an attribute of time?
no getting older is atribute of biology
Time is a run of clocks.
Clocks run faster on the Moon than on the Earth.
One is getting older faster on Moon than on the Earth.
-
The link between space and time is tested literally millions or even billions of times everyday- people running particle accelerators have very, very obvious data that shows that among other things, particles get more massive, decay more slowly at higher speeds and are unable to exceed the speed of light.
I would not agree
time is clocks run in space
space-time is a math model only
there is no experimental evidence that space-time is physical reality
Your thinking appears to be very muddled and not very well informed.
If you are intending to come up with a better way of describing the World as we see it, you will need to do better than to reject, with no evidence, the present view, which is backed up with loads of evidence.
Today in physics there are two fundamental approaches on time. First is that clocks run in space-time as a basic physical reality. Second approach is that clocks run only in physical (cosmic) space and clock’s run is time itself. First approach has limitations regarding quantum non-locality and superluminal phenomena. There is no experimental evidence of space-time as a fundamental physical reality in which material change run cannot be observed.
Second approach introduces “strange” idea that physical space itself is immediate information transfer medium between elementary particles. Second approach is confirmed with experimental evidence. Each experiment conforms that with clocks we measure duration and numerical order of material change that run in physical space. Clocks do not run in time, clock’s run itself is time. Run of time is relative; speed of clocks depends on strength of gravity force in different areas of physical space.
Time is run of clock in atemporal space. Space-time is a math model only.
-
I think we have to run faster than clock [;D] [;D] [;D] [;D]
AMRIT: for that we have to move on the Moon. But also there we will getting older in atemporal space only as space-time is a merely a math model. [;D]
-
I've started reading that document, and I have a first question. It's written:
"This understanding of time resolves the problem of twins. They do not
live in time; they live in space only. A brother in a high-speed spaceship is
getting older slower than his brother on Earth, but both are getting older in a
physical space only and not in time."
What means "both are getting older in a physical space only and not in time" ?
"Getting older" is not an attribute of time?
no getting older is atribute of biology
Time is a run of clocks.
Clocks run faster on the Moon than on the Earth.
One is getting older faster on Moon than on the Earth.
Ok, but if getting older is an attribute of biology, then you can't reproduce the twins experiment without living beings but with instruments only. And, anyway, how can you define and measure physically the biological ageing without using clocks?
-
I've started reading that document, and I have a first question. It's written:
"This understanding of time resolves the problem of twins. They do not
live in time; they live in space only. A brother in a high-speed spaceship is
getting older slower than his brother on Earth, but both are getting older in a
physical space only and not in time."
What means "both are getting older in a physical space only and not in time" ?
"Getting older" is not an attribute of time?
no getting older is atribute of biology
Time is a run of clocks.
Clocks run faster on the Moon than on the Earth.
One is getting older faster on Moon than on the Earth.
Ok, but if getting older is an attribute of biology, then you can't reproduce the twins experiment without living beings but with instruments only. And, anyway, how can you define and measure physically the biological ageing without using clocks?
Sure we use clocks.
Clocks are mechanisms for measuring duration of material and biological change.
But clocks run in space only and not in time, all run in space only.
And space itself is timeless - atemporal.
We have no experimental evidence space-time being physical reality.
Because of that we need to define:
1. TIME IS RUN OF CLOCKS IN SPACE (time is not part of space).
2. SPACE-TIME IS A MATH MODEL ONLY.
Space and time needs to be divorced.
This divorce will marriage GR and QM.
Right understanding of time will make possible to connect General Relativity and Quantum Mechanic.
-
I think we have to run faster than clock [;D] [;D] [;D] [;D]
what do u mean ? (by that ....)
-
I think he means some bs. [:D]
-
we observe that clocks run in space only
we have no evidence that space-time is physical reality in which clocks run
my idea is that clock's run is time itself
cosmic space itself is timeless (atemporal)
time as a clocks's run is relative
it speed depends on strenght of gravity field
about that idea you can read below
http://www.wbabin.net/sorli/sorli15.pdf
yours amrit
Hi amrit ,
ok !! Space is nothing but time ... there is no Isolation of time from space ....
it is only possible when Time stops ...
I mean to say that Einstein's Marriage between Space and Time needs Divorce ... when time stops .. !!
as long as time runs the Marriage is successful ...
Space and Time always good couple no problem with it ...
-
I think he means some bs. [:D]
what?
-
(https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FLocal-Bull-C.jpg&hash=846952bda5c278233e1936515bb1afc6)
(https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.showroom411.com%2FMedia%2FDirectoryEntries%2FToto%2520Aquia%2520Toilet.jpg&hash=fce4e3cb48f0f399dda7979520f4b61c)
-
no do not post this in forum ??
-
I think he means some bs. [:D]
what?
The pictures help you!!!
-
u r kind of annoying ..
-
I think he means some bs. [:D]
what?
The pictures help you!!!
i just asked meaning of bs ..... i think u r using bad words ??
-
You have got to be kidding me!
You still haven't worked out what 'bs' means? [???] [:D]
-
I think he means some bs. [:D]
what?
The pictures help you!!!
i just asked meaning of bs ..... i think u r using bad words ??
Exactly! Which is why I posted the pictures!
-
You have got to be kidding me!
You still haven't worked out what 'bs' means? [???] [:D]
bad words a meant for bad ppl like u ...
-
ppl? u? I know bs when I see it!
-
You have got to be kidding me!
You still haven't worked out what 'bs' means? [???] [:D]
And this from the man who doesn't know what a Chocolate starfish is! [;)]
-
Yeah...well... [:I]
-
I've started reading that document, and I have a first question. It's written:
"This understanding of time resolves the problem of twins. They do not
live in time; they live in space only. A brother in a high-speed spaceship is
getting older slower than his brother on Earth, but both are getting older in a
physical space only and not in time."
What means "both are getting older in a physical space only and not in time" ?
"Getting older" is not an attribute of time?
no getting older is atribute of biology
Time is a run of clocks.
Clocks run faster on the Moon than on the Earth.
One is getting older faster on Moon than on the Earth.
Ok, but if getting older is an attribute of biology, then you can't reproduce the twins experiment without living beings but with instruments only. And, anyway, how can you define and measure physically the biological ageing without using clocks?
Sure we use clocks.
Clocks are mechanisms for measuring duration of material and biological change.
But clocks run in space only and not in time, all run in space only.
And space itself is timeless - atemporal.
We have no experimental evidence space-time being physical reality.
Because of that we need to define:
1. TIME IS RUN OF CLOCKS IN SPACE (time is not part of space).
2. SPACE-TIME IS A MATH MODEL ONLY.
Space and time needs to be divorced.
Ok, I've understood this idea, but this doesn't answer my question about the exact meaning of your phrase: "both are getting older in a physical space only and not in time". If they get older, and you agree that this means that time flows for them, how they can not-get older in time?
-
And how do you explain relativistic effects between two clocks if there is no time?
-
TIME IS RUN OF CLOCKS
Abstract
Today in physics there are two fundamental approaches on time. First is that with clocks we measure time that is a consistent part of space. According to this approach clocks run in space-time as a basic physical reality. This approach has no experimental evidence, space-time as a fundamental physical reality in which material change run cannot be experimentally observed. Second approach is that time is not part of space; time is run of clocks in space. Each experiment conforms that with clocks we measure duration and numerical order of material change that run in space. There is no experimental evidence that clocks run in time, clock’s run itself is time. Run of time is relative; speed of clocks depends on strength of gravity force in different areas of space. Space itself is timeless (atemporal).
Key words: time, space, duration, numerical order, information
Introduction
There is no experimental evidence for space-time existing as physical reality. In physical experiments one observes stream of material change in physical space only. Physical space is a medium in which massive bodies and elementary particles move. Space-time is not a physical reality, space-time is merely a mathematical model with which one describe stream of material change in physical space. With clocks we measure duration and numerical order of material change that run in physical space. Here time is defined as: Time is run of clocks in physical space. Physical space itself is timeless (atemporal). Travel into past are out of question.
Discussion
Several researches confirm that space-time as an “arena” of the universe does not correspond to the physical reality. They propose “timeless space” as an arena of the universe.
An article discussing that model of space-time is not corresponding physical universal space and could be replaced with atemporal fractal geometry of state space was recently published on arxiv (1).
An article discussing possibilities that space is timeless was recently published in arxiv: “We illustrate our proposal using a toy-model where we show how the Lorentzian signature and Nordstroem gravity (a diffeomorphisms invariant scalar gravity theory) can emerge from a timeless non-dynamical space” (2).
Time and clocks are man inventions. Motion is primary, time is secondary. Ernst Mach sad: “It is utterly beyond our power to measure the changes of things by time. Quite the contrary, time is an abstraction, at which we arrive by means of the changes of things”(3).
Time is a scientific tool that permits us to build up cosmological models of the universe. Time as a run of clocks plays no role in the universe. Julian Barbour is saying in his article “The Nature of Time”: “I will not claim that time can be definitely banished from physics; the universe might be infinite, and black holes present some problems for the time picture. Nevertheless, I think is entirely possible – indeed likely – that time as such plays no role in the universe” (3).
Relativity of Time
According to this understanding of time in the Special Theory of Relativity in a faster inertial system the speed of clocks (time) and material change in general, is lower than in a slower inertial system. In General Theory of Relativity in physical space with stronger gravity the speed of clocks (time) and material change is lower than in cosmic space with a weaker gravity field.
This understanding of time resolves the problem of twins. They do not live in time; they live in space only. A brother in a high-speed spaceship is getting older slower than his brother on Earth, but both are getting older in a physical space only and not in time. With clocks we measure biological changes in their bodies.
Direct Quantum Information
Some research shows that quantum direct communication is a real phenomenon: “We show how continuous-variable systems can allow the direct communication of messages with an acceptable degree of privacy. This is possible by combining a suitable phase-space encoding of the plain message with real-time checks of the quantum communication channel. The resulting protocol works properly when a small amount of noise affects the quantum channel. If this noise is non-tolerable, the protocol stops leaving a limited amount of information to a potential eavesdropper”(4).
Here it is considered that information does not move in space-time, it moves in physical space only. Physical space itself is immediate information medium between quanta.
Also in the EPR experiment physical space is immediate information medium between elementary particles. There is no information signal in form of photon or some other particle traveling between particles A and B. Time of information transfer between particle A and particle B is zero (5).
Causality problems for Fermi’s two-atom system
Physical space as an “immediate information medium” resolves the causality problem of Fermy two atoms system: “Let A and B be two atoms or, more generally, a ‘‘source’’ and a ‘‘detector’’ separated by some distance R. At t=0A is in an excited state, B in its ground state, and no photons are present. A theorem is proved that in contrast to Einstein causality and finite signal velocity the excitation probability of B is nonzero immediately after t=0. Implications are discussed”(6).
Excitation probability of B is nonzero because space in which atoms exists is an “immediate medium of excitation”. There is no time needed for information or excitation to pass from A to B. Time is only a measure for motion of excitation from atom A to atom B in physical space.
Immediate Physical Phenomena
According to understanding here physical phenomena can be immediate. One can also say “timeless” or “atemporal”. Time t for these phenomena to happen is zero. Experiment from which they conclude that an electron can tunnel through the potential barrier of a He atom in practically no time vas carried out recently (7).
An article on arxiv a system of diagrams is introduced that allows the representation of various elements of a quantum circuit, including measurements, in a form which makes no reference to time (hence ``atemporal'') (8).
Conclusions
Material change does not run in time, they run in physical space only. Physical space itself is timeless (atemporal). Some physical phenomena that run atemporal physical space are immediate. Time for these phenomena to happen is zero. Clocks are scientific tools which measure time as a duration and numerical order of material change that run in timeless physical space.
References:
1. T.N.Palmer, The Invariant Set Hypothesis: A New Geometric Framework for the Foundations of Quantum Theory and the Role Played by Gravity, Submitted on 5 Dec 2008, last revised 17 Feb 2009, http://arxiv.org/abs/0812.1148
2. Florian Girelli, Stefano Liberati, Lorenzo Sindoni, Is the notion of time really fundamental? Submitted on 27 Mar 2009 http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.4876
3. Julian Barbour, The Nature of Time, submitted on 20 Mar 2009, http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3489
4. S. Pirandola and others, Quantum direct communication with continuous variables, A Leters Journal Exploring Frontier of Physics (2008)
5. Fiscaletti D. Sorli A.S. Non-locality and the Symmetryzed Quantum Potential , Physics Essays, 21(4), (2008)
6. Gerhard C. Hegerfeldt. Causality problems for Fermi’s two-atom system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 596 - 599 (1994) http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v72/i5/p596_1
7. P. Eckle, A. N. Pfeiffer, C. Cirelli, A. Staudte, R. Dörner, H. G. Muller, M. Büttiker, U. Keller, Attosecond Ionization and Tunneling Delay Time Measurements in Helium, Science,
Vol. 322. no. 5907, pp. 1525 – 1529 (2008) http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/322/5907/1525
8. Robert B. Griffiths, Shengjun Wu, Li Yu, Scott M. Cohen, Atemporal diagrams for quantum circuits, submitted on 21 Jul 2005, http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0507215
-
And how do you explain relativistic effects between two clocks if there is no time?
i do not say there is no time
time is run of clocks
time is relative, clocks run faster when gravity is weaker
-
That "cow" is of the male gender. Examine the bit down under.
-
i explain above clearly why space-time is a math model only