The Naked Scientists
Toggle navigation
Login
Register
Podcasts
The Naked Scientists
eLife
Naked Genetics
Naked Astronomy
In short
Naked Neuroscience
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
Archive
Video
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Articles
Science News
Features
Interviews
Answers to Science Questions
Get Naked
Donate
Do an Experiment
Science Forum
Ask a Question
About
Meet the team
Our Sponsors
Site Map
Contact us
User menu
Login
Register
Search
Home
Help
Search
Tags
Member Map
Recent Topics
Login
Register
Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side
New Theories
Here's a really wacko theory of time for you
« previous
next »
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Down
Here's a really wacko theory of time for you
2 Replies
3336 Views
0 Tags
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
DoctorBeaver
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
12653
Activity:
0%
Thanked: 4 times
A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
Here's a really wacko theory of time for you
«
on:
25/09/2007 18:07:00 »
Time is a force, not a dimension, and it is mediated by as-yet-untheorised particles.
As far as I am aware, there are no anti-forces - anti-gravity, anti-electroweak, etc - so there is no anti-time. That is why reverse time travel will never be possible.
Time dilation is the result of more of these particles hitting whatever it is that is moving. The more particles that hit, the more the time dilation.
The strength of the mediation is exactly that which matches the equations of relativity. So where relativity says that time will behave in a certain way, it does; but not for the reasons postulated by Einstein.
I'm still considering the implications of this so please don't jump on me too hard for being a total loony.
Logged
another_someone
Guest
Here's a really wacko theory of time for you
«
Reply #1 on:
25/09/2007 19:25:35 »
Forces can be defined in two ways:
The traditional classical notion of acceleration applied to mass, but acceleration is a function of time - so if time is a force, then how do you break the recursive definition - the force is related to time through acceleration, yet time is a force - so which defines which?
The other view of a force, as the exchange of particles, but those particles have velocity, and velocity is a relationship between space and time, so you again have a recursive definition.
Logged
DoctorBeaver
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
12653
Activity:
0%
Thanked: 4 times
A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
Here's a really wacko theory of time for you
«
Reply #2 on:
25/09/2007 21:28:54 »
Maybe the traditional views need re-visiting.
Acceleration being a function of time. Is it?
If time is a force then acceleration can be re-defined as a function of the resistance of the time-force.
«
Last Edit: 25/09/2007 21:31:27 by DoctorBeaver
»
Logged
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...