Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: tsafa on 03/11/2013 17:06:29
-
Given:
The Universe came out of a singularity of extremely dense mass.
Time would appear to come to a halt as you enter a black hole to a distant observer.
Large masses like stars slow down time.
Smaller masses like planets slow down time to some extent too.
Gravity of large masses can be felt over great distances.
Proposal:
It seems that the less mass you have, the faster time flows. It is my idea that in the absence of mass, there would be no time. All time would be simultaneous. This would allow for parallel universes because everything is happening at once in the same instant, thus allowing for all possibilities to occur. When the universe consisted of only Energy, all Time was Simultaneous. When some Energy transformed into Mass, the gravitational distortion stretched out the existing instantaneous Time into time as we know it.
- When you introduce a large mass with gravity, time is created. The larger the mass, the slower time runs (near black holes). Stars have less gravity then black holes so time runs faster. Planets have even less mass, so time runs faster yet.
-It is my thought that if you could go to location between stars (void of mass) time would run considerably faster.
-If you could go to a location between two galaxies, there would be almost no influence of gravity, perhaps you can get close to a state of NO TIME or where All Time is Simultaneous.
-If Time "appears" to slow down to almost a stop near the extreme mass of a black hole due to its mass... it is logical that the exact opposite would happen in an area of space that is void of the influence of mass.
Perhaps this can explain why the Universe seems to be expanding at an increasing rate. I propose that when we see the galaxies moving away from each other at an increasing rate... we are not considering the effect of zero mass between the galaxies and how that may be speeding up Time. The implication here is that as we watch a distant galaxy move through "seemingly" equal-distant points A, B,C, D, E...... Point A = 100 years in the future, Point B = 300 years in the future, Point C = 700 years in the future, Point D = 2,000 years in the future, Point E = 10,000 years in the future. We get the appearance that the velocity of the Galaxy is accelerating, when it is in fact the flow of Time that is accelerating due to less and less Mass between the galaxies.
If there is no Time between galaxies due to no Mass.... then perhaps there is really no Space either, since Time-Space are linked.. Perhaps distant galaxies as not as far as they appear to be... The apparent distance only appears to exist because of the influence of gravity within the galaxies.
It is also my opinion that the concept that the Universe is expanding at a faster rate due to "Undetectable Dark Mater" sounds too much like the Theory of Ether.
Thank You for considering my ideas.
http://poconogym.com/mass-time.html
-
Yes, in the absence of mass, time would become Newtonian, ie the same everywhere, so long as nothing else distorted spacetime as mass does. To be fair though, there are vacuum solutions to Einstein's fiels equations so the point is not really clear. Also the local inertial frame is determined by the dynamical fields of the universe. My reply comes from my assertion that without matter there would be no curves in any gravitational field that may be there. My idea is that in whatever was there before the big bang, call it sub space, time was the same everywhere. Time as we know it is measured out by means of various things which have inertia, eg a quartz crystal and a crystal's bending is determined by its stiffness and its inertia. The inertia part is determined by the universe, hence time is determined by the universe but it is also affected by relativity. With no matter and no intrinsically curved gravitational field there woiuld be no time as we know it.
-
Yes, in the absence of mass time would become Newtonian, ie the same everywhere, so long as nothing else distorted spacetime as mass does. In whatever was there before the big bang, call it sub space, time is the same everywhere.
Thanks for your feedback.
-
On the related issue of "Dark Matter"
The concept that the Universe is expanding at a faster rate due to "Undetectable Dark Mater" sounds too much like the Theory of Ether. It is based on the idea that there is not enough detectable mass within galaxies for gravity to hold them together. Why is is so hard to imagine that over 14 billion years the majority of large suns have run out of fuel to burn and are now dead masses of carbon that emit no light and no radiation for us to detect. Furthermore, there are probably 10 times as many dead planets and an uncountable number of asteroids out there that are not detectable.
-
On the related issue of "Dark Matter"
The concept that the Universe is expanding at a faster rate due to "Undetectable Dark Mater" sounds too much like the Theory of Ether. It is based on the idea that there is not enough detectable mass within galaxies for gravity to hold them together. Why is is so hard to imagine that over 14 billion years the majority of large suns have run out of fuel to burn and are now dead masses of carbon that emit no light and no radiation for us to detect. Furthermore, there are probably 10 times as many dead planets and an uncountable number of asteroids out there that are not detectable.
You appear to have confused dark matter with dark energy. It is dark energy that is proposed to be causing the accelerating expansion of the universe, not dark matter. Dark matter has been proposed to account for the apparent extra mass of galaxies that does not radiate detectably.
-
I should have said Dark Mater and Dark Energy. I don't think either one makes sense because I don't think that other more simple possibility have been fully explored, such as undetectable "normal" mater and time acceleration in areas of space with low gravity influences.
-
I should have said Dark Mater and Dark Energy. I don't think either one makes sense because I don't think that other more simple possibility have been fully explored, such as undetectable "normal" mater and time acceleration in areas of space with low gravity influences.
We know dark matter is unlikely to be normal (baryonic) matter because it doesn't absorb radiation the way normal matter does. It's not micro or macro black holes because we don't see the distortion they'd cause by gravitational lensing. It's not anti-matter because we don't see the gamma ray bursts that would occur when antimatter and matter particles annihilate. I have no idea what 'time acceleration' is supposed to be...
-
Dark matter and dark energy?
We don't presently have sufficient evidence to really detail the true nature of these cosmic characters. However, because this is the New Theories section, I'll present my own personal opinions. In truth however, this interpretation should only qualify as an Hypothesis and not really a Theory at all. Having made that distinction, the following while not being proof, is a reasonable solution for free thinkers to consider.
When examining each of the proposed solutions to universal generation, I like M theory the best. Just my preference. In M theory, our universe exists on a membrane, commonly referred to as a Brane. Lying closely adjacent to our universe, on either side, exist parallel universes and these parallel universes extend out in both directions to infinity.
In the case of our universe and the two lying adjacent, one on either side, gravitational energies from these two neighbors can and do influence our universe. Large masses in any one of these parallel universes will influence neighboring ones resulting in the observations we see as Dark Matter.
Because gravitational energy can pass back and forth between Branes, the gravitational pull our universe experiences from the two neighbors we have on either side of us causes the expansion we observe in our universe. This is the phenomenon we call Dark Energy.
Just my Hypothesis...................................