[guest39538]

Time = absolute unbounded dark space

That is just another way of not defining time. Time is always in a ratio with c as a constant of total zero point energy available to us in the void of space. Even in mass there is quite a void of space. The void is a uniform structure of energy. Mass causes the uniformity to stretch (dilate). This causes less energy per volume of space in GR. Mass expands (measuring stick) equal to the extra amount of distance light travels at c. This is what causes light and the electron to be confounded. Geometry is relative in every frame.

The twin paradoxs uses the energy dimension of time. The total energy minus vector energy used is the ratio of the speed of reaction rate of a frame. Electron cycle is reduced by the vector travel for energy ratio total c.

timing is always in ratio with c , not time. 

I think you completely missed the definition.

Time is darkness .

All things exist in darkness , darkness is the spacial unbounded void of space that all things need to exist in.   Things need and have to have a volume of time to exist in, I. E.   Space.


XYZT-XYZ=T



Think about that xyz only works because of source points, remove all the points we are left in darkness in time .

[GoC]

XYZT-XYZ=T
Think about that xyz only works because of source points, remove all the points we are left in darkness in time .

XYZ to me is the reason for time. XYZ is the grid structure of c energy the very cause of time. Until you come to the realization that electrons do not move themselves you will be stuck without a real definition of time. We measure time with the electron (and photon) realizing something is moving the electron (and photon) is the first step to understanding time is motion. A void does not move the electrons. here is no dimension of time only motion of time with a basis in c that move electrons (and photons).

By the way Merry Christmas.

[guest39538]

XYZT-XYZ=T
Think about that xyz only works because of source points, remove all the points we are left in darkness in time .

XYZ to me is the reason for time. XYZ is the grid structure of c energy the very cause of time. Until you come to the realization that electrons do not move themselves you will be stuck without a real definition of time. We measure time with the electron (and photon) realizing something is moving the electron (and photon) is the first step to understanding time is motion. A void does not move the electrons. here is no dimension of time only motion of time with a basis in c that move electrons (and photons).

By the way Merry Christmas.

merry Xmas to you ,

Xyz is a  point source co-ordinate system and nothing to do with time. It is our way of attempting to navigate the cosmos.

Perhaps it may benefit the conversation if we rewind and take a look at some rudimentary logic.

Would you agree that if we removed all the matter,Emr and CMBR from a volume of space,  the volume of space would be in darkness or if you prefer a dark space?

Now although there is no longer any sort of energy  or  c energy in this dark space, do you agree that there is still time in this dark space?

The dark space exists behind/under the light/c energy.  Consider that c is timing light travelling through time. Try to imagine if you can that c is the gears in an engine space, the engine space being time ,  timing light relative to time.

Or if you like imagine it is dark, close your eyes, imagine a single photon is travelling from the sun to your eyes, can you now ''see'' the photon travelling through time?

[GoC]

Perhaps it may benefit the conversation if we rewind and take a look at some rudimentary logic.

Would you agree that if we removed all the matter,Emr and CMBR from a volume of space,  the volume of space would be in darkness or if you prefer a dark space?

Interesting thought. I am not sure there would be space. Your messing with the very question of existence. Without something in space there would be no distance to create volume. If there is distance there is something causing distance. Our 3 dimensions being removed? We know mathematically we live in a point style universe because of Pi. Points can be closer together but a pure circle is not possible. This creates a xyz universe. Energy would be complimentary spin points in space for energy to move electrons and propagate the photon wave form.
So no we cannot agree on a volume of space.

Now although there is no longer any sort of energy  or  c energy in this dark space, do you agree that there is still time in this dark space?

No, If you take motion away for electrons to move everything would be frozen in place. Energy is from c not mass. Mass only has kinetic energy given to it by fundamental energy from the spectrum sea of energy c. Time is a measurement of relative motion to total energy c.

Or if you like imagine it is dark, close your eyes, imagine a single photon is travelling from the sun to your eyes, can you now ''see'' the photon travelling through time

You appear to believe a photon is a point moving through a void. I can see the waveform propagating on c spin particles (gears if you like). The particles ripple than go back into their stable relationship All wavelengths are a form of radiation. Some harmful others not. Time = motion = energy= organized c spin particles. Kind of like strings but strings are impossible because of Pi.

Lets go back to the twin paradox. You do not believe in different relative reactions to c as frames. This is relativity. If you do not agree with relativity you can believe anything. I am unfortunately stuck with relativity. So my view is always relative (to c).

[guest39538]

Perhaps it may benefit the conversation if we rewind and take a look at some rudimentary logic.

Would you agree that if we removed all the matter,Emr and CMBR from a volume of space,  the volume of space would be in darkness or if you prefer a dark space?

Interesting thought. I am not sure there would be space. Your messing with the very question of existence. Without something in space there would be no distance to create volume. If there is distance there is something causing distance. Our 3 dimensions being removed? We know mathematically we live in a point style universe because of Pi. Points can be closer together but a pure circle is not possible. This creates a xyz universe. Energy would be complimentary spin points in space for energy to move electrons and propagate the photon wave form.
So no we cannot agree on a volume of space.

Almost correct, without matter reflecting light in space , there would be nothing to allow us to percleve distance in space and our visual universe would be 0 in distance, however by moving we could prove distance still exists in  the dark, I. E a volume of dark space.

 

Picture your spinning things, what do you think they are spinning in?

They are spinning in time .

[GoC]

Picture your spinning things, what do you think they are spinning in?

They are spinning in time .

Their spinning is what we measure as time. They spin and move electrons by their spinning at c. Their spinning is what allows mass to move and clocks to tick. We think in terms of kinetic for energy but fundamental zero point energy is c. The energy of time is constant spin but different distances for tick rate of a frame. That matches relativity and observation.

To you time is a meta observation that just exists. To me all things have a mechanical cause. The basis of cause and affect so every effect has a cause. You never bring me a cause just an affect. Math is never a cause either.

We live in a sea of c.

[guest39538]

Picture your spinning things, what do you think they are spinning in?

They are spinning in time .

Their spinning is what we measure as time. They spin and move electrons by their spinning at c. Their spinning is what allows mass to move and clocks to tick. We think in terms of kinetic for energy but fundamental zero point energy is c. The energy of time is constant spin but different distances for tick rate of a frame. That matches relativity and observation.

To you time is a meta observation that just exists. To me all things have a mechanical cause. The basis of cause and affect so every effect has a cause. You never bring me a cause just an affect. Math is never a cause either.

We live in a sea of c.

yes we live  within a sea of c, however the sea flows through time.
I believe your mistake in thinking is simply this, you try to get time to equal something else, where as I simply believe time=time  and has no equal.
I also think that things have a mechanical cause, however like I mentioned earlier, the mechanics need an engine space or the function of the mechanics become seazed.
Consider a perfect vacuum that was even empty of CBMR,  do you not think that time is still existent in the vacuum?
You ask me what is the cause of time, which in my context is asking me what is the cause of space  .  The cause of space is to allow motion, without space there can be no motion. Without space there can not be volume, I am unsure what you actually mean by cause. I think I might be mistaking purpose.

Sorry

[GoC]

I believe your mistake in thinking is simply this, you try to get time to equal something else, where as I simply believe time=time

I believe in mechanics so to me everything has a cause even time. You keep claiming I am the one mistaken. I claim that time has a physical cause. You on the other hand believe in the meta physical of time just being.

The cause of space is to allow motion

Who or what is allowing motion? This is where your mind stops reaching for an answer. You think it is an impossible question to answer. It is not impossible but rather simple. That which moves the electron and photon waves is the cause of time. You need to define time in a physical context then you can realize the cause of time. Time is motion.

the mechanics need an engine space or the function of the mechanics become seazed.

Time is energy c. That move both the electrons and photon waves. Without energy c you are correct everything would be seized up.

Consider a perfect vacuum that was even empty of CBMR,  do you not think that time is still existent in the vacuum?

If you include energy c itself being removed than yes there would be no time. A BH is a prime example of no time inside and everything seized.

Your understanding hit a brick wall you were unable to penetrate. My thoughts are beyond your brick wall so naturally I must be mistaken.
 

[guest39538]

I believe your mistake in thinking is simply this, you try to get time to equal something else, where as I simply believe time=time

I believe in mechanics so to me everything has a cause even time. You keep claiming I am the one mistaken. I claim that time has a physical cause. You on the other hand believe in the meta physical of time just being.

The cause of space is to allow motion

Who or what is allowing motion? This is where your mind stops reaching for an answer. You think it is an impossible question to answer. It is not impossible but rather simple. That which moves the electron and photon waves is the cause of time. You need to define time in a physical context then you can realize the cause of time. Time is motion.

the mechanics need an engine space or the function of the mechanics become seazed.

Time is energy c. That move both the electrons and photon waves. Without energy c you are correct everything would be seized up.

Consider a perfect vacuum that was even empty of CBMR,  do you not think that time is still existent in the vacuum?

If you include energy c itself being removed than yes there would be no time. A BH is a prime example of no time inside and everything seized.

Your understanding hit a brick wall you were unable to penetrate. My thoughts are beyond your brick wall so naturally I must be mistaken.

I do not have a brick wall lol, I can think beyond the normal persons thinking ability.
You mention black holes and say there would be no time inside a black hole , that is rather outlandish when a black hole is in time along with everything else.

Your picture seems a rather small picture , based around c and electrons, where realistic they exist in time.
I look at the bigger picture.


Let me change the discussion slightly but I will lead to the relationship.


Do you consider that space is adjoined to space?

By this i mean space as in emptiness ,

[GoC]

I do not believe space can be empty. If it were empty it would not be space. Its filled with the energy dimension of size to small to detect directly. We detect it indirectly with the photon.

[guest39538]

I do not believe space can be empty. If it were empty it would not be space. Its filled with the energy dimension of size to small to detect directly. We detect it indirectly with the photon.

Why would you think that? Space is not made of anything, it is the rudiment of existence. If we remove things from space , I. E a perfect vacuum , the space remains . Light passes through space , all
 Things move through space , all things need a space to exist in, space has a ''viscosity'' of 0

[GoC]

Why would you think that? Space is not made of anything, it is the rudiment of existence. If we remove things from space , I. E a perfect vacuum , the space remains . Light passes through space , all
 Things move through space , all things need a space to exist in, space has a ''viscosity'' of 0

Because I am a firm believer that you cannot get something for nothing. Apparently you believe in something for nothing.
1. Light slows down in air than speeds up in a vacuum.          Something for nothing?
2. Electrons move.                                                                          Something for nothing?
3. Electron and photon clocks match time in every frame.     Coincidence?
4. c is constant.                                                                                Regulates itself?

Space has 0 viscosity?  No, space has energy c viscosity. Something also created energy c. What I do not know. I only know it is organized, pervasive throughout the universe and equal in every direction.

For you the answer was it just is.
 For me that was not enough.

[guest39538]

Why would you think that? Space is not made of anything, it is the rudiment of existence. If we remove things from space , I. E a perfect vacuum , the space remains . Light passes through space , all
 Things move through space , all things need a space to exist in, space has a ''viscosity'' of 0

Because I am a firm believer that you cannot get something for nothing. Apparently you believe in something for nothing.
1. Light slows down in air than speeds up in a vacuum.          Something for nothing?
2. Electrons move.                                                                          Something for nothing?
3. Electron and photon clocks match time in every frame.     Coincidence?
4. c is constant.                                                                                Regulates itself?

Space has 0 viscosity?  No, space has energy c viscosity. Something also created energy c. What I do not know. I only know it is organized, pervasive throughout the universe and equal in every direction.

For you the answer was it just is.
 For me that was not enough.

Not at all, I believe nothing can be something, I. E space/time.

Made of nothing but exists as space.

Let us go back to the twins , twin one who stayed on earth , knew there was no time dilation because he was smart and realised the significant  of 3.26cm .

[GoC]

thebox

Time just represents the reaction rate of a frame. In an accelerated frame reaction rates are slower.
I can explain the geometry for why it is slower but you do not believe in Relativity so it would be pointless.
The necessity of mechanics are lost on you also for instance: what cases the electron to move? It just does
is not the depth of knowledge of which I am comfortable. So while your understanding is nothing my
 understanding will be different from yours. Yours is similar to main stream not having the tools to
understand why gravity exists.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

That:
  A  ''Photon'' leaves the sun travelling to Earth. The ''Photon'' does not take 8 minutes to get here, the ''Photon'' passes through 8 minutes of time.
The Earth, the Sun and the ''Photon'' all experience the passing through 8 minutes of time, regardless of velocity.

 I do not believe that "Photon" is a "complete particle"/mass.
  Particles are born based on available energy/quanta, photon/spectrum, is not "enough" to become a particle, with mass of it's own...
  Seems more correct to assume that a photon of the sun does not take 8 minutes to arrive at earth...
  Seems logical that 8 minutes is a measurement of distance, and that C (the maximum speed in witch the photon attempt/quantification of light) happens...

I'm suggesting than that distance and time are always in correlation, resulting in different sizes and distances, but C is time..
  More precisely the "distance" in which C is happening from A to B, this case from Sun towards Earth...
  C is the speed, the constant speed in which void can quantification the energy, now we have a considerable distance between Sun and Earth...
 The photo traveling is bu a commodity, an useful and practical one, but the photon have not traveled, it was carried from A the B, in between the void...
  The self propagation of light, for me, seems to be related with the attempt of quantification the quanta of the photon, on a impossible shape(due size),
 the attempt is constantly falling and being restarted, the speed in witch this attempt happens seems to b C...
  I wondering photon does have mass, but it cannot achieve a center, so every time the photonic energy is about to receive mass the quantification fails,
the produced mass is left behind of the energy(open space).
 The gain and lost of mass of the photon being C, and also the same reason the self propagation of it at C. Light as being a warp engine...

 So when I think about 8 minutes to arrive on Earth, I wonder that "8 minutes" is a tool of measurement of time nothing more,
 the photon not traveling trough a distance, but time...
 The distance become real, when one consider that "C" is not instantaneous, so "SPACE" takes "time" to "C",
 void take time to (keep) "attempting" the photon...
  Now if you consider the "time" between Sun and Earth, that distance is resultant of the accumulation of a lot of "time"...
 Time allows distances to exist (physically). Our universe seems to behave point to point, but in terms of E=MC2,
 that is constant all trough the infinite "SPACE"...
  "SPACE" does not need A to B, that is a requirement of our "UNIVERSE"...

 Wondering that Photon wave/particle configuration as being a "impossible shape" is in fact the correct assumption.
 On a existence where a photon does not travel at C, but happens at C,
 is to assume that everything is happening on different states of the same constant C...
  For me "Photon" is happening at C, at the edge of letting being a wave and into become a electron/Proton, if it can accumulate it will become any
particle, but when on a perfect vacuum it's own point of reference (it's mass) is happening outside of it, it stays behind, self propagating the energy, it can be slowed down,
 but as soon the event that did that ends, it will reach C(on perfect vacuum) again...
  Is not that light is traveling at C, light is so fact for it cannot stop on it's own, something(wall) must disturb the "photonic attempt",
 and such wall, will determinate how much of light will accumulate to form new particles, and how much of that will temporarily remain as spectrum..
Light is not as fact as Space, cause light half warps itself in only one direction.
    Light uses the loss of it's achieved mass(instant) to bend space...
      Think about a sphere of 1 kilogram of iron on a perfect vacuum, now assume that the mass of that iron sphere is happening on the center, but different from a normal 1kg iron sphere, this one is not being able(due size) to form a center, the formed mass on this virtual center will stay beind as the energy that forms the sphere will be propagated in one dirrection, there you will have a 1kg iron sphere being moved at C...
       1kg iron sphere have energy enough to develop a center for it's own mass, form that point own the energy should keep doing the same think, but this time, a linear tragectory should be converted into sppining energy...
         Mass should be the reason of the spinning particles, but at the same time, mass is directly related with the energy...
         Time gives mass to energy, but mass is not static, mass is not permanent, mass of everything is constantly being gain and lost at C, great density results in different cotant C, as consequence different time(Frames), with differences in time(outside in) mass should be reduced in comparison to the previous frame, matter submited to less time become facter, fast matter becomes energy again...