[petm1 (OP)]

My duration in the present, my age is increasing, to slow down my clock I can either move deeper into our gravity well, or move faster either one will increase my duration in my present thereby slowing my clock.  The present is where we change the past into the future but it is also the limit to our movements via mass.   Mass on the other hand is my anchor to the past always centered in time relative to a changing present that I can not see.  It is a dilating second, the present, that explains the increasing duration the closer you move massive entities together and I see this as local clocks trying to tick at the same rate you see this same thing as tides.   

[Ethos_]

My duration in the present, my age is increasing, to slow down my clock I can either move deeper into our gravity well, or move faster either one will increase my duration in my present thereby slowing my clock. 

Park yourself at the event horizon of a black hole and ask yourself who's time is advancing faster. For you and your clock, time seems to advance at it's normal rate. But what you observe is everything outside speeding up. For those outside, they see you frozen at the event horizon. You see time advancing faster and those outside see your time frozen. Who's time has really slowed down? Depends on who's frame of reference you choose to gage the advance by.

Mass on the other hand is my anchor to the past always centered in time relative to a changing present that I can not see. 

People confuse the terms "Mass and Matter". Matter and mass/energy are very different things. Where matter is a local volume measured in radii, mass and energy are attributes associated with this presence measured in grams and ergs. While an electron is matter, it's mass and energy will increase with velocity. So the rest mass of an electron is very different than that same electron approaching velocities close to c.

My point here is; when you define a location or frame as being: "An anchor to the past," you should probably use the term "Matter" and not mass. But I still don't see the significance of your explanation. The Past, Present, and Future are only different points in the arrow of time. Why one or the other should have more or less to do with mass, or matter, is beyond reason in my opinion.

[petm1 (OP)]

Park yourself at the event horizon of a black hole and ask yourself who's time is advancing faster. For you and your clock, time seems to advance at it's normal rate. But what you observe is everything outside speeding up. For those outside, they see you frozen at the event horizon. You see time advancing faster and those outside see your time frozen. Who's time has really slowed down? Depends on who's frame of reference you choose to gage the advance by.

My consciousness is always co moving with my clock and my second is always a second by my count.  With that said I do not see it as a difference in the speed of times advancement I see it as a difference between the durations we are spending in our separate presents.     

People confuse the terms "Mass and Matter". Matter and mass/energy are very different things.

Matter is relative by size using an accelerated frame as the base, we all agree that a ruler of matter marked to a meter is always the same length in the present moment, much like our second. Our second is a variable we can measure as changing because of the different tick rates of local clocks but I do not see it as time speeding up or slowing down I see it as mass warping the present moment.

when you define a location or frame as being: "An anchor to the past," you should probably use the term "Matter" and not mass.

Time is always relative in the present and what keeps us all relative is mass, the resistance to change.  Matter is what I see via photons but mass is what I feel and I don't think of light as an anchor.  I may not be able to think of myself as the center of the universe, in space, but I am just as much the center of time as you or any other massive object. 

     

[gcrisp]

we all agree that mass can warp space and time, ie around a gravity well. I have this crazy theory that the universe behaves like a giant mass, and that the speed of light is proportional to the distance from the center of the universe (big bang/white hole), and the speed of time is probably inversely proportional to the distance from the center of the universe. This means we observe white light as being white light anywhere, but are we measuring distances correctly towards and away from the center?

What if the universe is behaving like a giant gravity well and we are halfway up the slope?

[petm1 (OP)]

the universe behaves like a giant mass, and that the speed of light is proportional to the distance from the center of the universe (big bang/white hole)

White hole as in the outward energy flow from big bang, all motion moving in one
direction, the beginning of entropy, not to mention space and time?

What if the universe is behaving like a giant gravity well and we are halfway up the slope?

Do you think that in the beginning time was infinite and space was not and that in the end it will be space that is infinite and time will not?  Is this the slope?

[gcrisp]

Maybe that is what I mean.
Its just that when I look at some of the diagrams of a gravity well, I start to wonder whether we really have it all correctly fathomed out.
Lets face it, we could go 1000 times the distance of Pluto, and it would only be a couple of remote decimal places that may change in speed of light/time elapsed if my preposterous theory were even minutely correct.
Maybe when we look outwards or inwards towards where the big bang/white hole occurred, what we see is far from reality in our sense of time/space understanding.
We have of course, based all our measurements on what happens here, in our backyard, so we assume what we see complies.
Are we so arrogant that we believe our back yard is the b all and end all?
Just like the church less than 100 years ago??? who persecuted anybody with alternate ideas.

Enough of the emotional argument!
I believe in mathematical representations of what we see. Far too often in my life I have seen evidence of theories that could be modified by changing a parameter and still make sense, but a different sense that opens new avenues of exploration.
None of what I have said would change a single recognizable thing in our lowly neighborhood of the universe. After all, we are just a spec of dust on the Pacific ocean.
g

[petm1 (OP)]

The way I see it, I may be the smallest part of the observable universe in space, but I am always the largest part of my own time in the present.

[petm1 (OP)]

Temporal motion is how I think of the motion I do not see; i. e. the photon I do not see its motion I see it as a static color, the outward acceleration of Earth, concrete cracking, grass growing.   Dilation is a singular motion outward The earth dilates, I am dilating, space is dilating, the sun is dilating, a clock counts this dilating motion.

One is a temporal entity, we do not separate time because time separates itself, dimensionless until we assign a number to it.  The largest common denominator and the lowest common denominator, time, of reality is size dependent.  The common beginning of mass, big bang, is relative in time to our present moment and looking back in time we always see it as smaller.  All you have to do is think of Planck as a relative static scale in the present while in time the common denominators are always dilating.

[petm1 (OP)]

A time line of the earth can be graphed as a wormhole through time, yet we do not see it that way, because we only see signals from the outer shell.  Newton may have showed us that space can be thought of as rigid from a point with a single time for us all. Myself I would think that Einstein showed us space and time must be on equal footings, yet opposites, such that time is rigid from a point with a common space for us all. 

Today we use the dilating rate of a caesium-133 atom to split our common second, much finer that the rate we got using hydrogen, but between the two we can see that there is a difference in the dilation rate of matter.   

[petm1 (OP)]

The duration of 9192631770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the Cesium 133 atom.  One second, we count the photons emitted from a Cesium atom as it is changing states over some distance with a detector.  Take two synchronized clocks, if you move one clock deeper into a gravity well, it will tick slower, the photons will have a longer duration.  The photons still travel at the same speed with the same distance but it takes them longer to make the trip.  The longer durations account for the slower tick rate between the clocks when reunited.  With an expanding space accounting for the red shift in old photons and an dilating duration accounting for red shift from the young ones then it is easy to see that space and time are opposites till the end.  You can also think of space as a single entity in which case you can describe it as one dilating moment but to stay as an opposite you would have to think of time as expanding, gravity maybe?   

[petm1 (OP)]

What if we believed our eyes, everything you see is smaller because that was the size when the photons were emitted, everything dilates in time we only see the photons sent from the outside edge of a dilating entity.  The present is set by my one second frame of reference as an observer and if you think of the past as being smaller then it makes sense that I can think of my present moment as the largest the same as you.  Every single thing gets bigger in time, size is relative, and we see it when ever we are moving our frame of reference.  The sign on the side of the road dilates as we get closer to the same moment but it does not contract as we leave we just see it receding in time while its dilating rate stays the same.  Space and time on equal footings account for everything, try thinking of time as accounting for all motion including the motion I do not see, like photons and the outward acceleration of gravity.  Think of the outward acceleration of the earth as a real motion, not just a force, masked by the pseudo-emission point within my eyes that I use as the leading edge of present moment.

[petm1 (OP)]

The apple falls to Earth, the Earth dilates out to the apple.  Both describe the same motion, one is attractive the other is repulsive, we see one and measure the other.  The apple does not feel the force of gravity, we measure this force when the apple lands on the accelerated frame.  I for one believe my instruments the gravity wave is measured by the accelerometer.   

[petm1 (OP)]

The tides can be accounted for using a warping of space time, not a force at all.  It is the different lengths of a second, slower tick rate, that we measure the deeper in a gravity well that is this warp in my mind.  I think that the negative, attractive, force of gravity in space equals the positive acceleration, outward, we measure as the lengthening second here on Earth.   

[petm1 (OP)]

Mass is the past holding us relative in the present.

Space is the present moment we share as observers.

Gravity is our outward dilation into the future.

[petm1 (OP)]

Time is just as real as space after all they are both the same thing just opposites, the mystical part of space/time is thinking time is not real. Time is the largest through smallest common denominator of our present moment when expressed within mathematics using space/time as a coordinate system from one point. One clock to rule them all.