Hořava’s theory, however, is far from perfect. Diego Blas, a quantum gravity researcher at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL) in Lausanne has found a “hidden sickness” in the theory when double-checking calculations for the solar system. Most physicists examined ideal cases, assuming, for instance, that Earth and the sun are spheres, Blas explains: “We checked the more realistic case, where the sun is almost a sphere, but not quite.” General relativity pretty much gives the same answer in both the scenarios. But in Hořava gravity, the realistic case gives a wildly different result.
Along with Sergei M. Sibiryakov, also at EPFL, and Oriol Pujolas of CERN near Geneva, Blas has reformulated Hořava gravity to bring it back into line with general relativity. Sibiryakov presented the group’s model in September at a meeting in Talloires, France.
Hořava welcomes the modifications. “When I proposed this, I didn’t claim I had the final theory,” he says. “I want other people to examine it and improve it.”
Gia Dvali, a quantum gravity expert at CERN, remains cautious. A few years ago he tried a similar trick, breaking apart space and time in an attempt to explain dark energy. But he abandoned his model because it allowed information to be communicated faster than the speed of light.
“My intuition is that any such models will have unwanted side effects,” Dvali thinks. “But if they find a version that doesn’t, then that theory must be taken very seriously.”
Note: This article was originally printed with the title, "Splitting Time from Space."
This article was originally published with the title Splitting Time from Space.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
180 Comments
Add CommentIf the progression rate of time and creation of space are proportional to the velocity of motion, and quantum particles can only be detected by absorbing their energy of motion, then particles can only be evaluated in the context of a constant velocity, space and progression rate of time. This condition could lead particle physicists to conclude that space and time are not interrelated. Just an idle thought...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI should say that spacetime is inversely proportional to velocity...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOr more correctly, the progression rate of time is inversely proportional to velocity, while the creation of space (distance) is proportional to velocity...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEinstein once explained Relativity for a layman by telling him, "time passes differently for an observer when a beautiful woman rests her hand on your leg."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis has practical applications. And I have spent my life trying to keep a beautiful woman's hand on my leg at all times, in all spaces where it might rest.
But I wish I knew more math.
Interesting article to say the least! I've never 'liked' dark matter or dark energy but there wasn't much else to hang your hat on when it came to some observations in the real world and the mathematical models to explain them. I hope this proves out in the end because I think it will be a whole lot easier to prove then trying to prove dark matter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSorry dark matter researchers, but don't loose hope, after all it's still a theory and I'm sure the underground research will yield some interesting results.
Quote: Splitting Time from Space--New Quantum Theory Topples Einstein's Spacetime - Unquote
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisReally? Is that so?
Sounds more like a catch line to get someone to buy a magazine.
Einsteinian physics did not "topple" Newtonian physics. It enhanced it. How is this supped to "topple" Einstein's Spacetime? Hopefully, like relativity, it'll make it more accurate.
Just so everyone understands, Newtonian physics is still taught today in Universities and it is sufficiently accurate to calculate architecture requirements and race car engineering.
So, what's next? Using the word "theory" like a creationist?
This is a headline worthy of CNN, or at the very least, the National Enquirer .
Actually, until very recent times the Ptolemaic theory was sufficient to calculate tide tables and it was a whole lot easier to use it rather than to puzzle out multi-body solutions with Newton's formula. The ancient Ptolemaic tables were good enough. At the Hood Canal locks here in Seattle there used to be a giant analog computer consisting of a heavy chain about fifteen feet long.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe chain was fixed on one end and stretched horizontally with a series of pulleys representing the celestial bodies each able to indent the stretched chain and make it shorter or longer. The free end culminated in a pointer that moved up and down a scale indicating the expected tide.
One problem with modern scientific logic is that when we invoke Occam's Razor we should consider that "simpler" is a subjective concept. For instance, to an advanced race of beings with ultra fast super computers for minds it may be no trouble at all to picture their home world at being the exact center of the universe and at perfect rest as well.
These creatures would then calculate the movement of everything else around their homeworld, including their local sun. They could resolve this intellectually because both Newton and Einstein point out that when two bodies attract each other on a really long timeline you can see that they mutually circle each other as their spacetime lines each trace an elegant sine wave through space.
Of course, it takes a huge long time for a sun like Sol to complete a conceptualized "orbit" around our little Earth, but it does and around all the other planets too!
So, the superintelligent beings with some mathematical juggling can set their homeworld at rest and make the rest of the universe obediantly move around it in predictable paths. To our minds this takes way too much calculation to pass Occam's test, but to their minds it is ridiculously easy.
To me the interesting thing about this is that ancient Hebrew lore says the world was created in six days and the Lord rested on the seventh. If it is the case (I have no idea) that the sun actually "orbits" the Earth in 700 million years, which is what the Bible writers considered a day (the sun orbiting the Earth) then they had the age of the Earth about right!
Also interesting is the fact that they allowed that even an all powerful God had to labor significantly to create the Cosmos. It wasn't just a snap of the fingers. God had to work hard at it and maybe has to work hard to keep the big machine running correctly--maybe it needs constant tuneups and corrections.
Agree with Sparrow - very interesting article, but do see that the theory is neither toppling anyone, nor disproving anything other than our preconceptions. Seems to me that it's simply a way of breaking down a level of abstraction we reached at thanks entirely to Einstein in the first place. Finding a new way to map DNA doesn't disprove Darwin's ideas. Hell, the discovery of genes itself could have been seen to have "toppled Darwin".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHey Michael C, I appreciate the thoughts, but I'm not sure mixing religious mythology into scientific discourse is terribly helpful.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI mean, maybe the Great Green Cheese Moon Fairy created the universe in 2 "holy Moon Days" which are equivilant to the distance between the center of the earth and the Great Pumpkin's house.... which oddly enough, is roughly the current age of the earth!
Thought provoking isn't it?
What if dark matter and dark energy really are gravity and not something out of the ordinary
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat if dark energy and matter are gravity and not some strange stuff just out there.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis was all proven a long time ago by: EinsteinGravity.com
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMathematically proven by: EinsteinElectricity.com
This was proven two years ago by EinsteinGravity . c o m
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMathematically proven by EinsteinElectricity . c o m
Very well expressed tharriss.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBack on topic, let's hope Mr Hořava's ideas turn out to be useful. As somebody previously said new theories are for expanding and enhancing knowledge. They should be encouraged. I don't understand peoples aggression toward new ideas. Lets face it, current physics theories are a bit of a mess. The 'standard model' and cosmological theories are wobbly at best. Ten points to Mr Hořava and minus several million to those whos confuse religion and science.
What if the speed of light is dependent on gravitational fields though?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFYI, today is still the 7th day. I might just be an Engineering but I'm also an amateur Biblical scholar. One of the specific things mentioned in those passages is a distinct beginning and end to each day to establish a precedent (6 days labor 1 day rest, which does work wonders physiologically). However, there is no end mentioned for the 7th day. Then, according to the Hebrew calender, the 7th day is 5900 years and counting. Also the first thing created was light. Only makes sense that bringing a universe into existence would entail releasing a massive amount of energy, and a whole lotta light.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlso, that tharriss guy is pretty clever. I've never seen a 5th grader employ a straw man so spectacularly.
I always comtemplated that dark matter and dark enery were the results of "interference" patterns of gravitational forces between bodies of mass. Some areas are additive so you have a hot spot of gravitational forces that would appear like a large mass or dark matter, others are subtractive leading to a vacuum of gravity (and the universe abhores a vacuum, reacts like potential energy to fill). But I ramble......
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust a layman here, but I read Micahel C's comment, and (if I even sort of understand the article, the theory, and Michael's comment) I agree from an intuitive standpoint, that it seems awfully convenient to declare that space time properties change phase in different energized states. Is this really finding an answer, or just changing the conditions to meet our expectations? Is there anything else to indicate that properties of time are affected by changes in phase?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOh please don't give the creationists another science "fact" to hang there bible thumping hats on. But there you have it. How long before you see this in a new paper from the religious right?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHello Michael, please don't give the creationists something to hang their bible thumping hats on. Oh well, too late. How long before a paper comes out saying that the new theory proves the existance of god?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@Mathew
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIsn't that what the article is claiming, in a sense. When you apply HoYava's new quantum gravity theory to a large scale model of a galaxy, it can in essence predict the apparent change in gravitational force.
I'm not sure about the dark energy problem though, they didn't seem to mention how his theory may or may not predict the apparent expansion of the universe.
It is interesting that in the article they talked about the "big bounce" being one prediction of the model, as I would have thought it would be incompatible with the expanding universe idea, which can only really lead to a big cool, can't it, or am I missing something?
This is exciting news for physics, in essence it is a GUT (grand unified theory) isn't it? It is marrying quantum mechanics with general relativity, or maybe rather it expresses both quantum mechanics and general relativity in terms that allow the two concepts to mesh together, by the removal of time from space on the quantum scale. I would like to hear more about how the model achieves this removal of time, and it's explanations for it.
@ Char Aznable
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisActually, don't predictions of the big bang state that light was not present until after expansion occurs? That would mean that matter, be it a boson or fermion, was created before light, meaning the bible got it wrong.
Not that the bible has anything to do with physics, just thought it was fitting that it gets it wrong again.
Char? Please, stick to your amateur bible studies. Your nor Michael's arguments hold any merit and they're logical fallacies. Here's a list of a few logical fallacies that you and Michael are engaging in: confirmation bias (similar to observational selection),confusion of correlation and causation,non sequitur.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy can't you apply scientific reasoning to your everyday logic?
Extremely interesting article. Hope it pans out, it would be a beautiful synthesis of existing observations. I wonder though, what happens at the phase transition. This is a transition in physical laws not in physical materials. At what energies would it occur and what, I presume bizarre, properties would the universe have?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@mattymomostl
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Why can't you apply scientific reasoning to your everyday logic?"
Because religion adopts parts of anything that might confirm its wild allegations, and rejects those that don't, unlike science which takes the good with the bad and is OPEN about the fact that its theories may have some drawbacks.
Basically, religion doesn't care if it is right or wrong, only that it seems like its right, whereas science only cares if it is truly right from all perspectives, and if there are holes or flaws in a theory, it will tell people about them, and they may be filled in the future.
Now tell me someone, which calling seems more like a pursuit for truth, and which seems like a pursuit to deceive?
When you learn science in school, it may be taught almost as religiously as the bible, but this is only done to cement certain basic knowledge in the mind to form a basis to build upon, and may change (though not likely) at any time, at which point, science will go back and change all the text books.
Religion also does this, as with the different editions of the bible, with bits and pieces removed, added, altered and misinterpreted, however this is supposedly the word of god, but people see themselves fit to alter his supposed word. Sounds like a creation in itself, a creation of MAN, to perpetuate a long held lie to himself that he is special.
I think Alexander Franklin Mayers explanations and proposed theory are much better, and simpler.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.jaypritzker.org/index.html
I think ALexander Franklin Mayers proposed theory is much more persuasive. It echoes De Sitters original idea and consigns the Big Bang, dark matter and dark energy to the dark ages where they belong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.jaypritzker.org/index.html
Again, a layman here, and not religious at all. In fact, quite the opposite. But the study of math and science does tend to follow narrow paths established by initial theories which seems to lead to a lot of dead ends. It sounds like from this article that some of Einstein's most trusted theories have turned out to be dead ends that many have spent time scratching their head over for decades. Whatever happened to the theory of everything that was to be based on these theories that are becoming irrelevant? And it does seem silly to me that the only reason dark matter & dark energy exists in theory is to fill in an unexplainable hole. How can you build on a theory of absence? The exploration and observation of science could be more open minded and broader. But I guess we can't explore the infinite number of paths that exist, or determine which will lead to solutions beforehand. It seems we know so little and need to know so much. I won't say creationists views have to be contradictory to observations of science (just that they are narrow-minded and inflexible in the definition of creation) because scientific observations aren't complete either. At least in reality science is absolute and provable. Kudos to all scientists, mathematicians, theorists, physicists, etc. for your contributions to understanding our universe and therefore ourselves. It's amazing that media like Scientific American makes it possible for anyone and everyone to follow discoveries of great thinking as they happen. Never before has a time like this existed for humanity. To the creationist I would say: that is a miracle worth pondering.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery interesting and its my understanding that it does not introduce additional dimensions as in string theory or an additional field as in Moffats theory (although I do find great value in his theory).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery interesting and it’s my understanding that it does not introduce additional dimensions as in string theory or an additional field as in Moffat’s theory (although I do find great value in his theory).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Physicists have struggled to marry quantum mechanics with gravity for decades." - it's been done. it's called The Wave Structure of Matter: http://mwolff.tripod.com/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Physicists have struggled to marry quantum mechanics with gravity for decades." - It's been done. Check out The Wave Structure of Matter: http://mwolff.tripod.com/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime cannot exist without space - duh! .......Next!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisActually, our home planet *is* the centre of the cosmos, if you consider it mathematically (citing Georg Cantor here).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course, the same argument applies to any other planet as well...
Well, I like Physics. I will adventure my opinion because I think Scientific American is directed more to the General Public than to a small number of specialists in a certain field. At the same time I feel Scientific American is a very prestigious magazine and treats subjects in almost every field of science with more than sufficient seriousness and depth. And we can (probably) drop the word almost from the previous paragraph. I have not studied carefully Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. We still know little; but I do not think we can say Einstein was wrong. Of course (very probably) this theory will be surpassed one day. One good day someone with a pencil and a piece of paper will make improvements in Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. We will continue unveiling mysteries. Every effort is valid and important. The efforts described in this article are good and welcome. I would like to have the time to enter more seriously into this area of study. My intuition says that time does not exist. It is movement (not time) what really exists. We will have to start from square one and check and re-check everything. We have a lot of work to do.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime and space exist in superatomic universe, they are nonexistent in the subatomic universe. The subatomic universe is all energy existing as waves and they are distributed as they must. We only understand them in probablistic terms and it is clear that they have many places with the atom at any instant and in several places at once. The experimental observations reflect how they express themselves to out methods, which make them appear as semiparticles with mass. In reality, the particles have no mass, but express themselves in a mass equivalent. In the subatomic universe; mass, location and time are meaningless. The two systems can never be fully reconciled, because they are in effect two diverent universities separate by a sort of an event horizon, that we have chosen to believe is the out boundary of the atom. We are creature of matter and see it even where it is not.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA doubt: time is connected to speed of motion in relativistic terms, but there is an intrinsic time in matter as seen in radioactive matter decay, that was used to show with an atomic clock that really time goes slower inside a moving object. Is there a way to match the relative time with the absolute time of elements desintegration?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAny kind of information that can travel faster than light as suggested above would be the solution to exploration beyond the solar system. Although it may not be possible to accelerate matter beyond light speed - it might be possible to accelerate it to a high enough velocity to reach nearby systems within years or decades - this would be pretty pointless though if communications with a probe were constrained to light speed - but what if they were not?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf It were possible to send and receive data much faster, or instantaneously, then the probe would be used as a robotic explorer. If control of a remote vehicle is fast enough - it does not matter that if it light years away.
And for the human controllers on earth, plugged into a virtual reality projection of the data, the experience would be as close to being there as the quality of projection allowed. The first humans to visit such distant places will be virtual.
hi
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCould gravity be carried in packets by the interaction of particles so that many tiny interactions appear to be one large movement?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWould that allow for Newtonian physics to work within a larger pool of quantum gravity?
"he abandoned his model because it allowed information to be communicated faster than the speed of light..." That's the whole point and the beauty. I never understood how an object's gravitational affects could be felt across the entire universe. This theory makes perfect sense. Gravitation occurs outside of space and time, therefore, the information imparted by gravity must be instantaneous.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe know that time slows down in the presence of mass, and we know that mass is quantized. So it would seem obvious that time changes in quantized fashion. The fact that it may be impossible to demonstrate this mathematically with current day techniques should not be justification for ignoring the observable facts.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you're going to talk about God, let's go ahead and talk about Him. Right away from Newton's principles of acceleration of motion we find simple square rules, and we find the same mathematically simple rules in Kepler's laws of planetary motion and also in Einstein's relativity. It were as if God designed the universe in such a way as to make it relatively simple to understand when we get to it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBased on this train of thought, my proposal is that space-time is indeed mathematical in nature, and that the unified field which composes space-time does not need to be reduced to or inferred from some hypothetical particle, graviton or whatever. Rather, it is a mathematical field, and that is sufficient. That is the way God designed it, and we can comprehend it in that way.
Scientists since the Renaissance have been attempting, doing their very best, to explain everything in nature without resorting to "deus ex machina". That has been the name of the game. However, now we move into a new physics where there are nine or ten dimensions and effects of consciousness. I am suggesting that, at a certain point, to postulate the existence and online action of "God" will ultimately be simpler as a theory than to attempt to explain everything without that. Especially when we go back to the tuning of the cosmological constants in such a precise way as to allow life as we know it to exist. This would have to have been conscious, deliberate, and carefully designed. At a certain point, scientists will have to bow down to the idea of God's existence, and the necessity of this in order to both explain and predict what we will be finding in the architecture of the universe as we come to probe it more deeply, and extend the reach of human beings out to the solar system and beyond. We may, likewise, predict that there are certain things already prepared for this eventuality. Interplanetary travel, in other words, must be possible, by God's design. Therefore we ought to look for the way with that confidence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI simply would like to know if gravity is a push or a pull force. Can anybody do it? I do believe that gravity is a push force. When a large mass is placed in space, it crumples or compresses the normal spacetime field, not stretch it. If the speed of light is constant, and the area is crumpled or compressed , the time is shortened. That is why on the ground time runs slower. Also, what is the gravity at the center of the earth? Will there be any? or none?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAll hail the Great Green Cheese Moon Fairy!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd in response to Sparrow - I hear you man, but attracting attention is what CNN does. Would you rather they attract attention to Britney Spears or particle physics?
Okay so the string theorists are appeased how does this new gravity do in the realm of the very, very small?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEinstein was right about the shortcomings of Quantum Mechanics and so therefore String Theory is also the incorrect approach. As an alternative to Quantum Theory there is a new theory that describes and explains the mysteries of physical reality. While not disrespecting the value of Quantum Mechanics as a tool to explain the role of quanta in our universe. This theory states that there is also a classical explanation for the paradoxes such as EPR and the Wave-Particle Duality. The Theory is called the Theory of Super Relativity and is located at: http://www.superrelativity.org
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis theory is a philosophical attempt to reconnect the physical universe to realism and deterministic concepts. It explains the mysterious.
Einstein was right about the shortcomings of Quantum Mechanics and so therefore String Theory is also the incorrect approach. As an alternative to Quantum Theory there is a new theory that describes and explains the mysteries of physical reality. While not disrespecting the value of Quantum Mechanics as a tool to explain the role of quanta in our universe. This theory states that there is also a classical explanation for the paradoxes such as EPR and the Wave-Particle Duality. The Theory is called the Theory of Super Relativity and is located at: http://www.superrelativity.org
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis theory is a philosophical attempt to reconnect the physical universe to realism and deterministic concepts. It explains the mysterious.
"The snag is that in quantum mechanics, time retains its Newtonian aloofness, providing the stage against which matter dances but never being affected by its presence. These two conceptions of time dont gel."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDoesn't the Uncertainty Principle indicate that time interferes with the measurement of momentum? How could it not?
Nah...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHello? Someone said god? Hey people! We are living in the 21st century. It's time to understand that there is no "invisible man" in the sky controlling the universe... Let's put this thing clear: god does not exist. Period. Now let's talk about science. Stop the god nonsense, please
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismattymommost! - I like their comments. What are you worried about anyway?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI enjoy your comments.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI enjoy your comments.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissillybean...matter IS light. everyone knows that.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswe know that time slows down in the presence of matter? i didn't know that.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisanyway, i find comments with a theological bent to be inappropriate to this forum.
but my comment is this: after wrapping my brain around QED and then diving into strings, it would be a welcome respite for my poor brain to see dark mater & dark energy relegated to the theoretical dustbin along side the ether and crystalline spheres. you know something smells like a fudge factor when it breathes new possibility into an admitted head-fake like quintessence, yes?
in the meantime, how about some of you cats provide less web links and more overviews? i am SO not going to your lemon party.
I always wonder why the big bang just didn't collapse into one big black hole. There was enough matter to bend light in circles capturing matter in an event horizon. If, however, there was a disconnect between time and space at the big bang moment then matter could explained and an inflationary universe would occur.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think this the wrong approach but I predict that resolution to the problem will be in the not too distant future. Of course this will require a new understanding concerning the complexity of the structure of space-time geometry. Patience, Einstein was not wrong both relativity and quantum theory are incomplete, hence the current apparent irreconcilability.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHaven't read all the comments. The semi-religious ones appear to be a red herring. I'm intrigued by the "bounce". At one time there was a "steady-state" theory that I presume was debunked by the "big-bang". Is the "bounce" something "steady-state" believers will start to hang their hat on?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt’s too bad that this article did not give the reader any real understanding of what HoYava’s theory actually is. Not having read about it in any other source I certainly have no idea, except that it does not tie space and time together. The other comments seem to indicate that many other readers did not gain any understanding from this article, either.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs I understand it is actually special relativity that established the relationship between velocity, space and time.
It seems critical to understand that particles are only detected by absorbing the velocity of motion of an energy wave, effectively halting it. As such, a detected particle can be compared to a photograph of a bird in flight. It would seem that, since space and the progression of time are directly related to the velocity of motion, particle physics could not effectively address time at all. It seems little wonder to me that particle physics, the study of halted energy waves, would not address the affects of relativistic motion.
Nothing *unreal* exists.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGet over it.
According to His Holiness Huzur Maharaj, the Second Most Revered Spiritual Head of Radhasoami Faith had stated : Love or Force of attraction (i.e. the Force of Cohesion) is the Param Tattva or the chief ingredient of the creation, i.e. the entire creation has come into existence out of Love and is sustained by Love. In scientific terminology this is known as Gravity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBased on my recent comments posted in various blogs , I have postulated a hypothesis. propose. Theoretcal Physics describes four fundamental forces of nature viz., weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force, electromagnetic force and force of gravity. Here we can present an analogy. Weak and strong nuclear forces represent pancha-bhutas or the five elements. Electromagnetic force represents force of current of mind which mainly works through sensory organs and force of gravity represents supra-causal state of Consciousness. We know that during advanced stage of practice of meditation and yoga pancha-bhutas or five elements merge into mind and mind into supra-causal state of Consciousness and ultimately Individual Consciousness merges into Cosmic Consciousness. This is the state of Perfect Bliss or Self-Realization. Likewise during the reverse process of Cosmic Evolution i.e. Perfect Dissolution of the Universe, weak and strong nuclear forces merge into electromagnetic force and electromangnetic force merges into force of gravity.
In the beginning, the enetire Creation came into existence from this Single Force Current which later on manifested into many force currents during the process of Cosmic Evolution.
Gravitation Force is the Ultimate Creator, this paper I presented at the 1st Int. Conf. on Revival of Traditional Yoga, held at The Lonavla Yoga Institute (India), Lonavla, Pune in 2006. The Abstract of this paper is given below:
The Universe includes everything that exists. In the Universe there are billions and billions of stars. These stars are distributed in the space in huge clusters. They are held together by gravitation and are known as galaxies. Sun is also a star. Various members of the solar system are bound to it by gravitation force. Gravitation force is the ultimate cause of birth and death of galaxy, star and planets etc. Gravitation can be considered as the cause of various forms of animate and inanimate existence. Human form is superior to all other forms. Withdrawal of gravitational wave from some plane of action is called the death of that form. It can be assumed that gravitation force is ultimate creator. Source of it is God. Gravitatio
According to His Holiness Huzur Maharaj, the Second Most Revered Spiritual Head of Radhasoami Faith had stated : “Love or Force of attraction (i.e. the Force of Cohesion) is the Param Tattva or the chief ingredient of the creation, i.e. the entire creation has come into existence out of Love and is sustained by Love.” In scientific terminology this is known as Gravity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBased on my recent comments posted in various blogs , I have postulated a hypothesis. propose. Theoretcal Physics describes four fundamental forces of nature viz., weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force, electromagnetic force and force of gravity. Here we can present an analogy. Weak and strong nuclear forces represent pancha-bhutas or the five elements. Electromagnetic force represents force of current of mind which mainly works through sensory organs and force of gravity represents supra-causal state of Consciousness. We know that during advanced stage of practice of meditation and yoga pancha-bhutas or five elements merge into mind and mind into supra-causal state of Consciousness and ultimately Individual Consciousness merges into Cosmic Consciousness. This is the state of Perfect Bliss or Self-Realization. Likewise during the reverse process of Cosmic Evolution i.e. Perfect Dissolution of the Universe, weak and strong nuclear forces merge into electromagnetic force and electromangnetic force merges into force of gravity.
In the beginning, the enetire Creation came into existence from this Single Force Current which later on manifested into many force currents during the process of Cosmic Evolution.
Gravitation Force is the Ultimate Creator, this paper I presented at the 1st Int. Conf. on Revival of Traditional Yoga, held at The Lonavla Yoga Institute (India), Lonavla, Pune in 2006. The Abstract of this paper is given below:
The Universe includes everything that exists. In the Universe there are billions and billions of stars. These stars are distributed in the space in huge clusters. They are held together by gravitation and are known as galaxies. Sun is also a star. Various members of the solar system are bound to it by gravitation force. Gravitation force is the ultimate cause of birth and death of galaxy, star and planets etc. Gravitation can be considered as the cause of various forms of animate and inanimate existence. Human form is superior to all other forms. Withdrawal of gravitational wave from some plane of action is called the death of that form. It can be assumed that gravitation force is ultimate creator. Source of it is ‘God’. Gravitational Field is the supreme soul (consciousness) and its innumerable points of action may be called as individual soul (consciousness). It acts through body and mind. Body is physical entity. Mind can be defined as the function of autonomic nervous system. Electromagnetic waves are its agents through which it works. This can be realized through the practice of meditation and yoga under qualified meditation instruction. This can remove misunderstanding between science and religion and amongst various religions. This is the gist of all religious teachings – past, present and future.
Screwed up on the "steady-state" theory which continuously creates matter. I was thinking of the Oscillating Universe Theory in which the universe periodically expands and contracts. From what I've read this theory has problems with the second law of thermodynamics, but it seems in line with the postulated "bounce". I think at one time Einstein liked this idea.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhaaaat??? Oh, no...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisbla bla bla....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is a basic conflict between our perception of time and the reality of time which is causing epic confusion in physics. As mobile creatures, we perceive time as a linear series of events, but the cause is a constantly mutating physical reality which creates these events and replaces them. We think of it as proceeding from past events to future ones, but it is these events which go from future potential to past circumstance. The earth doesn't travel the fourth dimension from yesterday to tomorrow. Tomorrow becomes yesterday because the earth rotates. Time is not the basis of motion, but a consequence of it. It has more in common with temperature than space.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince thought is reductionistic, it's natural to combine the effects of all motion into a single dimension. Much like months have become totally divorced from the cycles of the moon and are now just a convenient placeholder between the more dominant cycles of days and years, as well as the social invention of weeks.
There is only what's moving about. The present isn't even a dimensionless point, since that would require the cessation of the very motion being measured. This goes to the issue of the uncertainty principle, as there is no specific location, as time is not a fundamental dimension and actually freezing time would remove all of the energy in the motion and reality would vanish, like an non-fluctuating vacuum.
The multi worlds model is due to trying to push a seemingly deterministic past into a probabilistic future, but if we view it the other way, as the wave of future probabilities collapsing into past circumstance, this reality makes sense.
Space, on the other hand, is an equilibrium state. Thus the speed of light as a constant and the faster anything moves through space, the slower its internal activity must be, to compensate, so the cumulative effects don't add up to greater than C.
If something is spinning in space, we would still know it, even if there are no other outside objects for reference, because there would be centrifugal force.
So it would seem that space, the vacuum, is an equilibrium state in which fluctuation happens. Time and temperature are effects of that fluctuation.
The left side of our brain is a serial processor that records the cause/effect of time, while the parallel processor of our right brain registers the cumulative effect of temperature.
Until the Seventeenth Century, scientists felt the need to cojoin science and philosphy. It held back even Newton, Copernicus and Galleo; they were constantly called to demonstrate science's conformance with their own or the prevaling social philosophy. Fortunately, in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, people began to think of them as separate and equally valid studies, and stopped trying to unify them. Somewhere in the mid-Twentieth Century, even worthy scientist like Dawkins, Sagan and Hawkins began to drag philosopy into their science, and there has often been this creeping inefficiency in science since. If the worthy scientists will return to their science, they and the world will be a better place. They can never prove anything for or againt philosopy, and philosopy can never prove anything for or against science. They are both worthy studies and valid within their own areas and should be pursued on their own without futher attempts by each to attack or join with the other.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHoyava now has two mathmatical models that he says are valid when applied in two different circumstances. He must now develop the rules and models of the transition between the two circumstances. There must be an equation(s), continuous transformation, or criteria, discrete transformation, of transition. Until he has those, the theory is incomplete. With those he can attempt to explain the physical processes at work in the entire theory and the cause of the discontinuity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBlack holes are the spewers of this so black matter they're filling the universe like a helium balloon.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHeaven forbid that anything should be able to exceed the sacred lightspeed barrier.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell put.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is a huge, glaring mistake in this article. Dark energy is in fact contained in Einstein's General Relativity, in the form of the cosmological constant. That the author made such a simple mistake, on something which any undergraduate physics student learns, makes me instantly distrust everything else he says.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI love how they subtitle these articles. "Topples Einstein's Relativity." That could not be farther from the truth, I simply do not take this hunch as anything serious.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEinstein's explanation of time, how it sometimes seems fast, sometimes slow depending on what attractive woman we are looking at, proves that we have no sensation of "time" at all. We have simply more or less carefully noted experiences with different degrees of concentration and absorption.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime doesn't exist as anything but a concept. Clocks of any sort are entirely self referential. They only count their own cycles. There is only an endless sequence of events happening in the now. The "past" is our memory of those events. The "future" is an expectation of events to come. There is no "timestuff" for clocks to keep track of and if there were it would not be done in the way it is popularly believed to be done.
No past. No future. No time travel. Only an eternal now with events happening in it. Our memory of those events is a mirage we call the past. We look for and sometimes imagine we see another mirage we call the future but both past and future are simply mental constructions.
Have you ever wonder what's beyond the boundaries of the Universe? Void space, not more. Energy always is dispersed towards low energy density spaces. If I would like to try with reality, I would discharge every bit of relativity nonsense and would deal with the negative pressure of nothingness. I have no need of inventing any dark matter or dark energy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHave you ever wonder what's beyond the boundaries of the Universe? Void space, not more. Energy always is dispersed towards low energy density spaces. If I would like to try with reality, I would discharge every bit of relativity nonsense and would deal with the negative pressure of nothingness. I have no need of inventing any dark matter or dark energy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is very interesting, I think that Petr HoYava may be on the right track. Time is tied to matter, not space. The is no space-time without matter. Space-time is the motion of matter. Time is no more than comparisons of the motion of matter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd I am sure that HoYava is correct in ruling out singularities, though this does not necessarily mean that the universe "bounces".
He needs to realise that his theory, like mine, implies that "black holes" have to be self-limiting, and as has been observed, periodically stopping feeding. I think that they thus periodially lose matter to form new stars, so that everything in the universe is constantly recycled.
Expansion will ultimately be shown to be an illusion.
Bob Beck
www.einsteins-revolution.com
This is very interesting, I think that Petr Hořava may be on the right track. Time is tied to matter, not space. The is no space-time without matter. Space-time is the motion of matter. Time is no more than comparisons of the motion of matter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd I am sure that Hořava is correct in ruling out singularities, though this does not necessarily mean that the universe "bounces".
He needs to realise that his theory, like mine, implies that "black holes" have to be self-limiting, and as has been observed, periodically stopping feeding. I think that they thus periodially lose matter to form new stars, so that everything in the universe is constantly recycled.
Expansion will ultimately be shown to be an illusion.
Bob Beck
www.einsteins-revolution.com
This does not mean that Einstein was wrong about time or gravity. Most have simply not read enough of what he said to understand that relativity is still universally missunderstood.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFor instance, he actually visualised different types of gravitational field. And time will still vary with speed when space-time is correctly interpreted from all Einstein said as the motion of matter. See the second paper on my website www.einsteins-revolution.com
space/time is not a fabric... neatly woven, but more a glob of fluff, affected by objects with gravity within them; i.e., a solar system.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the history of science there has been an unmistakable trend toward an 'atheistic' understanding of cosmology. By this I mean that with the increase of knowledge there is becoming less and less left for a deity to be responsible for as natural explanations are always found whenever we come to an understanding of any phenomenon in nature. Science and religion are logically irreconcilable because science depends epistemologically on reason and evidence and religion depends on magical thinking and delusion. Religion is itself a fit subject for scientific examination. I offer here a definition of religion; religion: a metaphysical system of superstition and mythology perpetuated via cultural transmission for the relief of existential anxiety and epistemologically dependent on magical thinking and delusion .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisChristina, I totally agree with you.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGravitational lensing proves curved space, not curved space-time. After looking at the experiments that proves curved time, I believe that physicists erred when they say time curves. If we were to define time as different states of matter(in other words, say we call where you're sitting right now "present state", then one heart beat later, we can call it "future state," then the more accurate conclusion is that the rate of change of each state of matter slows down/speeds up, not that time slows down/speeds up.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSimilarly, "aging slower" is not the same as saying "time curves," as one might conclude from the Twin thought experiment.
Gravitational lensing proves curved space, not curved space-time. After looking at the experiments that proves curved time, I believe that physicists erred when they say time curves. If we were to define time as different states of matter(in other words, say we call where you're sitting right now "present state", then one heart beat later, we can call it "future state," then the more accurate conclusion is that the rate of change of each state of matter slows down/speeds up, not that time slows down/speeds up.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSimilarly, "aging slower" is not the same as saying "time curves," as one might conclude from the Twin thought experiment.
Gia Dvali was on the right track when he attempted to segregate Time and Space in an effort to unify the gravity with string theory. What a shame that he back off because of a flawed assumption under lying information vectors and black holes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCould this also confirm my theory of time shadows?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime is an abstraction, conceived as a measurement of rates of change, be it in velocity, force, mass, etc. Stands to reason there will be inconsistencies in measurements from one part of the cosmos to another due to a multi-dimensional web of causation that can never be "measured" in toto. No theory of such measurement can ever completely or accurately take into account the ultimately unknowable.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswe need models and a complete data as well as an explanatory theory to provide a clear understanding of this hypothesis.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRobertW: if preventing sloppy science is 'creeping inefficiency,' then I can only hope that science becomes infinitely 'inefficient.'
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI challenge you to provide a specific example of Dawkins or Sagan harnessing their thoughts to some prevailing philosophy. Your statement makes it clear that you aren't terribly familiar with their actual works.
The 'philosophy' you so detest is directly responsible for creating and underpinning the very 'scientific method' you admire.
Newton, Copernicus and Galleo were required to conform their ideas to prevailing, religiously-sanctioned, 'philosophy' of such thorough-going mystics as Plato and Aristotle. The dark ages were not quite over at the time.
Philosophy has come along way since Plato and Aristotle (and the craptastic adaptations of Thomas Aquinas).
Science (thankfully) no longer operates under such constraints (although, if the American Taliban continues to get their way, the situation could change in the U.S.).
As for philosophy 'proving' science or visa versa: you might do well to follow your own observation and actually study these 'valid' topics. You'd make more sense.
It's interesting that these scientists don't seem to take into consideration Dewey B. Larson's 'Reciprocal System of physical theory' which may in fact account for many of these seemingly anomalous discrepancies.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'll propose the following theory; that Dark Matter is really Anti-Matter. They say that at moment of creation/Big Bang, that equal parts of matter & anti-matter had to be created and that it's a quandary as to where the anti-matter went, right? I speculate that it's right there in front of our eyes! The fact that there are unequal amounts of Dark Matter vs. normal atomic matter can be explained by the action of Black Holes sucking in inordinate amounts of matter. Possibly Anti-Matter has immunity from Black Holes by destroying them if one sucks in Anti-Matter, that would make sense.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think the Anti-Matter would be visible if we were able to take a sort of 'negative' image of the cosmos in some, yet undiscovered method.
I think time is really all in the mind, it's how we perceive change. Time is not the way we think of it, maybe it should have a different name.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMaybe time doesn't exist as we know it. Maybe time is simply change, perhaps motion is time. It takes time to go from point A to point B, so motion wouldn't exist without time, so therefore time is motion. If you go the speed of light then time stops, so maybe the speed of light is "absolute time", which is motion. Maybe it's impossible to have no motion compared to all reference points in the universe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCorrect me if I am wrong but I believe I did see an Einstein theory toppled but it wasn't what Sci Am mentioned. "But he abandoned his model because it allowed information to be communicated faster than the speed of light." Didn't Einstein's model say that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light? I would like to understand this better if I read into any of this wrong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAgree with Sparrow. I find "New Scientist" riddled with such stuff. I hope SciAm does not feel compelled to compete in hyperbole.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisQuestion from a layperson for all you theoretical physics types. If this holds up, does string theory go away? Even from my point of view, string theory always sounded really desperate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree, Eistein didn't "topple" Newton's, he merely made it more accurate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this(please clarify/correct: the name of the physicist is given three different spellings)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMaybe, if the universe did indeed "bounce", this gives some additional validity to Steinhardt and Turok's "bouncing branes" (enabled by a "springy"dimension/powered by the energy from the gravitational field) conception of cosmogenesis.
There seem to be some "reactionism" going on here against popular science writing, or, perhaps a confusion over reference scale. Einstein may not have "toppled" Newton, but his GR did supersede it in the macro-scale universe (where it is convenient to look at space-time as continuous and unified). Now, on the micro-scale (let's call it "sub-Newtonian") universe, QT and GR just don't mesh (Einstein hated the probabilistic nature of quantum outcomes).
If this new theory of quantum gravity holds up to vetting, it will have superseded Einstein on this (micro, i.e., quantum) scale of measurement. Newton is still valid. Einstein is still valid. But just within their respective scales of reference and measurement.
Michael Ricciardi
It would require no energy to accellerate time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf time is acellerating, then the light emitted by stars long ago would appear red shifted under todays faster "clock".
This also would account for dark energy and dark matter, since it does not require any expansion of the universe at all.
Plain old random motion, without beginning or end.
Time accelleration need not have a beginning or end either, since time is not really incremental.
Any ideas how this accelleration might be detected, other than red shift?
i think time is just how long it takes anything to travel from point a to point b , nothing more
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthere seems to me , theres alot of babble about nothing , a bunch of nonsense
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo explain dark enrgy, dark matter, and gravity, I believe that you need to realize that space-time, gravity, dark E, and dark M are different consaquences of the same thing. If gravity effects time (slows time down), then why shouldn't time effect gravity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI believe that time is spread unevenly throughout the universe with areas of high intensity, and low intensity, analogous to high and low pressures in our atmosphere. heavy particals in the air accumulate in low pressure areas, creating vortexes that resemble galaxies.
The accelerating expansion of the universe, is the effect of high intensity time (far from a gravitational field) pushing the galaxies farther apart. The farther apart the more space the faser time gets (time gets more intense).
Dark matter may not be matter at all. It could be explained as areas of low intensity space time that is compressed by surrounding higher intensity space time. Time and gravity are proportional. If time is fast then gravity is low. If gravity is high then time is slow.
Please give me some feed-back on this idea. I'm not a scientist, but I think about this alot.
I believe that dark matter and dark energy are caused by warping of space and time (gravity).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCould time be the medium for waves to travel through a vaccum?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPlease read my balloon inside balloon theory of gravitoethertons . I have long back said in article 6198 that time is entropical phenomena and and it depends on rate of energy droplets flow depending on the level of energy difference as such not absolute but dilated . Einstein in relativity theory assumed wrong application of lorentz to create magic taking into account time as dimension without any logic and we got mesmerized for a century. In the year 2002 , after retirement I got involved in physics and published article 6198 to allert that relativity should be abandoned and time is purely entropical concept. I also said that ether exists which is dark energy but not detectable due to neutral high frequency but low wave length nature . In year 2003 I again wrote a theory of twin universe --balloon inside balloon theory of matter and antimatter universes on opposite entropy path producing gravitoethertons or ether at the common spherical boundary by anihilation of matter and antimatter . I also told that this antimatter universe surrounding our universe is dark matter and gravitoethertons flow in our universe is dark energy. This gravitoethertons flow is many times faster than light and when it get focussed at centre of earth ,we get hot molten core and also due to flow of electrons in iron core we get earths magnetis. This is why I said copenhagen summit is useless due to rise of earths temp. rise slowly due to more gravitoethertons flow rather than carbon emmission. My theory explains why sun corrona is hotter due to flash of gravitoethertons but surface temp is lower. Also sun is powered partly by gravitoethertons and rest by thermo nuclear fusion . Again you see our furthermost galaxies are flying faster due to pull of antimatter universe and we may not be able to see common spherical boundary due the galxies flying faster than light speed. But we must try to understand by observation the violent common boundary zone where gravitoethertons are produced and recently some bright spots of anihilation of matter and antimatter is seen and we may see some more such very very luminious spots. Now in my opinion this gravitoethertons flow cause gravity as well as as laws and constants and all these may be slowly changing. As these twin universes are on unstable equlibrium , we may expect a cyclic contraction and expansion in phases causing different constants and laws and by chance suitable laws may produce life on earth like planet by rare chance and we are here today . This is most amazing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNow after my advice that time should not be considered as dimension , I propose to apply this method in string theory taking polar coordinates instead of cartesian coordinates . Please ensure negativity of antimatter and opposite entropy within manageable dimensions. Time should always be positive and not dimension.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime, gravity, space, enrgy, antigravity, call it what you want, but it seems to me to be the same thing. Is the pressure of these gravitoethertons what pushes galaxies apart and create gravity as a pressure? The idea of 6198 is very interesting. How do I find balloon inside balloon, and twin univers?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisperhaps it is the insertion of the notion of infinity into a closed system meant to be used in measurement and in actual use in the real not the reel world, is the problem. infinity is false.. infinity only exists to explain things larger than what is already know.. this is a far cry from a source of unlimited possibilities... perhaps words in all thier inadequate variations cannot make up something which does..not exist. ask the stock brokers with thier "magic" computer programs of endless wealth, how reality tends to rain and rein down upon the parade . i as a human being have actually been in the 99.99% as measured by the stanford tests and can assure you while it may not look and sound the way you "wood" envision it.. if its reality it does not go away once noticed
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisperhaps it is the idea of the existence of infinity that is incorrect and make the figures quickly fall apart. It seems more reasonable that you don't actually have all the real variables. infinity is false in a closed system or a system used for measurement so the assumption it plays a part in the actual solution is ..false just ask all th ewall stree genie-a$$es how thier magic formulas for perpetual profits worked out in the real, not the reel world. in a real system al posiblities are actually used when all the possibilities they could think of or compute with a computer were exhausted they were left with the reality of the truth maybe. that why as a math whiz growing up i took one look at economics and realized very quickly they were not using sound mathematical principles so i never wasted a second of my time with micro or macro garbage or fudge factors if i need the absolute truth. i myself have been in the 99.99 percentile of the Stanford tests growing up. i may not look like or sound like or act like what other people think i should be but i assure you i am real and perhaps maybe some should ask me what i think to be the facts and why on things...that wood be 2 funny a broken down hillbilly fine artist contributing to physics.. .. i don't study physics i study neuro biology on a very high level ;-)~
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am surprised that this article by Merali of Horava's work didn't rate bigger attention in SciAm's mag. After all, this work upends Einstein's General Realtivity Theory entirely. Einsiein may go down in history as a modern day Aristotle (who was taught and believed for centuries, but was ultimately wrong in most respects). It's gratifying to see that gravity, in fact, exists and is not some figment of some 'warped space-time fabric' nonsence. Maybe Einstein is no Einstein after all.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRegarding 'lensing' being proof of 'warped space time', it could well be that photons are not the massless aprticles assumed. After all, they do have energy, and by the equation E=mc squared, if the left side of the equation is positive, then so is the right side, which can only happen if m is positive. And if m is positive, then it would be subject to gravity as it passed a body, thus producing 'lensing'. Sorry, Einstein
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes , the flow of gravitoethertons in our universe from the common spherical boundary pushing our galaxies apart as as well as our distant galaxies are being pulled by antimatter universe near by surrounding and gravity is the reaction force as per Newtons theory of every action has opposite reaction. That is why the expansion rate is faster and faster as we go to the outer boundary . I also think that gravity is variable and more and more as we go more outwards in our universe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust now I proposed to Dr. Greene of Columbia University to apply my ideas of using polar coordinate and time as purely entropical concept not dimension in his string theory to evolve some workable string theory. Also as my request NASA may look to prove my balloon inside balloon theory of twin universes in their new vision of WISE. Let us wait for the results.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust now I proposed to Dr. Greene of Columbia University to apply my ideas of using polar coordinate and time as purely entropical concept not dimension in his string theory to evolve some workable string theory. Also as my request NASA may look to prove my balloon inside balloon theory of twin universes in their new vision of WISE. Let us wait for the results.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is a very promising theory. It explains how gravity gets quantized, it matches computer simulations, it connects to dark matter and dark energy. And it was discussed at Perimeter. I am eager to see the promise on solving the credit crisis and global warming problems, to mention a few.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat is beautiful!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat is gravity is just a sensation of motion? Like how the sensation of touch is really just our human perception of time(motion).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGravity is Time. And to us, time is everything. Maybe we should get rid of a few theories, or at least unwrap them completely before we decide to use them.
The Time
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI go a little further ahead.
Time is not a measurable entity, as a distance is.
A distance is measured with another distance, for instance, an inch.
Time does not exist. It is a ratio, a category of the human knowledge procedure (Kant).
The unit of time, is not a portion of time, is a movement.
A "second" is the "duration"(Tautology) of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom. Electromagnetic vibration is a "movement".
What we call "time is the comparison of two movements.
Time is always related to one observer.
That is why Einsteins two observers have different time estimations.
That is why a particle can "be" at the same "time" in two different separate places, following the quantum theories.
The absolute time of Newton fails because the mobile whose movement is the unit of time can not be real, it is not real.
Considering the "time" this new way( new for me), we will be able to establish new theories to interpret the physical world.
Arturo P�rez Rodr�guez
Dr. Industrial Engineer.
Curious. At the beginning this thread thronged with, I believe, non-Sicam readers venting their hatred of science and scientists.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThen that morphed into a throng of people with their own pet Theories of Everything instead of discussing Horava's. Horava is a physicist at a prestigious university. I get the impression most of the pet theory shoppers are no more physicists than I am.
I have zero interest in TOEs being promoted by nonpractitioners in the field, touting their notions in public forums instead of going through the peer review process to get published in real physics journals, then get reported on in good laymen-oriented publications such as SciAm.
TOE spammers are wasting their time and ours. I keep plowing through the ranting looking for actual comments about Horava. They're there but you have to dig through mucho nonsense.
For my part I realize I have no say and no ability to advance theoretical physics, but I find Horava's work exciting and inherently more elegant than dark matter/energy concepts. So I'm rooting for Horava from the sidelines.But if it loses eventually, so be it.
One thing I like about Scientific American is that I get the impression they talk about science innovations once they've established themselves somewhat. I don't want to hear about all the dead ends and superficial speculation.
So this article on Horava gravity is the right length for its level of establishment so far. It seems to have enough heft to be worth me reading about, but not enough for a feature article yet. And it gives me something to ponder every time I see articles about dark matter/energy.
Intelligence is knowing what you know.
Wisdom is knowing what you don't know.
Google my name to find my blog.
Is time not a unit of measurement created by man to give a point of reference to the passage of events? Does energy itself not have mass and therefore contribute to the mass of the universe? If gravity "could" be categorize as an energy of sorts, could it be a contributing mass to the universe? Energy can not be created or destroyed only transferred there is no constant, only motion being acted upon by every other motion. The universe is a big place and a lot of motion making it difficult to make anything a point of reference. There are many theories out there, each one only a small piece of a very large puzzle. The trick is figuring out how all the pieces fit.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat if Time is the "equal and opposite force" of gravity as we pass through space?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf this will tie to together the very large with the very small. It could be a useful tool. Mathematical consequences should prove it out one way or the other. Dark matter may be no more than the stellar wind of billions of stars, with 10 Billion plus years there must be a great deal of dust (as it were) leading the way, out beyond the farthest stars. The math is a little tough but Einstein said "if you can not explain it simply then you do not understand well enough".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf this will tie together the very large (Theory of Relativity), and the very small (Quantum Mechanics) then it will prove to be a very useful tool. Mathematical consequences will prove it out one way or the other. Dark matter and the acceleration of the expanding universe could be explained by stellar wind. Multiplying the millions of billions of stars and the 10 plus billion years, there must be a great deal of gas and dust rapidly expanding out beyond the furthest stars. (this gas and dust must have gravitational consequences.) As Einstein said "If you cant explain it simply then you don't understand it well enough".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf we accept Biblical possibilities, note several references to 'God stretching out the universe' and 'surrounding Himself with dark clouds'. Dark matter/energy would be a place where God might exist, the laws of entropy do not, and the source of all visible matter and creation. Some of the formulas show transfer of energy beween dark energy and visible matter to take place faster than the speed of light: Not a problem if the source of dark energy has no time and space restrictions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf we accept biblical possibilities, we have no need to hopscotch through the bible for verses. "In the beginning" places God as transcendent, (hovering over), and that from which He creates is "empty, void, formless, dark". To put it simply God creates out of "Nothingness". Hence when we look into the abyss of matter and the underlying forces of the universe what we eventually come to is "nothingness". Leave this for a moment as the overall reality and now lets look at human perception.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe mind of man is both fed and conditioned by the senses. Senses are geared to perceive obstructions to reality and not reality itself. i.e. "Sound" is an obstruction, temporal, fleeting, finite. Behind sound there is the macro context of silence, infinite, and although it is no-thing yet it exist with more REALity than any sound. The nature of our conditioned thinking is to place the VALUE of reality upon sound while perceiving silence as emptiness. So as many look for the ultimate REALity in science, "nothingness" is abhorrent to their mind. When science hits this nothingness as in the gravitational infinities, dark matter, whatever, their minds, conditioned by their senses, always seeks a "THING", and so they must develop theories to find their way around what is generally an abyss.
Reality as we understand it possess two basic realms, the world of physical phenomenon, matter, etc. and the realm of universal laws, time, space, etc. Wherein we delve with the help of mathematics. Biblically these are expressed as the Heavens and the Earth and these two realms are created thus, first Time (unidirectional), Space (multidirectional), Gravity (Potential localities), and Life (consciousness). From these four heavenly forces arise all of the world of phenomenon, planets, etc., and the latter always dependent upon the former. And beneath it all these Nothingness symbolized by water, formlessness, etc.
God on the other hand, as creator, exists apart from the nothingness from which He creates, as the Infinite exists transcendent to the finite in which we exists as mere localities in time and space. But the infinite is rarely understood as the materially conditioned mind thinks of the Infinite as mere potential, time never ceasing, rather than the eternally complete and undivided transcendent context, in which the finite (Creation) is merely a ripple. The Dark clouds to which you refer is therefore the nothingness of the created which blinds us to the everything of the infinite.
So would this new theory make the concept of time travel more or less likely?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd, of course a related question would be: would this theory allow for faster than light travel?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm not a scientist/physicist, but it seems intuitive that time and space are interlinked, because it is insufficient to say *where* an object is without also saying *when* it is there. At the quantum level, though, I dunno. I don't understand string theory, though if it means that when "blobs" of energy get large enough to affect other forms of energy around it, then it has mass and therefore becomes a physical object, then something like that I could understand.
Manipulating time is intriguing to me, and not just because that may be the only way I can get my hair back. ;)
Energy moves through macroscopic spacetime in waves we are told. But when energy waves hit matter they move in quantum jerks, behaving outside as waves and inside as particles.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo wonder things get complicated at the interfaces!
We are used to thinking of gravity as an energetic force, yet gravity is said to be merely the manifestation of mass on space-time. No wonder the grand unification is proving to be elusive!
I wonder.. If time can exist independent of space, what is it really, then?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think of time as just a way to express relations between events in space, but if it can also exist independent of any kind of motion of objects in space, what defines it in that case?
By current definition, you wouldn't even be able to measure time without space, since the definition of a second involves energy level transitions in an atom, an event involving matter and space, and second is the base unit of time.
i
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisQ. Do radioactive elements decay at different rates depending on their relative velocities?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMore simply put, would identical atomic clocks run at different rates if one was Earth bound and one was in orbit?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust a dumb question that could determine if time dilation only affected the motions of objects (as in an (electro)mechanical clock), or whether quantum processes, such as nuclear decay, were also affected by macro velocity.
As sometime happens, I answered my own dumb question by recalling that unstable fundamental particles are commonly detected at elevation on Earth, produced by the interactions of cosmic rays with the upper atmosphere. Their detection occurs despite the fact that their Earth bound decay rate would prevent them from persisting long enough to travel from the upper atmosphere to their detection location. Their persistence is extended relative to Earth time by their velocity. So, relative velocity does affect the quantum process of decay.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis observational evidence alone argumentally supports the notions that:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this- Time is produced by energy that also produces motion and creates space, and its progression rate is inversely proportional to the kinetic expression of that energy.
- Space and time are related only to the extent that each is produced by the kinetic expression of the same energy. In the example above, an elementary particle passed through the space associated with Earth, but was not subjected to its time progression.
- The affects of the relative velocity of motion are extended to quantum scales, affecting quantum processes.
My theory of gravitoethertons that is ether-gravity theory published in year 2002 in ASTRONOMY.NET explains everything in this article and must be read to understand our balloon inside balloon twin cyclic universes of matter and antimatter on opposite entropy path producing gravitoethertons that is ether at the common spherical boundary by annihilation of matter and antimatter . So ether is vacuum energy of exotic form which can be continuum single entity of unparticled energy where our quantum physics is dancing in entanglement and we are unable to visualise . But the effect of gravity is felt as well as expansion of our universe due to opposite equal reaction of gravity as expansion of the universe. All our co related and we have slowly march ahead on my gravitoetherton theory Cosmos observation like distant galaxies flying faster, magnetism of earth due to focus of ether flow at the centre of earth producing hot iron core and flow of electrons to give a dynamism magnetic effect on earth. So hot iron core and magnetism can be explained. SO ETHER IS THEORY OF EVERYTHING WHICH I PUBLISHED IN YEAR 2002 IN ASTRONOMY.COM WHICH SHOULD BE READ AND PUBLISHED AGAIN. If we do not consider TIME as dimension and apply modified relativity and quantum physics in light of my gravitoethertons theory, then our approach will be better and Dr. Roger Penrose may like to work further to develop a new theory with his genus mathematical skill as PHYSICS IS NOT WRONG TOTALLY with my suggested modification.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGravity Simplified
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
A. E=Total[m(1 + D)]
Is the relationship between the cosmic energy(E), mass(m), and spatial expansion distance(D) since the cataclysmic E/m superposition resolution.
At 10^-35 seconds since big bang, D was already a fraction of a second above zero. This is when gravity started. This is what started gravity. At this instance started the energy space texture, the straining of space texture, and started the space-texture-memory, gravity, that most probably will eventually overcome expansion and initiate impansion back to singularity, again.
The clusters of galaxies behave as accelerating classical Newtonian bodies. Their motion is fueled with energy from myriads of mass-to-energy reconversions, in intertwined evolutions within the clusters.
B. The mass-to-energy reconversions continuously diminish m, as D continuously increases
The energy spent on increasing D, the clusters expansion, becomes the potential impansion energy that will eventually re-form singularity. This is gravity. This is the striving of the resolved-from-energy mass to return to its sigularity wholeness.
m are ALL cosmic formats of mass, regardless of size and complexity, including astronomic-to-smallest-particle bodies and all energy-mass organizations such as black holes environs, biospheres-lifes, all sizes and varieties of spin-arrays.
C. Mass is destined to dis-exist. It attempts to postpone-survive this by ingesting of energy
The cosmic expansion will eventually nearly run out of fuel-energy, when at some value of D it will be overcome by gravity and impansion will thus set in. The universe will then revert towards singularity. D will go on a diminishing course and m will enter a growing course of evolution, very different from the present cosmic evolution course.
D. Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
The universe came into being with inflation, with the onset of gravity. Gravity has been setting the course and nature of all the aspects of its evolution. Gravity will eventually terminate cosmic expansion and reverse the course of cosmic evolution.
Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
28Dec09 Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)]
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/184.page#4587
Cosmic Evolution Simplified
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427
As long as we are at a point where human consciousness could very well be a physical/temporal force of the universe, there are going to be religious comments popping in. But those comments don't necessarily mean or imply this 'guy' above the clouds smiting and whipping miracles all over the place and spreading a tasty dressing on sandwiches. You just have to ask people what they mean, you know, converse, agree, disagree, prove, disprove, interact. That stuff.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is encouraging that my publication in ASTRONOMY.NET in year 2002 ,where theory of gravitoethertons that is ether-gravity -dark energy theory and balloon inside balloon theory was published . Recent gravity theory is on the same approach but it can now be clearly stated as I have done in balloon inside balloon theory . In simple worda we may say as I have done in year 2002 and sent a copy to all scientists that we live in ether as fish live in water. So our space is ether. This ether is flowing much faster than light speed towards center of earth causing gravity on all objects. Ether is not dragable due to high frequency exotic high speed , so Michelsons experiment give null result. Einstein is wrong to assume his postulates and application of Lorentz in Michelsons equation. Relativity theory is basically wrong and may be locally confirmative. Empty space is ether and ether is dark energy causing expansion of our universe. Entropy of our matter universe is increasing but entropy of outer anti matter universe is decreasing and when it tends to zero , another recycle takes place by bounce giving new laws etc . and cosmic background radiation is of this bounce and not of big bang. Ether is produced by annihilation of matter and antimatter at the common spherical boundary of these twin universes. So it is being injected from all sides in our universe to cause expansion. Discarding ether and qualifying time as dimension with space is big mistake . Space-time continuum is big mistake and time and space are separate. Time should be treated only entropical and dilating from point to point in space . This things I said long back in various reports and comments to enlighten our scientists. It is good that new gravity theory is taking a shape as vibrating gravitoethertons or string in spherical co ordinates separating time from space so that my vision of a theory of everything based on discarded ether but considering now dark energy in empty space may one day bring my name also with the new physics of to morrow. If you open --durgadas datta facebook-- then you will get the links to read my theories and any comments may be sent to my e-mail: durgadas.datta@gmail.com
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGravity is Twisted
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOkay...take your boot, hold it up by the lace, letting the boot dangle, and start twisting the tip of the lace as fast as you can with your thumb and finger.
Now, it takes a bit for the boot itself to start spinning, because of its larger size. Keep twisting! Twist faster! Now, notice what you have been twisting is the lace in the, which is starting to bundle up and pull the boot upwards. This upward motion, brought on by your fingers twisting furiously the end of the lace, is gravity. What you are looking at is Gravity and how it relates physically with two different measurements of time. Fast to slow. The tension throughout the lace, twisted and spread down from your fingers to the slowly spinning boot, represents the pulling motion we feel on earth, downward. We are slowly being wound from the feet up. Now, the faster you twist the more the boot rises, even though it is spinning much slower. (Like how a small gear must go faster to propel the larger gear.) The lace is the binding element between the two speeds.
Now imagine this....imagine that the lace is everywhere, all being twisted, all being pulled downward and upward, twisted along the threads of light or photons or reality as we know it.
Gravity is deeply twisted.
Gravity is Twisted
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOkay...take your boot, hold it up by the lace, letting the boot dangle, and start twisting the tip of the lace as fast as you can with your thumb and finger.
Now, it takes a bit for the boot itself to start spinning, because of its larger size. Keep twisting! Twist faster! Now, notice what you have been twisting is the lace in the, which is starting to bundle up and pull the boot upwards. This upward motion, brought on by your fingers twisting furiously the end of the lace, is gravity. What you are looking at is Gravity and how it relates physically with two different measurements of time. Fast to slow. The tension throughout the lace, twisted and spread down from your fingers to the slowly spinning boot, represents the pulling motion we feel on earth, downward. We are slowly being ‘wound’ from the feet up. Now, the faster you twist the more the boot rises, even though it is spinning much slower. (Like how a small gear must go faster to propel the larger gear.) The lace is the binding element between the two speeds.
Now imagine this....imagine that the lace is everywhere, all being twisted, all being pulled downward and upward, twisted along the threads of light or photons or reality as we know it.
Gravity is deeply twisted.
I have published my suggestions in year 2002 by several articles and sent copy to scientists where I told that Einstein is basically wrong. Ether is dark energy which cannot be dragged and assuming the postulates of Einstein is a wrong step. Again application of Lorentz transform in Michelsons equation can not be granted . If you do not apply this transform then time and space is separate . This space-time continuum is odd concept which suggests warping ,bending of space which should be explained by my ether-gravity-dark energy theory as ether whirls and time is separate and entropical phenomena. These views I have submitted in ASTRONOMY.NET in year 2002 and I also explained that gravitoethertons which is new name given to ether or vacuum energy is continuously produced by annihilation of matter and antimatter at common spherical boundary of our matter universe and outer antimatter universe. This antimatter is dark matter and gravitoethertons is dark energy in our equations. So unless we are very clear in our concept as suggested by me in year 2002 , we will not be able to look forward based on Einstein concept. Ho Yava is working on my suggestions and may be he will formulate broad mathematical framework of quantum gravity as I advised him way back in year 2002 . Those who are interested to read my theories can get the links in --durgadas datta facebook --or in ASTRONOMY .NET publications in year 2002 and 2003 and look for links and developments in Ho Yavas new quantum gravity .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo correct.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf we go back to translating gravity back to Newtonian format we can get results that technically agree exactly with general relativity ( where GTR has been thoroughly tested), but avoid all those unwieldly singularities . See: An advanced dynamic adaptation of Newtonian equations of gravity. Physiscs Essays 21: 222-228.
Then we can go directly to advanced quantum gravity and explain both dark matter and " dark energy". See: String quinmtessence and the formulation of advanced quantum gravity.mPhysics Essays. 22: 364-367.
Alignment theory.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.becomereal.com/quantum_relativity.htm
In my view, this explains the constant or invariant speed of light. Light exists in a separate domain, and is therefore resistant to aligning with the "realm of mass" (or Spatial reality). Light simply refuses to align with the realm of mass, and this causes light to be independent of it. The anti-alignment vibration of light is part of its nature, and relative comparitive speeds, if accomplished at below light speed, have no effect upon light speed transmission. The example of a spaceship traveling at .5 C relative to light is applicatble here, speeds are not additive, nor can they be subtracted relative to light speed. The fields surrounding mass and light are therefore quite different, and cannot be combined. It also explains red and blue shifts, as the continuing refusal of light to align with anything other than its own reality.
lignment theory.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.becomereal.com/quantum_relativity.htm
In my view, this explains the constant or invariant speed of light. Light exists in a separate domain, and is therefore resistant to aligning with the "realm of mass" (or Spatial reality). Light simply refuses to align with the realm of mass, and this causes light to be independent of it. The anti-alignment vibration of light is part of its nature, and relative comparitive speeds, if accomplished at below light speed, have no effect upon light speed transmission. The example of a spaceship traveling at .5 C relative to light is applicatble here, speeds are not additive, nor can they be subtracted relative to light speed. The fields surrounding mass and light are therefore quite different, and cannot be combined. It also explains red and blue shifts, as the continuing refusal of light to align with anything other than its own reality.
The theory that permits G to be calculated rather than merely measured will be the right one.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTHE MIRAGE OF MODERN COSMOLOGY
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1. Time is out of the logical equation.
2. Black holes are out of the logical equation.
3. Traditional gravity is out of the logical equation.
4. Antigravity is out of the logical equation.
4. Antimatter is out of the logical equation
So what is left to be counted for in the Universe?
1. Eternal motion
2. Electric explosions.
3. Magnetic fields caused by the electric explosions.
4. Magnetic fields bend the motions in gas and matter.(Bending "space-time")
5. Magnetic fields that in-folds and out-folds gas and matter.
6. "Gravity" is just magnetic fields that assembles and distributes gas and matter. "Gravity" goes both ways.
7. No anti this or that is needed in order to explain the motions in the Universe.
It all is just that simple!
THE MIRAGE OF MODERN COSMOLOGY
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1. Time is out of the logical equation.
2. Black holes are out of the logical equation.
3. Traditional gravity is out of the logical equation.
4. Antigravity is out of the logical equation.
4. Antimatter is out of the logical equation
So what is left to be counted for in the Universe?
1. Eternal motion
2. Electric explosions.
3. Magnetic fields caused by the electric explosions.
4. Magnetic fields bend the motions in gas and matter.(Bending "space-time")
5. Magnetic fields that in-folds and out-folds gas and matter.
6. "Gravity" is just magnetic fields that assembles and distributes gas and matter. "Gravity" goes both ways.
7. No anti this or that is needed in order to explain the motions in the Universe.
It all is just that simple!
http://bradkcmo.tripod.com/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf anyone cares...
Is time the measure of the speed of matter thru space?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswithout radial motion does time exist?
If you can travel thru space at speeds over 25% of the speed of light does that mean you can travel into the future of any particular planet that you leave and come back to. What is the most abundant energy in the universe Light or Gravity
How much mass does light or gravity carry across the universe. What effect do subatomic particles (ejected from stars during intense sunspot activity)have on "open space". Are they uniform or in streams and eddies and what do they do to bend light and gravity?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGravity defined correctly: Empty space, is not totally empty. It is the least amount of "something" that there is, but it is something. The "something" that it is, is fuel for atoms.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAtomic particles "eat" the fabric of space, and that is the "fuel" that keeps atoms condensed and active.
The fabric of space transports "nuclear (light) waves" in the same way that air molecules radiate/disperse/transport sound waves. These nuclear waves include all of the vibrations that travel at the speed of light.
Sound waves travel slower than light waves, because air is much denser than the fabric of space (some mathemetician out there should c.
When you put enough matter together into a cohesive "ball", the pressure from the incoming "wind" caused by the massive consumption of space fabric, can create enough pressure to start destroying the atomic structures of matter. This "explosion" of atoms is the "nuclear furnace", and the resultant high-frequency vibrations of the fabric of space, are what make up the entire electromagnetic range of frequencies (vibration cycles/levels.)
As the atoms of a star have their strutcure torn apart, the star will shrink in size. Eventually, the shrinking star will be consuming space fabric faster than "the speed of light", and will then become a "black hole."
The speed of light, is not an unbreakable speed, it is simply a speed at which the fabric of space dissipatee energy.
The key to traveling faster than the speed of light, will be to "punch a hole" into the fabric of space that is right in front of you, and ride (be drawn into) the (true) vacuum in front of you.
I saw a show on TV today, where they described Einstein's dream (thought experiment) about traveling away from earth at the speed of light, and how the hands of a clock on a tower in his village would stop moving (if you could observe them), and he interpreted this as some sort of "time" travel.
This is a mis-interpretation of the vision that was revealed to him.
Many years ago, I also had a "mental vision", when slipping into a trance-like state while pondering the universe.
The resaon that the clock in Einstein's imagination/inspiration (gift?) stopped moving, is that he was traveling at the same speed away from the clock tower, as was the light waves that bounced off of it, at his "moment" of acceleration.
The clock, back on Earth, was continuing to advance.
Time travel is not possible for anything composed of matter.
JT
time relitive to speed. any ancient asternaut believers out there? dont get me wrong i believe in aliens, but what if they never came here. perhaps we have already went back in time and dident even know it. maybe on your plane trip from new york to LA your tavels where witnessed by the dinosours. has anyone seen the egyptian hieroglyphics of the helicopter? no way that was random an why would aliens use such craft? it was us. helicopters dont move fast, but their prapellers do. could this speed cause (or increase the chances of) a flux in time? i believe the ancients saw these crafts, but sadly, and happily, im believeing less that they where aliens.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthis idea stupid or genius? ive taken the theory further, but i dont wanna bore you.
JTackett - I agree with some of your conceptions. That spacetime expands surely requires energy contained 'within' spacetime. That 'virtual' particles and antiparticles are observed to materialize and annihilate each other surely indicates that than some energy was required for their production (no imaginary multidimensional exchanges, please!).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhile general relativity describes the gravitational effect in terms of a system of spacetime coordinates, no physical entity was defined. How can abstract dimensional coordinates alter the motions of matter and vice versa?
Surely there's something missing - in the 'vacuum'!
Isaac Newton was parially correct while Einstein should have remained a patent clerk. For centuries, scientists have been chasing a mysterious force for that doesn't actually exists and in the past century, every nutcase with hopes of making a name for himself has come out of the woodwork espousing theories which can't be proven because they're just plain wron. Einstein is included in that peanut gallery. Because of such people, physics has become as ludicrous in its ideals as religion has. If you want to know EXACTLY what gravity really is, as well as how and why it works in the manner in which it does, read the following book:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.amazon.com/Treatise-Relativity-Perspective-Relative-Cosmology/dp/1456379399/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1295114630&sr=1-1
It occurs to me that maybe time is more digital, whilst space is analog.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDigital, sort of like a plank based time sense. But are there smaller units than plank? Consider a fractal--does it continue on forever, layer after repeating layer, or does it stop when it reaches the plank "limit"? A plank unit may be dimensionless for large beings such as ourselves, yet to infinitessimal particles, it may be comparitively larger.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDown the rabbit hole. Are there smaller units of digital information? How compressed can information be?
What we have to realize is it is ok if we fall into the realms of infinity. Infinity is not a wrong answer. I do not believe time and space are the same entity. It just makes math easier and it seems it also makes it harder, same as Planck units. It all boils down to time follows energy. Time is created with the expansion force of the last big bang, energy traveling into positive time. For a collapsing force to exist in the form of gravity means time also exists as a collapsing force, negative time. Space is just a byproduct formed from the difference between these two opposing forces.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEveryone keeps talking about the speed of light as being the Holy Grail but ignore special relativity. If an entity was traveling faster than the speed of light right in front of us we would only see it traveling at the speed of light because its personal clock would slow down. It would quantify using all of its own time in its own personal universal moment. I believe a personal universal moment is dictated by the collapsing force of spheres of dark energy one after another at the speed of light. The more mass an entity has traveling into positive expanding time the more encapsulations it will have pulling it into negative time creating gravity. It does not get any simpler than that.
Does quantum scale not mesh with large scale because of the phase transition that occurs at the scale where quantum effects overtake intuitive observation?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisQuantum Time Parallel
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswritten by: Johnny Luckett
I see many reality's traveling side by side as the universe expands, and our planet spins. The electromagnetic distortion of space-time can only be imagined at the quantum level. Let me explain... if you could take a mirror and reflect the earth turning... the reflection would reverse the spheres direction, thus making it appear to be going backwards, as if time had reversed. Now take an electron... and the positron, think of them as mirror image's of each other. ( Time Reversed Counterparts) please note: The emission of a particle is exactly equivalent to the absorption of it's antiparticle. If this is true, (and I think it is) we have the beginning ingredients of space-time travel.
Now, I must explain something before I go farther. Due to it's light speed, the proton has no sense of time as we know it. I feel that this is the flower to our quantum-time-cake. Electromagnetic radiation See's everything at once... so it's logical to say that a proton can travel thousands of earth years without time (as we know it) passing at all.
With that said, I will now intensify what I'm saying. Hence, an electron is moving forward through space-time... then suddenly it hits a proton! (naturally traveling at light speed) It then absorbs an electron, reversing it back through time until it suddenly emits an intergenic proton. It recoils, sending it forward again. Time travel could be achieved, but I feel going into the past might not be like the movie "Back To The Future".
I feel you would find another you, and a very different past, present, and future. In fact... I think that there are billions and trillions of reality time combinations. The reality you are in right now is real... then in a moment, it's gone, becoming nonexistent.
From time to time, I do feel that protons do pop in and out of existence. the best example is the so-called ghost story's that you hear about. I believe that this phenomena is caused by energy bursts, combined with some sort of atmospheric condition.
I have been asked if I believe in spirits... or a creator of all things, the answer is yes... I do. Everything that is created, most certainly has a creator. And it also is logical to say that pure energy (a spirit) can never die. It can only be transformed to another place... maybe to another Quantum Time Parallel.
Quantum Time Parallel
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswritten by: Johnny Luckett
I see many reality's traveling side by side as the universe expands, and our planet spins. The electromagnetic distortion of space-time can only be imagined at the quantum level. Let me explain... if you could take a mirror and reflect the earth turning... the reflection would reverse the spheres direction, thus making it appear to be going backwards, as if time had reversed. Now take an electron... and the positron, think of them as mirror image's of each other. ( Time Reversed Counterparts) please note: The emission of a particle is exactly equivalent to the absorption of it's antiparticle. If this is true, (and I think it is) we have the beginning ingredients of space-time travel.
Now, I must explain something before I go farther. Due to it's light speed, the proton has no sense of time as we know it. I feel that this is the flower to our quantum-time-cake. Electromagnetic radiation See's everything at once... so it's logical to say that a proton can travel thousands of earth years without time (as we know it) passing at all.
With that said, I will now intensify what I'm saying. Hence, an electron is moving forward through space-time... then suddenly it hits a proton! (naturally traveling at light speed) It then absorbs an electron, reversing it back through time until it suddenly emits an intergenic proton. It recoils, sending it forward again. Time travel could be achieved, but I feel going into the past might not be like the movie "Back To The Future".
I feel you would find another you, and a very different past, present, and future. In fact... I think that there are billions and trillions of reality time combinations. The reality you are in right now is real... then in a moment, it's gone, becoming nonexistent.
From time to time, I do feel that protons do pop in and out of existence. the best example is the so-called ghost story's that you hear about. I believe that this phenomena is caused by energy bursts, combined with some sort of atmospheric condition.
I have been asked if I believe in spirits... or a creator of all things, the answer is yes... I do. Everything that is created, most certainly has a creator. And it also is logical to say that pure energy (a spirit) can never die. It can only be transformed to another place... maybe to another Quantum Time Parallel.
Quantum Time Parallel
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswritten by: Johnny Luckett
I see many reality's traveling side by side as the universe expands, and our planet spins. The electromagnetic distortion of space-time can only be imagined at the quantum level. Let me explain... if you could take a mirror and reflect the earth turning... the reflection would reverse the spheres direction, thus making it appear to be going backwards, as if time had reversed. Now take an electron... and the positron, think of them as mirror image's of each other. ( Time Reversed Counterparts) please note: The emission of a particle is exactly equivalent to the absorption of it's antiparticle. If this is true, (and I think it is) we have the beginning ingredients of space-time travel.
Now, I must explain something before I go farther. Due to it's light speed, the proton has no sense of time as we know it. I feel that this is the flower to our quantum-time-cake. Electromagnetic radiation See's everything at once... so it's logical to say that a proton can travel thousands of earth years without time (as we know it) passing at all.
With that said, I will now intensify what I'm saying. Hence, an electron is moving forward through space-time... then suddenly it hits a proton! (naturally traveling at light speed) It then absorbs an electron, reversing it back through time until it suddenly emits an intergenic proton. It recoils, sending it forward again. Time travel could be achieved, but I feel going into the past might not be like the movie "Back To The Future".
I feel you would find another you, and a very different past, present, and future. In fact... I think that there are billions and trillions of reality time combinations. The reality you are in right now is real... then in a moment, it's gone, becoming nonexistent.
From time to time, I do feel that protons do pop in and out of existence. the best example is the so-called ghost story's that you hear about. I believe that this phenomena is caused by energy bursts, combined with some sort of atmospheric condition.
I have been asked if I believe in spirits... or a creator of all things, the answer is yes... I do. Everything that is created, most certainly has a creator. And it also is logical to say that pure energy (a spirit) can never die. It can only be transformed to another place... maybe to another Quantum Time Parallel.
Quantum Time Parallel
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswritten by: Johnny Luckett
I see many reality's traveling side by side as the universe expands, and our planet spins. The electromagnetic distortion of space-time can only be imagined at the quantum level. Let me explain... if you could take a mirror and reflect the earth turning... the reflection would reverse the spheres direction, thus making it appear to be going backwards, as if time had reversed. Now take an electron... and the positron, think of them as mirror image's of each other. ( Time Reversed Counterparts) please note: The emission of a particle is exactly equivalent to the absorption of it's antiparticle. If this is true, (and I think it is) we have the beginning ingredients of space-time travel.
Now, I must explain something before I go farther. Due to it's light speed, the proton has no sense of time as we know it. I feel that this is the flower to our quantum-time-cake. Electromagnetic radiation See's everything at once... so it's logical to say that a proton can travel thousands of earth years without time (as we know it) passing at all.
With that said, I will now intensify what I'm saying. Hence, an electron is moving forward through space-time... then suddenly it hits a proton! (naturally traveling at light speed) It then absorbs an electron, reversing it back through time until it suddenly emits an intergenic proton. It recoils, sending it forward again. Time travel could be achieved, but I feel going into the past might not be like the movie "Back To The Future".
I feel you would find another you, and a very different past, present, and future. In fact... I think that there are billions and trillions of reality time combinations. The reality you are in right now is real... then in a moment, it's gone, becoming nonexistent.
From time to time, I do feel that protons do pop in and out of existence. the best example is the so-called ghost story's that you hear about. I believe that this phenomena is caused by energy bursts, combined with some sort of atmospheric condition.
I have been asked if I believe in spirits... or a creator of all things, the answer is yes... I do. Everything that is created, most certainly has a creator. And it also is logical to say that pure energy (a spirit) can never die. It can only be transformed to another place... maybe to another Quantum Time Parallel.
Quantum Time Parallel
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswritten by: Johnny Luckett
I see many reality's traveling side by side as the universe expands, and our planet spins. The electromagnetic distortion of space-time can only be imagined at the quantum level. Let me explain... if you could take a mirror and reflect the earth turning... the reflection would reverse the spheres direction, thus making it appear to be going backwards, as if time had reversed. Now take an electron... and the positron, think of them as mirror image's of each other. ( Time Reversed Counterparts) please note: The emission of a particle is exactly equivalent to the absorption of it's antiparticle. If this is true, (and I think it is) we have the beginning ingredients of space-time travel.
Now, I must explain something before I go farther. Due to it's light speed, the proton has no sense of time as we know it. I feel that this is the flower to our quantum-time-cake. Electromagnetic radiation See's everything at once... so it's logical to say that a proton can travel thousands of earth years without time (as we know it) passing at all.
With that said, I will now intensify what I'm saying. Hence, an electron is moving forward through space-time... then suddenly it hits a proton! (naturally traveling at light speed) It then absorbs an electron, reversing it back through time until it suddenly emits an intergenic proton. It recoils, sending it forward again. Time travel could be achieved, but I feel going into the past might not be like the movie "Back To The Future".
I feel you would find another you, and a very different past, present, and future. In fact... I think that there are billions and trillions of reality time combinations. The reality you are in right now is real... then in a moment, it's gone, becoming nonexistent.
From time to time, I do feel that protons do pop in and out of existence. the best example is the so-called ghost story's that you hear about. I believe that this phenomena is caused by energy bursts, combined with some sort of atmospheric condition.
I have been asked if I believe in spirits... or a creator of all things, the answer is yes... I do. Everything that is created, most certainly has a creator. And it also is logical to say that pure energy (a spirit) can never die. It can only be transformed to another place... maybe to another Quantum Time Parallel.
I am new to this and just love the retoric...our conception of time and space is just that...particles(??) can be in two or more places at the same time thus time does not exist??
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime is a part of the measuring system used to sequence events, to compare the durations of events and the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change such as the motions of objects. The temporal position of events with respect to the transitory present is continually changing; future events become present, then pass further and further into the past. So if time is motion and motion is energy then time is energy this being said then time is a limitless pool of energy In physics, energy is an indirectly observed quantity. It is often understood as the ability a physical system has to do work on other physical systems. Since work is defined as a force acting through a distance (a length of space), energy is always equivalent to the ability to exert pulls or pushes against the basic forces of nature, along a path of a certain length. Now as a physical system it can be manipulate things around it and alternatively it can be manipulated. the equation of motion to force is f=m meaning that the force to move and object must be equal to or greater than the mass of an object now knowing this then the amount of force needed to manipulate time must be equal or greater then the force that time places on the universe so time travel as well as mutiverse travel is completely feasible.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe multiverse (or meta-universe, metaverse) is the hypothetical set of multiple possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them. The term was coined in 1895 by the American philosopher and psychologist William James. The various universes within the multiverse are sometimes called parallel universe. Now each of the different parallel versus are based of each choice we make or don't make think "every action has an equal reaction". Now if we can use the above theory to manipulate time then we can make choices based off of the impact they have on the future and return to said point in time if the outcome is less then satisfactory. This would allow us to experience the different universes at or leaser. This "parallel" universes will continue on as if nothing happened even if your personal "path" has changed. Each of the verses are preserved by the person experiencing them even if we are all in the same time/space we are not necessarily experiencing the same verses, depending on the choices you make is when the verses split changing the individual "path". Using time manipulation we can get a cosmic "Mulligan" allowing us to remake the choices and changing our individual perception of our course in time and space.
DURGADAS DATTA published a few papers in ASTRONOMY.NET in year 2002 and sent to many scientists including HO YAVA and PMI,CANADA. The papers are-1//-MISJUDGEMENTS BY NEWTON --2//- BALLOON INSIDE BALLOON THEORY OF MATTER AND ANTIMATTER UNIVERSE ON OPPOSITE ENTROPY PATH PRODUCING GRAVITOETHERTONS AT COMMON BOUNDARY AND INJECTED INTO OUR UNIVERSE AS DARK ENERGY. These articles were published long back and DR.HO YAVA has discussed these articles in PMI,CANADA as requested by DR.DATTA BUT NOW HE CLAIMS THAT THESE ARE HIS ORIGINAL IDEAS.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat a great article and comments.I only wish there had been more about the theory,a little more meat if you will.Let my comment start with what space is,it still has not been defined,and I believe that once space is fully defined TOE will fall in place quickly.I think it is the base and controller of all things.It appears to be some kind of fluid flowing around and through matter and energy.I believe that when we are looking at the wave function of an object we are looking at space,and when we look at particle function we are looking at mass.that is why we can't look at both at the same time,because their not the same thing.Although there are exceptions like when we see an object in two places at the same time.One is space and the other is mass.Now let us take a magnet,you can cut in as many pieces as you want right down to the subatomic level and you still have a north and south pole.What is happening here is that space is flowing in one end and out the other.this is why two n's or s's oppose each other because the flows are going against each other.The smaller the object are the greater the effect space has on them.This flow of space is happening through out atoms,and has to be very complex with circular motions as well.As objects get larger this flow has less effect and becomes what we perceive as gravity,and manifest themselves in different ways.With space spinning around the solar system.And through the planets,Sun,and the Galaxy.Now we come to time it is not another dimension.What it is is the passage of mass or energy through space and or the flow of space around them.The faster something moves the greater the objects feel the drag of space.And this is what we perceive as time.In Fact the reason light can't go any faster is because space won't let it.And the drag of space is what causes red shifting,with photons slowly giving up their energy to space.Now lets talk about objects with mass as they travel near the speed of light it gains mass do to drag of space,creating a gravity well if you will,and the same drag slows down time.Now lets talk about time travel.While you can travel into the future by going very fast.As for traveling backward in time is can't be done,and the reason why is very simple.There is no way to make a negative move through space.No matter which way you move it is a positive one,and causes a advancement in time.But everything I have just written is a theory but I hope it gives those who study these things a pause and think what if.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo, finding a new way doesn't but statistical probability does.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd maybe the universe exploded 12 billion years ago by the magical 12 billion year old Big Bang monster, and maybe energy turned into matter via the magical mathematics of woo woo Mainstreamer Cultists who chase grant money like crack and spread anti-Christian propaganda myths like crazy chickens with their heads cut off and emperors with no clothes, and maybe stars are forming from gas over millions of years via the magical process of troll fairy dust, and maybe planets formed over millions of years using super gravity flux capacitor dust, and maybe the moon was formed millions and meeeelions of years ago when a giant piece of cheese struck Earth and conveniently landed by it so that one side is always facing Earth and helped play a part BEEEELIIONS AND BEEEELIONS OF YEARS AGO MY CHILDREN SITTING AT THE MAGIC FIRE PLACE, WHERE WE TELL ARE SOOTHING FANCY FAIRY STORIES TO YOU (SO WE CAN SELL MORE MAGZ AND CONTINUE GLOATING OVER THE CHRISTIANS BY OUR CONNIVING FAIRY FAQ LIES), and maybe the magic thunder fairy struck a puddle of lovely fairy soup beeeeelions of years ago and made living poopie doopies complete with the ability to eat, think, have sex or maybe clone themselves oh yes oh my! and eventually turned into men! And we know this happen cuz there are nice and neat magical nonexistant columns of fossils which show a steady progression of the soup monster thingie particles all the way from the whales walkin' hip bones to monkey men and the neanderthals, blah blah blah blah, men! Yes, wait, Cambrian explosions galore, magical asteroid hits of dinos turning into mice and birds! Lost yet? Not me, for I am the narcissist empreror extraordinare who may smugly in ignorance (or knowingly) make straw men and false statements about Christians, creationists, and the Bible, pretending there is no evidence for the Bible or creationism, or Christians being able to be as good scientists or superior to us Mainstreamer cultists, even though ANY MORON, ANY MORON, ANY MORON, CAN TYPE "BIBLE EVIDENCE" INTO A SEARCH ENGINE AND SEE YOUR RIDICULOUS DELUSIONAL CLAIMS ABOUT KNOWING WHAT HAPPENED 12 BILLION YEARS AGO, smashed to pieces over and over. Bible has archeological evidence to support it's historical records that cannot be refuted, true science shows the world is not older than 6,500 years, and all the non-scientific conniving "oh fairy cheese made the moon" nonsense will never make that go away, narcissist cultist. FAIL, AS USUAL. Tying in everything to your "Big Bang" and "evolution" stupidity is what is stupid, hindering and unhelful.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd maybe the universe exploded 12 billion years ago by the magical 12 billion year old Big Bang monster, and maybe energy turned into matter via the magical mathematics of woo woo Mainstreamer Cultists who chase grant money like crack and spread anti-Christian propaganda myths like crazy chickens with their heads cut off and emperors with no clothes, and maybe stars are forming from gas over millions of years via the magical process of troll fairy dust, and maybe planets formed over millions of years using super gravity flux capacitor dust, and maybe the moon was formed millions and meeeelions of years ago when a giant piece of cheese struck Earth and conveniently landed by it so that one side is always facing Earth and helped play a part BEEEELIIONS AND BEEEELIONS OF YEARS AGO MY CHILDREN SITTING AT THE MAGIC FIRE PLACE, WHERE WE TELL ARE SOOTHING FANCY FAIRY STORIES TO YOU (SO WE CAN SELL MORE MAGZ AND CONTINUE GLOATING OVER THE CHRISTIANS BY OUR CONNIVING FAIRY FAQ LIES), and maybe the magic thunder fairy struck a puddle of lovely fairy soup beeeeelions of years ago and made living poopie doopies complete with the ability to eat, think, have sex or maybe clone themselves oh yes oh my! and eventually turned into men! And we know this happen cuz there are nice and neat magical nonexistant columns of fossils which show a steady progression of the soup monster thingie particles all the way from the whales walkin' hip bones to monkey men and the neanderthals, blah blah blah blah, men! Yes, wait, Cambrian explosions galore, magical asteroid hits of dinos turning into mice and birds! Lost yet? Not me, for I am the narcissist empreror extraordinare who may smugly in ignorance (or knowingly) make straw men and false statements about Christians, creationists, and the Bible, pretending there is no evidence for the Bible or creationism, or Christians being able to be as good scientists or superior to us Mainstreamer cultists, even though ANY MORON, ANY MORON, ANY MORON, CAN TYPE "BIBLE EVIDENCE" INTO A SEARCH ENGINE AND SEE YOUR RIDICULOUS DELUSIONAL CLAIMS ABOUT KNOWING WHAT HAPPENED 12 BILLION YEARS AGO, smashed to pieces over and over. Bible has archeological evidence to support it's historical records that cannot be refuted, true science shows the world is not older than 6,500 years, and all the non-scientific conniving "oh fairy cheese made the moon" nonsense will never make that go away, narcissist cultist. FAIL, AS USUAL. Tying in everything to your "Big Bang" and "evolution" stupidity is what is stupid, hindering and unhelpful.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ ""theory" for creationists". Newtonian/Einsteinian physics are testable, true science. Evolutionary theory is a non falsifiable hypothesis, as much as religious belief system is, only differing in that, the latter admits faith as its base. Remember, Newton and Einstein were men of faith, if you know what I mean.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting, but no cigar! May I refer readers to my time theory at:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://nomathphysics.wordpress.com
wherein I separate time and space in a simple and logical manner with arguments much easier to defend against non-believers. I solicit comments and discussion from all fans of science.
written by: Johnny Luckett
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI see many reality's traveling side by side as the universe expands, and our planet spins. The electromagnetic distortion of space-time can only be imagined at the quantum level. Let me explain... if you could take a mirror and reflect the earth turning... the reflection would reverse the spheres direction, thus making it appear to be going backwards, as if time had reversed. Now take an electron... and the positron, think of them as mirror image's of each other. ( Time Reversed Counterparts) please note: The emission of a particle is exactly equivalent to the absorption of it's antiparticle. If this is true, (and I think it is) we have the beginning ingredients of space-time travel.
Now, I must explain something before I go farther. Due to it's light speed, the proton has no sense of time as we know it. I feel that this is the flower to our quantum-time-cake. Electromagnetic radiation See's everything at once... so it's logical to say that a proton can travel thousands of earth years without time (as we know it) passing at all.
With that said, I will now intensify what I'm saying. Hence, an electron is moving forward through space-time... then suddenly it hits a proton! (naturally traveling at light speed) It then absorbs an electron, reversing it back through time until it suddenly emits an intergenic proton. It recoils, sending it forward again. Time travel could be achieved, but I feel going into the past might not be like the movie "Back To The Future".
I feel you would find another you, and a very different past, present, and future. In fact... I think that there are billions and trillions of reality time combinations. The reality you are in right now is real... then in a moment, it's gone, becoming nonexistent.
From time to time, I do feel that protons do pop in and out of existence. the best example is the so-called ghost story's that you hear about. I believe that this phenomena is caused by energy bursts, combined with some sort of atmospheric condition.
I have been asked if I believe in spirits... or a creator of all things, the answer is yes... I do. Everything that is created, most certainly has a creator. And it also is logical to say that pure energy (a spirit) can never die. It can only be transformed to another place... maybe to another Quantum Time Parallel.
--- end ---
You said: "Really? Is that so?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI say: Yes, it is so. If you read the article they pointed out how Time for Newton was Absolute, and for Einstein it was Relative. Contradictory from one another. Second, Space and Time, for Newton, were completely separate. For Einstein, Space and Time weren't separate. Contradictory for one another. Third, Mass for Newton doesn't increase the faster you move. Mass for Einstein increases the faster you move. Completely contradictory from one another. The speed of light, for Newton, was instantaneous. The speed of light, for Newton, wasn't instantaneous. Completely contradictory. So yes, it really is so. One is contradictory from the other. And they pointed out how QM uses Newton's idea of Absolute Time, while Einstein's idea of Time, doesn't hold for QM. SO they separated Space from Time, which is what Newton did and what Einstein put together.
You said: "Einsteinian physics did not "topple" Newtonian physics. It enhanced it. How is this supped to "topple" Einstein's Spacetime? Hopefully, like relativity, it'll make it more accurate.Just so everyone understands, Newtonian physics is still taught today in Universities and it is sufficiently accurate to calculate architecture requirements and race car engineering."
I say: And, what does it matter if Newton's theory is still used today? It's wrong, deal with it. It was falsified. Mass increased the faster you move, which Newton's theory prohibited. Newton's theory fails to make correct predictions at all levels, which is exactly what it was intended to do. It failed. False theories are still useful, but that doesn't make them true any more. And when you find a theory is false, your new theory has to make all the same predictions that the false theory was successful at, and more successful prediction than it did. Einstein did that, and made all the same predictions that Newton's was successful for. The world view between both theories are completely different, but they both make the same predictions in certain areas.
"Time" is actually a 'subjective' entity in my opinion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would have reminded this fact to Prof. Einstein, if I were present at that time!
'Space' is an objective entity; whereas 'time' is a 'subjective' entity; we subjectively perceive 'time'. But the 'rate' at which my time flows may be different from the rate at which your time may be flowing. So, to bring uniformity in our descriptions, we use an objective device known as 'clock' to communicate our experiences. Therefore, it is meaningless to speak that 'time' runs faster or slower; rather we should speak that a particular process, e.g. decay of a particular radio-active-material takes longer 'duration'. If we change both: the 'time-scale' as well as 'durations' of an event, then we can not measure anything accurately. So, we cannot describe a phenomenon accurately. So, in my opinion, just as we have agreed upon the definition of a meter: the bar kept in Paris-musium, at NTP, we should agree upon a definition of 'time' e.g. half-life of a radio-active substance at NTP, and gravitational-fieldstrength G M /R where M is mass of the earth and R radius of the earth. In short we need to 'standardise' or 'absolutize' the 'Relativity Theory' if we wish to progress faster. The starter of this page has to write this page after more than a century of Special-Relativity, because we have not 'standardized' and 'absolutized' 'distance' and 'time'. What do you think, dear reader?!
"Time" is actually a 'subjective' entity in my opinion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would have reminded this fact to Prof. Einstein, if I were present at that time!
'Space' is an objective entity; whereas 'time' is a 'subjective' entity; we subjectively perceive 'time'. But the 'rate' at which my time flows may be different from the rate at which your time may be flowing. So, to bring uniformity in our descriptions, we use an objective device known as 'clock' to communicate our experiences. Therefore, it is meaningless to speak that 'time' runs faster or slower; rather we should speak that a particular process, e.g. decay of a particular radio-active-material takes longer 'duration'. If we change both: the 'time-scale' as well as 'durations' of an event, then we can not measure anything accurately. So, we cannot describe a phenomenon accurately. So, in my opinion, just as we have agreed upon the definition of a meter: the bar kept in Paris-musium, at NTP, we should agree upon a definition of 'time' e.g. half-life of a radio-active substance at NTP, and gravitational-fieldstrength G M /R where M is mass of the earth and R radius of the earth. In short we need to 'standardise' or 'absolutize' the 'Relativity Theory' if we wish to progress faster. The starter of this page has to write this page after more than a century of Special-Relativity, because we have not 'standardized' and 'absolutized' 'distance' and 'time'. What do you think, dear reader?!
In my opinion, we are able to perceive 'time', because our brain has 'memory'.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSupposing, we were not having any memory, then there were no perception of time.
With the help of 'memory' we are able to compare previous perception with the new perception. So, we are able to recognize a pattern; then we are able to predict an event; and then we learn to control events to some extent.
'Time' is a 'subjective' entity, the 'time' that our clocks show are for bringing regularity in the 'subjective' perceptions of 'time' of all the members of the society.
Einstein talked about 'stretching' of 'time'; 'time-dilation'. He should have used a term 'duration', and then told that 'duration' of a process, say decay of a particle, gets stretched. Isn't it?
More views can be found at:
http://sites.google.com/site/theultimaterealitysite
Sub-page-titled: Holistic Theory of Everything
Joe: There are a lot of Theories of Everything. The only one I know of that is tied to experimentation is QES. The bases is in String Theory and functioned Quantum Entanglements that produce a system of relativity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMost TOE say they unify electromagnetism and gravity, but they ignore instantaneous properties. QES is based upon instantaneous properties of entanglement and gravitational aberration.
http://qesdunn.pbworks.com
However, within QES the foundation at the Singularity level looks very much like what is proposed here. In QES many abstract energies/forces are supported and likely exist.
Depending upon our relativistic system of states I suppose universes of physics of most any conception can be created. But what combination represents the one we live within?