Like a lot of things, it has been there, right in
front of our eyes ever since humankind gained the ability to think. We have to
think to be unique. All any living entity has is it senses. Without thought, all any
entity can do is respond. When danger is involved entities that fail to
respond are eliminated. It is how evolution works.
Billions of years passed in this universe we all live in before life of any sort could happen. Once it did, it took millions of more years before an entity capable of thought began to observe its environment rather than simply reacting to it. All that we are today happened in the last 100,000 years.
For thousands of years we lived on a flat earth and all that was external to our planet revolved in our sky. There were clues contradicting what we observed but so much was unknown. Philosophy and religion evolved from conjecture, power and wishful thinking. Anyone who questioned what was accepted was ostracized and sometimes silenced with violence or the threat of violence. Still, thought gave us the ability to speculate and those questioning what they were observing set out to prove their speculations. They developed new tools and new forms of mathematics. We learned we were not the epi- center of all that existed. Many men of science accomplished great things and expanded our knowledge and capabilities at an ever accelerating rate. It boggles the mind when you consider a little over hundred years ago there was no electronics anywhere on this planet. Today we have probes landing on other planets and traveling beyond our solar system. We now have instruments that can see back to the earliest days of our universe.
The list of discoveries and inventions is long but one mans intuition and power of observation stands head and shoulders over the rest. He was an accomplished scientist but it was his inquisitiveness and intuitive thought that opened the door to the greatest discovery our species has accomplished to date, the discovery of relativity. The man was Albert Einstein and the location was Bern Switzerland in the early 1900's. Most of the great discoveries in science are founded on things that contradict the excepted theories and beliefs. Einstein was in a quandary regarding time. If time, as measured by the speed of light, is a constant why did separate mathematical constructs give differing results? That thought coupled with a clock tower he passed every day on his way to work opened the door to relativity. It did not take his mathematical genius to open the door, simply the thought that were he to start traveling at the speed of light, the hands on the clock would be stationary if he were to maintain the optical field in perspective. Time is relative. The math agreed but it took a solar eclipse to prove. The field of physics had to be redrawn.
Einstein died without resolving one of the largest contradictions in physics, paradoxes. he believed there was a theory that applied to both traditional physics and the newly discovered field he brought to the world, quantum physics. Why couldn't he solve the problem? Something is not right. What is it the field of physics is missing? The answer may very well be nothing. The problem may very well we be scientists have made an erroneous assumption based on observation and little or no intuition. It wouldn't be the first time.
The erroneous observation is obvious, just like the clock tower in Bern was. Einstein failed to see it because he had bought into the observation. Some scientists are starting to realize the observation has been false all along. Getting all of science to recognize the problem is just as challenging as it was to get the people on this world to recognize the earth revolved around the sun.
What if time is not a dimension? A paradox is impossible but calling time a dimension allows for the possibility of a paradox. We call time a dimension because we measure time in space and motion. In comparison, we measured the sun revolving around the earth for centuries. We built structures to record the event that were so complex we don't know how they were built with the tools they had at that time. There were contradictions and we ultimately discovered reality. If time is not a dimension what is it?
Billions of years passed in this universe we all live in before life of any sort could happen. Once it did, it took millions of more years before an entity capable of thought began to observe its environment rather than simply reacting to it. All that we are today happened in the last 100,000 years.
For thousands of years we lived on a flat earth and all that was external to our planet revolved in our sky. There were clues contradicting what we observed but so much was unknown. Philosophy and religion evolved from conjecture, power and wishful thinking. Anyone who questioned what was accepted was ostracized and sometimes silenced with violence or the threat of violence. Still, thought gave us the ability to speculate and those questioning what they were observing set out to prove their speculations. They developed new tools and new forms of mathematics. We learned we were not the epi- center of all that existed. Many men of science accomplished great things and expanded our knowledge and capabilities at an ever accelerating rate. It boggles the mind when you consider a little over hundred years ago there was no electronics anywhere on this planet. Today we have probes landing on other planets and traveling beyond our solar system. We now have instruments that can see back to the earliest days of our universe.
The list of discoveries and inventions is long but one mans intuition and power of observation stands head and shoulders over the rest. He was an accomplished scientist but it was his inquisitiveness and intuitive thought that opened the door to the greatest discovery our species has accomplished to date, the discovery of relativity. The man was Albert Einstein and the location was Bern Switzerland in the early 1900's. Most of the great discoveries in science are founded on things that contradict the excepted theories and beliefs. Einstein was in a quandary regarding time. If time, as measured by the speed of light, is a constant why did separate mathematical constructs give differing results? That thought coupled with a clock tower he passed every day on his way to work opened the door to relativity. It did not take his mathematical genius to open the door, simply the thought that were he to start traveling at the speed of light, the hands on the clock would be stationary if he were to maintain the optical field in perspective. Time is relative. The math agreed but it took a solar eclipse to prove. The field of physics had to be redrawn.
Einstein died without resolving one of the largest contradictions in physics, paradoxes. he believed there was a theory that applied to both traditional physics and the newly discovered field he brought to the world, quantum physics. Why couldn't he solve the problem? Something is not right. What is it the field of physics is missing? The answer may very well be nothing. The problem may very well we be scientists have made an erroneous assumption based on observation and little or no intuition. It wouldn't be the first time.
The erroneous observation is obvious, just like the clock tower in Bern was. Einstein failed to see it because he had bought into the observation. Some scientists are starting to realize the observation has been false all along. Getting all of science to recognize the problem is just as challenging as it was to get the people on this world to recognize the earth revolved around the sun.
What if time is not a dimension? A paradox is impossible but calling time a dimension allows for the possibility of a paradox. We call time a dimension because we measure time in space and motion. In comparison, we measured the sun revolving around the earth for centuries. We built structures to record the event that were so complex we don't know how they were built with the tools they had at that time. There were contradictions and we ultimately discovered reality. If time is not a dimension what is it?
Before I supply my hypothetical answer. let's look at times companion, space. In this case our observations have been right all along. Space is a void. It simply doesn't exist. If you find that hard to wrap your mind around, look at it this way, space is a function of motion and time. If there were no motion or no time there would be no space. There is a void. The expansion of the universe places objects in the void. We use time and motion to give space dimension. Now we need to ask the question, the time and motion of what?
Our universe, since its inception, contains all the energy it will ever have and to the best of our scientific ability and knowledge, it will contain this energy down to the last bit as long as the universe exists. All that energy is capable of motion in both wave form and particle form. What would the universe look like if there were no particle forms? Does energy exist if there is no motion? The big bang certainly suggests it does. If we have no motion, no space and of course no time only energy, I would say we are looking at a big bang just about to happen. Of course there is no time or distance so there is no way to measure anything. Discovering what existed before the Big Bang is not part of this paper. Someone else can work that one out.
Lets take a look at current existence using what we do know and what I hypothesize. Our planet is not flat. the universe does not revolve around it, the speed of light is not a constant, time is not a dimension and there is no space other than a void.
Where does that leave time? Time could be a product of motion. Some are trying to prove that. The answers may lie in the conditions that existed prior to the big bang happening but we have no way of observing them. Mathematics may open some doors. The goal of this paper is to point out a few new doors that need opening.
I am looking at the door marked time. My hypothesis, time is either a force or force like. We can say the same thing about gravity and I believe comparing time and gravity is not a bad approach. Gravity affects time so it stands to reason time can affect gravity if time is a force or force like. The possibility lends itself to experimentation.
We all know how we measure time. We break it into the past, the present and the future. To measure time a past must exist. When I first conceived of my hypothesis, I thought the past only existed in archival form. It requires an intelligent species to both create and interpret the archives of the past. Is there a past if there is no intellectual life form to observe it and record it? The past happened. It did exist as the present but for how long? How long does the present last? The common answer is, "not very long." Some see it as a point and the frequency of the human brain sets a limit of 10 milliseconds. Anything faster than that, we cannot resolve.. We can use tools to resolve faster rates but where do we draw the line or to be more precise, the point on the line? I start talking line and those who believe time is a dimension will be quick to say, "We told you so!"
Time is a line and everything that is has a starting point. Everything that is has an end point. We call it the present. The problem with calling time a dimension in this case is, the end point is not defined. It keeps changing as the future becomes the present. Consider this, every particle in our bodies had a starting point. Millions if not billions of years may have passed between the starting points of the elements that make up our bodies. Our conscious mind had a starting point that has yet to be defined. All that we are exists in the present. Some how the starting point of all that went into making us is important. I don't know what, how or why but there are answers to be found here.
My hypothesis deals with the relationship between the future and the present. That's where the proof exists that time is a force or force like. Time flows from the present to the future much like current flows from negative to positive or if you prefer positive to negative. Negative and positive are terms we created to identify source and destination. Instead of positive and negative we have present and future. We can say time flows from the future to the present or present to the future but only if time has particulate form. To flow from the future to the present we would need a time particle. The momentum of the present projects a potential future. In electricity we call that potential voltage.
There are relationships between mass, energy and time. A dense rock has the potential for a future far and above that of hydrogen gas. The gas has a starting point. It quickly combines and generates a new element with its own starting point. It is how the universe was formed. Particles could not exist until the universe stopped expanding at rates above the speed of light. Most particles. Could it be time has a particle or properties similar to the photon that exists at rates above the speed of light? Impossible, consider the photon. For all our scientific discoveries we still don't know if a photon is a particle. It displays the properties of a particle so we cover ourselves by saying, "If a photon has mass, it is the smallest form of mass in the universe."
Maybe there is a smaller one, what I call a time particle which needs a name but not before we can prove it exists. Why haven't we been able to detect it? A simple answer, if it exists, it exists in the future and flows from the future to the present. It is not detectable in the present. My hypothesize is, the greater the mass, the further into the future it resides but we are not talking large amounts of time separation. New elements, even heavy ones in unstable suns can still form very quickly but it takes more energy to make them so the potential of the future is is derived from the amount of energy and mass present.
The existence of a time particle could explain where all the missing material is in the universe. If we started studying summations over the millenniums, I think we have a chance of discovering it.
Like all things knowledge is only good if we have a way of applying it or using it to discover knowledge we can apply. There are no paradoxes. We have known that from the beginning but we still insisted on making time a dimension. In order to make the possibility feasible we create alternate and multi universes. Anytime we need to make things more complicated in order to understand them, we are usually wrong. The past exists solely as starting points. No do overs, no paradoxes.
The future does exist but solely as the result of the potential of the present. That potential may affect a particle and if that is true, we start to fill in some of the holes in quantum physics. That includes black holes.
All one has to do to travel anywhere in this model of the universe is create the right conditions because space does not exist. Distance exists but solely as a function of motion and time with factors introduced by energy and mass.
I am going to close this with the perception of time. There are those who believe time only exists because that is how we perceive existence. I find that ridiculous. It's like saying "Does a tree make sound when it falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it?" If nothing can hear it the sound cannot be perceived but the forces involved are still present. Time is no different. Billions of years passed before an entity existed that could perceive the passage of time.
So where do we start? The obvious answer is, we start at the starting point. The theory of relativity existed in the physical universe long before we discovered it but the starting point for our species occurred when Einstein looked up at the clock tower in Bern. Starting points all happen in the present, a present that no one has defined. Small wonder we are easily misled by what we observe especially since all that we observe lies in the past. Once again how long does the present exist before it becomes the past?
Knowing how long the present exists is key to our understanding time is a force or force like. I have a formula, I believe identifies the present. It is quite simple but so is the theory of relativity. I have not derived this formula as I do not have the math skills to do so but I believe it can be derived. If we use 1 as the unit of relative time, the present lasts for 1 divided by C squared. From this we can then hypothesize that the potential for the future is 1 divided by C squared multiplied by the product of all the energy in the universe. That energy can be in either wave or particle form. In particle form we call it mass and mass has density.
The greater the density the greater the potential for the future provided the object is not being submitted to high levels of energy. Black holes will exist as long as the universe exists though it may be possible for any black hole to spawn a new universe. Black holes consume all energy that crosses their periphery. Their presence guarantees the future and their properties provide the means to derive how long the present and the future exists.
Time flows like water, electrons and photons. There must be a time particle as there has to be something to flow. It flows from the future to the present where it conjoins with the potential that drives the present into the future. Control that flow and one can travel anywhere in the universe in a heartbeat. Not into the future and not into the past, one will always find themselves in the present though that present is relative.
I keep saying the past does not exist but remnants of the present do. To really understand the past, we have to stop looking upon it as a product of time. What we see is the affects of energy being transferred from the future to the present. In the future there is only energy,. In the past we see energy in particle and waveform. You see a rock. You pick it up. You are holding the past in your hand. Particles and energy in waveform exist in the past. The present is the conversion point when energy attains form of of some sort. It is why photons have the properties of mass but appear as waves.
We exist in the past. The present, 1 over C squared, is simply too small of a period for anything to exist in. Existence in the present, as we can understand it, is not possible. Einstein had the answer when he reduced relativity to his simple equation. Using that equation we can define time as M is equal to E divided by C squared. In text form The present multiplied by energy (the future) creates the past. As brilliant as his mind was, he was limited by his concept of time as a dimension. He also was a proponent of the steady state theory.
Stephen Hawking said it best, (I am paraphrasing here), "Most scientists have to spend many hours with their fellows, working on new concepts and ideas. Cosmologists can can come up with new concepts on their way to lunch." Proving them is another matter.
I may have further thoughts on time but, as of now, I have nothing more to add. I will post updates on twitter. I encourage anyone reading this to share it with people they know with a background in physics. I welcome comments and observations.
We all know how we measure time. We break it into the past, the present and the future. To measure time a past must exist. When I first conceived of my hypothesis, I thought the past only existed in archival form. It requires an intelligent species to both create and interpret the archives of the past. Is there a past if there is no intellectual life form to observe it and record it? The past happened. It did exist as the present but for how long? How long does the present last? The common answer is, "not very long." Some see it as a point and the frequency of the human brain sets a limit of 10 milliseconds. Anything faster than that, we cannot resolve.. We can use tools to resolve faster rates but where do we draw the line or to be more precise, the point on the line? I start talking line and those who believe time is a dimension will be quick to say, "We told you so!"
Time is a line and everything that is has a starting point. Everything that is has an end point. We call it the present. The problem with calling time a dimension in this case is, the end point is not defined. It keeps changing as the future becomes the present. Consider this, every particle in our bodies had a starting point. Millions if not billions of years may have passed between the starting points of the elements that make up our bodies. Our conscious mind had a starting point that has yet to be defined. All that we are exists in the present. Some how the starting point of all that went into making us is important. I don't know what, how or why but there are answers to be found here.
My hypothesis deals with the relationship between the future and the present. That's where the proof exists that time is a force or force like. Time flows from the present to the future much like current flows from negative to positive or if you prefer positive to negative. Negative and positive are terms we created to identify source and destination. Instead of positive and negative we have present and future. We can say time flows from the future to the present or present to the future but only if time has particulate form. To flow from the future to the present we would need a time particle. The momentum of the present projects a potential future. In electricity we call that potential voltage.
There are relationships between mass, energy and time. A dense rock has the potential for a future far and above that of hydrogen gas. The gas has a starting point. It quickly combines and generates a new element with its own starting point. It is how the universe was formed. Particles could not exist until the universe stopped expanding at rates above the speed of light. Most particles. Could it be time has a particle or properties similar to the photon that exists at rates above the speed of light? Impossible, consider the photon. For all our scientific discoveries we still don't know if a photon is a particle. It displays the properties of a particle so we cover ourselves by saying, "If a photon has mass, it is the smallest form of mass in the universe."
Maybe there is a smaller one, what I call a time particle which needs a name but not before we can prove it exists. Why haven't we been able to detect it? A simple answer, if it exists, it exists in the future and flows from the future to the present. It is not detectable in the present. My hypothesize is, the greater the mass, the further into the future it resides but we are not talking large amounts of time separation. New elements, even heavy ones in unstable suns can still form very quickly but it takes more energy to make them so the potential of the future is is derived from the amount of energy and mass present.
The existence of a time particle could explain where all the missing material is in the universe. If we started studying summations over the millenniums, I think we have a chance of discovering it.
Like all things knowledge is only good if we have a way of applying it or using it to discover knowledge we can apply. There are no paradoxes. We have known that from the beginning but we still insisted on making time a dimension. In order to make the possibility feasible we create alternate and multi universes. Anytime we need to make things more complicated in order to understand them, we are usually wrong. The past exists solely as starting points. No do overs, no paradoxes.
The future does exist but solely as the result of the potential of the present. That potential may affect a particle and if that is true, we start to fill in some of the holes in quantum physics. That includes black holes.
All one has to do to travel anywhere in this model of the universe is create the right conditions because space does not exist. Distance exists but solely as a function of motion and time with factors introduced by energy and mass.
I am going to close this with the perception of time. There are those who believe time only exists because that is how we perceive existence. I find that ridiculous. It's like saying "Does a tree make sound when it falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it?" If nothing can hear it the sound cannot be perceived but the forces involved are still present. Time is no different. Billions of years passed before an entity existed that could perceive the passage of time.
So where do we start? The obvious answer is, we start at the starting point. The theory of relativity existed in the physical universe long before we discovered it but the starting point for our species occurred when Einstein looked up at the clock tower in Bern. Starting points all happen in the present, a present that no one has defined. Small wonder we are easily misled by what we observe especially since all that we observe lies in the past. Once again how long does the present exist before it becomes the past?
Knowing how long the present exists is key to our understanding time is a force or force like. I have a formula, I believe identifies the present. It is quite simple but so is the theory of relativity. I have not derived this formula as I do not have the math skills to do so but I believe it can be derived. If we use 1 as the unit of relative time, the present lasts for 1 divided by C squared. From this we can then hypothesize that the potential for the future is 1 divided by C squared multiplied by the product of all the energy in the universe. That energy can be in either wave or particle form. In particle form we call it mass and mass has density.
The greater the density the greater the potential for the future provided the object is not being submitted to high levels of energy. Black holes will exist as long as the universe exists though it may be possible for any black hole to spawn a new universe. Black holes consume all energy that crosses their periphery. Their presence guarantees the future and their properties provide the means to derive how long the present and the future exists.
Time flows like water, electrons and photons. There must be a time particle as there has to be something to flow. It flows from the future to the present where it conjoins with the potential that drives the present into the future. Control that flow and one can travel anywhere in the universe in a heartbeat. Not into the future and not into the past, one will always find themselves in the present though that present is relative.
I keep saying the past does not exist but remnants of the present do. To really understand the past, we have to stop looking upon it as a product of time. What we see is the affects of energy being transferred from the future to the present. In the future there is only energy,. In the past we see energy in particle and waveform. You see a rock. You pick it up. You are holding the past in your hand. Particles and energy in waveform exist in the past. The present is the conversion point when energy attains form of of some sort. It is why photons have the properties of mass but appear as waves.
We exist in the past. The present, 1 over C squared, is simply too small of a period for anything to exist in. Existence in the present, as we can understand it, is not possible. Einstein had the answer when he reduced relativity to his simple equation. Using that equation we can define time as M is equal to E divided by C squared. In text form The present multiplied by energy (the future) creates the past. As brilliant as his mind was, he was limited by his concept of time as a dimension. He also was a proponent of the steady state theory.
Stephen Hawking said it best, (I am paraphrasing here), "Most scientists have to spend many hours with their fellows, working on new concepts and ideas. Cosmologists can can come up with new concepts on their way to lunch." Proving them is another matter.
I may have further thoughts on time but, as of now, I have nothing more to add. I will post updates on twitter. I encourage anyone reading this to share it with people they know with a background in physics. I welcome comments and observations.
No comments:
Post a Comment