The double solution theory, a new interpretation of Wave Mechanics

paddoboy said:
Sure we can.
It's been 13.8 billion years since the Universe/space/time evolved....It's been 13 hours or so since I last participated on this forum....
Click to expand...

Just not getting it are you? That's not a measurement in physics. What you're talking about, is what you believe to be an external, objective time. This is just a fanciful hypothesis and as Penrose said himself, science isn't about fashion.

Time is not an observable, it cannot be measured as we define measuring things in physics. We sense time... this is different to objectively having facts it exists external to the subjective sense of it.
 
BlackHoley said:
Just not getting it are you? That's not a measurement in physics. What you're talking about, is what you believe to be an external, objective time. This is just a fanciful hypothesis and as Penrose said himself, science isn't about fashion.

Time is not an observable, it cannot be measured as we define measuring things in physics. We sense time... this is different to objectively having facts it exists external to the subjective sense of it.
Click to expand...



:)
Just possibly, it may be you that doesn't get it.
Time stops everything from happening together. [Occam's razor] It forms an inexorable link with space and the Universe in general...without any of them, nothing exists.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Controversially, Physicist Argues Time Is Real

http://www.livescience.com/29081-time-real-illusion-smolin.html
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Experiments continue to show that there is no 'space' that stands apart from space-time itself...no arena in which matter, energy and gravity operate which is not affected by matter, energy and gravity. General relativity tells us that what we call space is just another feature of the gravitational field of the universe, so space and space-time can and do not exist apart from the matter and energy that creates the gravitational field. This is not speculation, but sound observation.

Sten Odenwald:
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
 
paddoboy said:
:)
Just possibly, it may be you that doesn't get it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, do you know why I know that's a load of bull? You even admitted the other day you had never heard of Hermitian matrices and ''needed to look it up'' you admitted to another poster.

If I am the one who comes in here, educates you the theory of measurement in physics (the act of determining observables) and it gives you an insight into what is measurable in physics, I very much doubt this is a matter of me 'not getting it.'

I'll tell you one last time, you're doing physics wrong and worse yet you are lying to the public here. You cannot measure ''time'' like you can objectively measure a rubber or a car... or the spin of a particle.

Time isn't an observable in physics it has no corresponding Hermitian matrix. Now stop trolling and move on.
 
And by the way... continually repeating the statement Occams Razor... doesn't make you brighter or somehow better than anyone else, and why invoke it I have no idea. Physics is not a good place to test the application of Occams Razor. Physics is far from simple.
 
paddoboy said:
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Experiments continue to show that there is no 'space' that stands apart from space-time itself...no arena in which matter, energy and gravity operate which is not affected by matter, energy and gravity. General relativity tells us that what we call space is just another feature of the gravitational field of the universe, so space and space-time can and do not exist apart from the matter and energy that creates the gravitational field. This is not speculation, but sound observation.
Click to expand...

There are too many fine points I could raise about this, but I'm not going to bother because you would never understand it. Time is not an absolute quantity in relativity, in fact, General Relativity says we don't even need it! But as I said, I won't even go into this, because your understanding of relativity, is so basic there is no hope of any advancement.
 
BlackHoley said:
If I am the one who comes in here, educates you the theory of measurement in physics (the act of determining observables) and it gives you an insight into what is measurable in physics, I very much doubt this is a matter of me 'not getting it.'

I'll tell you one last time, you're doing physics wrong and worse yet you are lying to the public here. You cannot measure ''time'' like you can objectively measure a rubber or a car... or the spin of a particle.

Time isn't an observable in physics it has no corresponding Hermitian matrix. Now stop trolling and move on.
Click to expand...



Well let me tell you one last time, time is real, it forms an inexorable link with space, and we refer to that reality as space/time.
To adhere to Occam's razor, it is what separates events....while space is what separates mass/energy.
All have a connection as Sten Odenwald has noted.


Yep, I had never heard of the Hermitian matrix, so?
I'm here to learn sonny, just as you should be.
Now stop misleading the public and realize that time is part and parcel of the Universe we are a part of.....it exists, and if it didn't exist, we wouldn't be here. And of course, we measure its rate with clocks, and planetary motions.
 
BlackHoley said:
There are too many fine points I could raise about this, but I'm not going to bother because you would never understand it. Time is not an absolute quantity in relativity, in fact, General Relativity says we don't even need it! But as I said, I won't even go into this, because your understanding of relativity, is so basic there is no hope of any advancement.
Click to expand...

I dare say you would be shot down in flames anyway, by others that do know more then you.
One thing I have learnt in my time on this forum, is that those that shout the loudest about how much they know, are actually those that know the least, and are actually driven by some agenda against mainstream physics/cosmology.

Space/time is the foundation framework against which the equations of GR are calculated. Its geometry can also be warped, curved, twisted in the presence of mass, and which we then feel as gravity.
It most certainly, unquestionably exists.
 
paddoboy said:
Well let me tell you one last time, time is real, it forms an inexorable link with space...
Click to expand...

I think you mean, inexorably linked through math, because Einstein never formulated his theory of time being part of the space dimensions, he even admitted later in life that the mathematicians had butchered his work... in reference to his theory being united with time.

It was Minkowski who had this ''brilliant'' idea to think of time as being part of the metric, however there is no evidence this is a real facet of nature!!! And you keep hailing it as such, quite the contrary!

There is zero evidence for an external time. Even Paul Dirac, around the same time as Minkowski had done this, was asked whether he believed time was fundamentally linked to space, he said he was inclined not to believe so.

This ''inexorable'' link, isn't as inexorable as one once thought and external time could be one of the biggest blunders of modern physics. We just attach ourselves to it like a fashion.
 
paddoboy said:
Space/time is the foundation framework against which the equations of GR are calculated.
Click to expand...

WRONG! There is no time in general relativity. There is only space.

There is no space-time framework, time disappears from it completely! See how much you know, really?
 
BlackHoley said:
Excellent, yes.

Time is what clocks measure. Now... there can only be agreement, no one actually observes time. There can only be agreement there are changes in events (they don't need to be cyclic). So an interval is a measure of the changes in events, the clock on the wall helps you keep track of it.

That's a big difference in my eyes, to saying we can be certain of it, because we can measure it. That's not at all what is happening, is it?
Click to expand...



You need to get your house in order BlackHoley...You seem to have a habit of contradicting yourself.
Yep, it exists, whether observable or not, and as you agree, we can also measure it.
Ans whether you want to label it "changes in events" it's still time, now, next week, or in a million years.
 
BlackHoley said:
WRONG! There is no time in general relativity. There is only space.

There is no space-time framework, time disappears from it completely! See how much you know, really?
Click to expand...

Rubbish.....
If you feel like proposing something else, or if you want to rewrite 20th/21st century physics/cosmology, then go get it peer reviewed.
You are now the fourth one who thinks he has all the secrets.
 
BlackHoley said:
This ''inexorable'' link, isn't as inexorable as one once thought and external time could be one of the biggest blunders of modern physics. We just attach ourselves to it like a fashion.
Click to expand...

If you have any observational evidence to show any different, then you know what to do.
In the meantime, the mainstream position is that space, time, space/time,Universe, gravity, matter, energy all exist and all are dependent on one another.
Space/time of course being the framework against which GR is calculated.
 
paddoboy said:
Rubbish.....
If you feel like proposing something else, or if you want to rewrite 20th/21st century physics/cosmology, then go get it peer reviewed.
You are now the fourth one who thinks he has all the secrets.
Click to expand...

There is no global time in general relativity, I am not proposing something new! You just don't know enough to have a qualified point of view! If you don't know that time ceases to exist in general relativity, then your wasting my time and lying to the public for even attempting to argue it.
 
paddoboy said:
If you have any observational evidence to show any different, then you know what to do.
Click to expand...

Excuse me?

It's you who doesn't have any observational evidence of time! LOL! You're arguments are pathetic and laughable. The crux of the argument is on you to prove it, there is no evidence of external time, so good look with that one.
 
BlackHoley said:
There is no global time in general relativity, I am not proposing something new! You just don't know enough to have a qualified point of view! If you don't know that time ceases to exist in general relativity, then your wasting my time and lying to the public for even attempting to argue it.
Click to expand...

And so far you have also said that time can not be measured and time can be measured.
I see you as a fraud, due to your arrogant attitude right from the word go......
What you say is of no real concern to this debate, and that is evident by the yes and no answer to the measurement of time you have given.

In the meantime, my limited knowledge, will be re-enforced from reputable links [unlike the ones you give] and the reputable members of this forum.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

http://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/q411.html

In 1906, soon after Albert Einstein announced his special theory of relativity, his former college teacher in mathematics, Hermann Minkowski, developed a new scheme for thinking about space and time that emphasized its geometric qualities. In his famous quotation delivered at a public lecture on relativity, he announced that,

"The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality."

This new reality was that space and time, as physical constructs, have to be combined into a new mathematical/physical entity called 'space-time', because the equations of relativity show that both the space and time coordinates of any event must get mixed together by the mathematics, in order to accurately describe what we see. Because space consists of 3 dimensions, and time is 1-dimensional, space-time must, therefore, be a 4-dimensional object. It is believed to be a 'continuum' because so far as we know, there are no missing points in space or instants in time, and both can be subdivided without any apparent limit in size or duration. So, physicists now routinely consider our world to be embedded in this 4-dimensional Space-Time continuum, and all events, places, moments in history, actions and so on are described in terms of their location in Space-Time.

Space-time does not evolve, it simply exists. When we examine a particular object from the stand point of its space-time representation, every particle is located along its world-line. This is a spaghetti-like line that stretches from the past to the future showing the spatial location of the particle at every instant in time. This world-line exists as a complete object which may be sliced here and there so that you can see where the particle is located in space at a particular instant. Once you determine the complete world line of a particle from the forces acting upon it, you have 'solved' for its complete history. This world-line does not change with time, but simply exists as a timeless object. Similarly, in general relativity, when you solve equations for the shape of space-time, this shape does not change in time, but exists as a complete timeless object. You can slice it here and there to examine what the geometry of space looks like at a particular instant. Examining consecutive slices in time will let you see whether, for example, the universe is expanding or not.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top