In a private conversation you are absolutely correct.
As I said, this is an open forum. It is public. You never know who else may be following a conversation. Some of those may be able to make the distiction, some may not.
What is time??
- Thread starter Shadow1
- Start date
In a private conversation you are absolutely correct.
As I said, this is an open forum. It is public. You never know who else may be following a conversation. Some of those may be able to make the distiction, some may not.
ahhhh.................. just ahhhhhh
dam , dam , dam , dam , dam
how are we ever going to get anywhere
Reminds me of Elvis Presley. All the older folk try to hold onto those years, but the younger generation want to move on. Science does tend to take a firm grip on its theories. But anyway, like I said, a student will not be able to use this information in a coherent form, so it's pointless putting it in here.
Last edited:
its time the older folk moved on , drop the ego , because eventually , the younger will find flaws in the old thinking
Here's a link to the stuff that students shouldn't read...
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=110750
Here's a link to the stuff that students shouldn't read...
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=110750
time wobble ?
you have to show that time has a substance reality on its own
I can't answer you in here.
What is your fun-logic ? or It is just a random guess .
To know time well , we got to know space well ; as to " what is the structure of space ? " , " what are the constituents of space ? " , " what are the characteristics of space ? " etc . We can frame as many questions and try to view space from different perspectives . Along with space , we should also try to know about the interactions between mass and space . As is our experience , space doesnt offer any resistance to the movement of a mass through space . But movement of a mass through space causes frame-dragging . How this can be explained ? One possibilty can be , when a mass moves through space ; some of the space remains attached with the mass and moves along with the mass . So along with the relative motion between the mass and the space , there is also a relative motion between two layers of space . When there is a relative motion between two layers of space , there will be some friction which is dependant upon the speed of the mass . As the speed of the mass increases , this frictional force also increases and causes frame-dragging at some point of time at a higher speed .
Time is the constraint imposed on reality that can be imagined in the negative through the notion of a photon which, at light speed, appears (to a real world observer) to exist outside of time. That is, a "corpuscle" moving at light speed apparently slows its clock to zero.
Do you mean to say that , if the speed of 'photon' becomes zero ; time will also becomes zero ?
No I mean, if you were a photon, traveling at light speed, you would be eternal. You would zip around every nook and cranny of of every thing that ever was and ever will be. To have no clock ticking is to be eternal, outside of the dimensional constraint imposed by reality.
If a photon were to somehow stop, which doesn't make sense, but what does, so I'll entertain it: then the photon would reenter our time continuum and the two of you would have a lot to talk about.
If a photon were to somehow stop, which doesn't make sense, but what does, so I'll entertain it: then the photon would reenter our time continuum and the two of you would have a lot to talk about.
To be eternal ; one has to be much faster than light . It takes lightyears to travel from one star to another .
Photon can be stopped by a strong gravity as in the case of a black-hole , where no clock can tick .
To exceed light speed is to reverse time. The particle would exit eternity and enter the negative time stream which is farther from reality than eternity.
To you, the particle needs one year to traverse one light-year. To the particle, in the clock-stopped step away from reality some folks call eternity, there is no such thing as time, and every point in space is instantly and forever accessible.
To you, the particle needs one year to traverse one light-year. To the particle, in the clock-stopped step away from reality some folks call eternity, there is no such thing as time, and every point in space is instantly and forever accessible.
Or just stick around forever.
Wrong on two counts: firstly a lightyear* is a measure of distance, not time and secondly - it depends on how fast you travel.
* If you can't even get that right what makes you think your contributions are worth listening to?
It would seem that "at" the event horizon (not a real place can't be "at" it)...
"at" the event horizon all that exists is light speed particles, no?. Including light - photons. Sure it's black, what other color would nature choose to present the interface between reality and eternity?
In real terms, there us no "being" "at" the event horizon. On approach, it would move away like a mirage. So it's a manifestation of observation.
The photon is curious because it's perpetually moving at c. Intuition tells us the clock is stopped in the world of the photon. Where else is the clock stopped? The event horizon. Gravity can change the wavelength of its emission, leaving it black, but the velocity presumably remains at c. The photon itself is invincible to gravity if it has no mass as it seems. Yet (if anything really happens "at" the event horizon) it's a dimensionless space anyway.
Since the photon is the carrier of electromagnetism, which is the very thing influenced by the intrinsic impedance of free space, and since intrinsic impedance is the constant that is equivalent to light speed, and time and space are both instantiated out of observation from pairs of reference frames, the traversal of the photon seems connected to the existence, or gauge, or time.
In other threads I may get my ass reamed for speculating, but maybe here yall are OK with it. I sometimes wonder if the event horizon permeates all of reality, and the photon, living in the eternal dimensionless realm of the event horizon, is ever present, available to "instantiate" time, space and radiation whenever the causal conditions arise. Cause is this context would appear to be observation itself.
Really just a wild ass guess. But it's such a deep question, almost approaching religion or superstition that it begs answering.
Last edited:
Or just stick around forever.
Wrong on two counts: firstly a lightyear* is a measure of distance, not time and secondly - it depends on how fast you travel.
Read my earlier statement
as
I only guessed a possibility for frame-dragging . I found it logical . So , i mentioned it here .
so your talking of fluid and/or aerodynamics of space
which then implies that space has substance
If you look at the boundary of our Earth's space with the outer space ; a relative motion is happenning there , between the two layers of space . This event is quite similar to the case with fluid mechanics and/or aerodynamics .
It seems so . Space must be consisting of some particles , which are mass-less but respond to gravity .