WE ARE born. We die. We call the span that separates these events time. Its passage is perhaps the most fundamental feature of our human experience, yet we are incapable of saying exactly what it is. Worse – the laws of physics don’t help. That time exists is undeniable, but the way we experience it makes no sense.
“There’s an old joke about time – it’s nature’s way of keeping everything from happening at once,” says physics Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas, Austin. To us mortals, time is the passage of the sun and seasons, the progressive wrinkling of our skin as we age – irreversible markers of a present that is moving forwards, and a future that is ineluctably becoming the past. Unlike space, time has a natural order. If A influences B, then B is always later in time. This is the central feature of time as we perceive it: as a flowing entity that orders our lives.
There’s only one problem with this, says David Deutsch of the University of Oxford: it’s nonsensical. We see ourselves as living in a present that marches down an imaginary timeline at a set pace. The imagery implies the existence of some sort of universal ticking time setting the beat against which all else is measured. “But what is that other time?” says Deutsch. We’ve only succeeded in creating a new problem.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23130890-900-metaphysics-special-is-time-an-illusion/?cmpid&utm_medium=EMP&utm_source=NSNS&utm_campaign=metaphysics_part6&utm_content=IsTimeAnIllusion
In classical mechanics, time is something that passes uniformly regardless of whatever happens in the world. For this reason Newton spoke of absolute space and absolute time. On the other hand, Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity predicted that time does not flow at a fixed rate: moving clocks appear to tick more slowly relative to their stationary counterparts. Quantum mechanics does not neglect the time either. In standard model, photon does not experience time. Some new theories suggest that time does not exist at the quantum level. The study of the quantum universe shows us that time does not exist. It shows us that time is a function of relativity only and exists relative to some arbitrary point of reference [1]. Whatever else may be said about time, one thing is certain. It defies definition. The best we can say is that we all know what time is, intuitively. The Seventh Edition of Webster's Collegiate Dictionary tells us that time is "the measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues." Of course, what the lexicographer has done here is to tell us that time is defined by its measurement and that measurement is of a period during which something occurs. He has not told us what time really is [2]. In fact it is the definition of a clock. What is the nature of physical time, really? In this paper, I have tried to answer this question.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279531060_Graviton_physical_time_and_thermodynamics
Article Graviton: physical time and thermodynamics
I would argue that any dimension could be called "an illusion," if we did not perceive it from a higher dimensional space.
Consider the first dimension. A dot in space. If that's all there was, there would be nothing, and we would perceive nothing.
Now you arrange many dots consecutively, and in the two dimensional space, the first dimension takes on meaning. At least now, the concept of a first dimension can be understood.
Three dimensional space expands on two dimensional space, allowing objects to be defined conceptually. But still nothing exists, because all matter is frozen. Nothing can even be formed.
Time allows three dimensional objects to be perceivable, as much as a flat two dimensional space allowed one dimensional dots to be conceptualized.
Mathematics has no problem at all defining multi-dimensional spaces, in which time would be just another dimension. Physics deals with what we can see and measure, so it doesn't delve in these higher dimensional spaces. But that doesn't mean they don't exist. So, once we figure out how to detect these higher dimensional realities, that's when we'll get a clear understanding of what time is.
Remember, you read it here first. :)
Physically, when there is no time,there is no motion,and changes can never occur.
I would argue that any dimension could be called "an illusion," if we did not perceive it from a higher dimensional space.
Consider the first dimension. A dot in space. If that's all there was, there would be nothing, and we would perceive nothing.
Now you arrange many dots consecutively, and in the two dimensional space, the first dimension takes on meaning. At least now, the concept of a first dimension can be understood.
Three dimensional space expands on two dimensional space, allowing objects to be defined conceptually. But still nothing exists, because all matter is frozen. Nothing can even be formed.
Time allows three dimensional objects to be perceivable, as much as a flat two dimensional space allowed one dimensional dots to be conceptualized.
Mathematics has no problem at all defining multi-dimensional spaces, in which time would be just another dimension. Physics deals with what we can see and measure, so it doesn't delve in these higher dimensional spaces. But that doesn't mean they don't exist. So, once we figure out how to detect these higher dimensional realities, that's when we'll get a clear understanding of what time is.
Remember, you read it here first. :)
Is time an illusion?
Time to me personally is a dimension in relative comparison with other dimensions like distance, space, speed, progression, event etc. rather than illusion.
The way that how nature works is not imaginable without “time passing”, because functionality of nature is a kind of changing and changing is in relation with time.
In order to have better understanding of the physical nature of time, reviewing physical properties of particles can be helpful and how they interact. The question is: what is the physical nature of time? Moreover, which particles do not experience passing time? Are there such particles? If so, what are their features? In physics, we see only clocks, our efforts is to understand more than ticking clocks. Is there time independent of clocks? Is time describable without of clock?
Usually, clock is introduced as a tool that shows passing time, behind this simple definition of time, there is something else. This ambiguity permeates to thought that not all clocks are synchronized with each other, and surprisingly they have very different lifetime. Probably human is looking for an eternal clock, a clock that works independently of all physical events and will work forever.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302313653_Adaptive_Review_of_Three_Fundamental_Questions_in_Physics?ev=prf_pub
Article Adaptive Review of Three Fundamental Questions in Physics
TIME is an ILLUSION according to EINSTEIN - (the space-time continuum)!
Albert Einstein was very clear in his day. Physicists are very clear now. Time is not absolute, despite what common sense tells you and me. Time is relative, and flexible and, according to Einstein, "the dividing line between past, present, and future is an illusion". So reality is ultimately TIMELESS. This sounds pretty bizarre from the view of classical physics, but from the view of consciousness theory and spirituality, it fits in perfectly...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYZQxMowBsw
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-time-an-illusion/
Dear @Hossein, there are fine threads about time, I do suggest you to visit this one. Many good responses were made about flow of time as an illusion.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_the_flow_of_time_an_illusion
Dear Hossein,
>...Usually, clock is introduced as a tool that shows passing time, ...,
Yes. Time is a tool!
Time is one of the most complex concepts that usually the human mind has been preoccupied about it. Scientists and philosophers have struggled to identify and explain the nature of time.
However, still there is no definition for physical definition of time, and it is still just a scientific undefined quantity. "It would be nice if we could find a good definition of time." Richard Feynman said.
http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_05.html
With naivety about time, time is passing from past to the future which from all eternity would last forever. This is exactly the simplified form of the absolute time of Newtonian physics. Although, the nature of time was intended, but do we really have anything for time except the clock and its ticking.
Richard Feynman once quipped, "Time is what happens when nothing else does."
http://www.amazon.com/The-End-Time-Revolution-Physics/dp/0195145925
If nothing happens, so there is nothing cause of happen, when there is nothing, what is time that could happens? So it seems what Feynman has said is a philosophy explanation (not defined) of time and it is not even physical explanation. However, Julian Barbour disagrees with Feynman and says: "if nothing happened, if nothing changed, then time would stop. For time is nothing but change. It is change that we perceive occurring all around us, not time. Put simply, time does not exist." (last link)
Some other authors and researchers say that time is an illusion.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-time-an-illusion
“The meaning of time has become terribly problematic in contemporary physics, the situation is so uncomfortable that by far the best thing to do is declare oneself an agnostic.” Efforts to understand time below the Planck scale have led to an exceedingly strange juncture in physics. The problem, in brief, is that time may not exist at the most fundamental level of physical reality. If so, then what is time? In addition, why is it so obviously and tyrannically omnipresent in our own experience?
http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/in-no-time
In order to have better understanding of the physical nature of time, reviewing physical properties of particles can be helpful and how they interact. The question is: what is the physical nature of time? Moreover, which particles do not experience passing time? Are there such particles? in standard model a photon that moves with constant speed of limit , does not experience "time passing"
http://www.whillyard.com/science-pages/electromagnetic-force.html
So this question arises: what is the properties of a particle that could be really a fundamental particle? In CPH theory, a fundamental particle is a particle that is not decayed under any condition or is not convertible into other particles. Such a particle must be constant mass (energy), therefore, the value of speed must not change.
By this definition of fundamental particles, that standard model presents, particles are not fundamental, because their masses are not constant and they are convertible to energy. For instance, electron and positron absorb each other and convert to energy. This phenomenon holds for other fundamental particles in standard model even for photon, because energy photon is variable (for example in gravitational field and Compton effect)) and in pair production, a high energy photon converts to electron-positron. As the same way, it can be shown that even photon experiences time passing. In fact, a fundamental particle must not experiences time passing, and all other particles are made of it even quantum fields.
https://www.researchgate.net/project/Creative-Particles-of-Higgs-or-CPH-Theory
How can it be? Are we not aging with time? Do we not spend time. How does time brings value to money _ " time value of money" ?. There are many concepts/ processes that are ought to be temporal!!!
However, money cannot be deposited in a bank, and be drawn at convenient installments.!!!!
Dear Jayaram
You are draw conclusions from a macroscopic perspective. It is true that from a macroscopic perspective. But the microscopic point of view is not correct.
For detail please see pages 70-81 of following link:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302313653_Adaptive_Review_of_Three_Fundamental_Questions_in_Physics?ev=prf_pub
Article Adaptive Review of Three Fundamental Questions in Physics
My thoughts on this topic,, interpreting the formulae of physics and going back with respect to time involvement, inductively and symmetrically, are as follows:
“ In subjects concerning motion, forces, energy, power etc., I noticed, that, there exist seven (7) basic forms, which appear to derive one from the other and thus related. These forms (relationships) necessary for the creation of a (powerful) work element, from its conceptual idea to materialization are Line, surface, volume per unit time (mass rate of unity water density), momentum, force, work (or energy) and power. They are fractions with numerators powers of space (length) and denominators powers of time:
L^1 /T^0 , L^2 /T^0 , L^3 /T^1 , L^4 /T^1, L^4 /T^2, L^5 /T^2, L^5 /T^3.
Length (L^1 ) and surface (L^2) are timeless (T^0 =1), Encephalic Concepts.
Ref. p13:
http://www.stefanides.gr/pdf/BOOK%20_GRSOGF.pdf ”
Regards,
http://www.stefanides.gr
Dear Panagiotis
You are right, but consider that you are a clock too. And you are comparison two clock that one more regular than the other.
Dear Hossein Javadi,
Your question has an answer today by the paper titled 'Human's Delusion of Time'. There is also a thread of similar discussion mentioned below that can be interesting for you.
Moreover, latest research gives us a device (WO/2015/040505) described in the paper 'Philosophy, Physics, and Mathematics of Relative and Absolute motion.'
That device uses not any notion of so-called "Time" and makes some measurements that "impossible" for other devices.
For example, it splits all round-trip experiments (all Michelson-Morley type Experiments) for two one-way experiments. As a result, it determines a difference in signal propagation in two opposite directions.
According to Einstein's point of view, light spends ever the same duration to move from the point A to the point B. That is one of the fundamental postulates of Relativity.
However, the device WO/2015/040505 exceeds that limitation and gives counter-arguments against that postulate by a measured difference of light propagation in two opposite directions. The same law is correct for any signal-medium combination.
Therefore, all speculations about "changing Time" for a "moving" observer become incorrect.
The same law is correct for any signal-medium combination.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_the_time_a_product_of_the_mind_Is_the_mass_and_energy_also_a_product_of_the_mind#view=57874c083d7f4b8601502ddd
https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2015040505
Article Human’s Delusion of Time
Article Philosophy, physics and mathematics of relative and absolute motion
Dear Hossein,
>...comparison two clock that one more regular than the other....
“Is time an illusion”
- such problem is considered a number of times in the RG already. The Time isn’t an illusion, of course, but to understand this point is necessary to understand before that the notions/phenomena “Time” and similar in a number of features, “Space”, are Meta-mainstream-philosophical [and mainstream-physical…] notions /phenomena and so can be properly defined and rationally considered only in framework of the “The Information as Absolute” conception (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260930711_the_Information_as_Absolute )
More comments – see SS posts in https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_reality_of_becoming_Is_times_arrow_subjective#view=57cacd983d7f4bb1f427a631 at least pages 11-20.
Including any paper that used an approach outside the conception, including the referenced in this thread, defines/discusses this problem being rather far away from the correct understanding. The papers in the referred above special “New Scientist” aren’t an exclusion from this fact…
Cheers
Article the Information as Absolute
Refer to Plato's Time:
....He planned to make a movable image of Eternity, ....
….set in order the Heaven....
...HE MADE AN ETERNAL IMAGE MOVING ACCORDING TO NUMBER,
… WHICH WE HAVE NAMED TIME......[TIMAEUS 37E]
...Time was created along with the Heaven,in order to disolve concurrently with it,IF EVER A DISSOLUTION OF THEM WILL TAKE PLACE [Timaeus 38B]...
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.stefanides.gr/Pdf/artsymposium.pdf
http://www.stefanides.gr/Html/platostriangle.htm
http://www.stefanides.gr/pdf/BOOK%20_GRSOGF.pdf
http://www.stefanides.gr
Going to Classical Mechanics, for the simple pendulum period [sec] :
T= 2π[ sqrt (l/g)]
i.e. time [ PERIOD OF OSCILLATIONS] is a function of length and acceleration of gravity
[l = length ( in m) of the pendulum, and g is the local acceleration of gravity im m/s^2].
LHS [units seconds] = RHS [units seconds].
Half period t/2 [in sec] may be replaced by the circle’s 2πl, arc lθ = L [in meters] i.e. arc defined by bob’s center reciprocation between the two end of movement limits [ and θ the small sector angle of reciprocation ].
If T/2[ in seconds] is substituted by L[in meters ] then g in m/s^2 units has to be substituted by m^(-1) i.e. 1/m.
Then l/g units will take value of m*[1/m] = m^2 and sqrt[m^2] = m
Tthus LHS [in meters] = RHS [in meters].
Note 1.The interest of the formula " T= 2π[ sqrt (l/g)] " is that increased values of g, result into decreased values of periods [ or increased frequencies] i.e in STRONG GRAVITATIONAL FIELDS time does not tend to ZERO but PERIOD OF OSCILLATIONS does or : FREQUENCY tends to INFINITY! *
* Relativity specifies that, as such [ i.e in strong gravitation fields] “ time tends to zero”.
Note 2. A similar, quantified measure of time, in our local environment, is that of the gravitational flow of sand in a clepsydra.
Regards,
Panagiotis Stefanides
-------------------------------------------
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/geometric-approach-gravity-force-variation-height-stefanides?trk=mp-reader-card
We are confronted with the illusions as soon as the first time we open our eyes after birth.
'...The unconscious has no time. There is no trouble about time in the unconscious. Part of our psyche is not in time and not in space. They are only an illusion, time and space, and so in a certain part of our psyche time does not exist at all.'
-Carl Jung
Time together with Life or Information are big topics in all human sciences. Nobody knows all publications about these terms and words.
To provide a nonending discussion: the word and term time can be seen in two main points of view:
a) physically as attribute of every changing in whole nature - used time for this is a useful attribute to make a change comparable. This time is defined by comparing with our clock-movements in worldwide unified units (seconds, minute, hours,..).
b) time is an object of human mind and feeling. So it can't be measured. But it can be realised by all our human senses and organs. Then it is dependent on whole human soul or consciousness. Sometimes one physical hour is long and sometimes it is very short - that depends on how much of our mind is concentrated on the measurement of changing itself. We can't accellerate time but it goes slowlier if we observe the seconds-pointer of a clock.
I wouldn't say "time is illusion" because that would be something not realy important existing or noticed.
“…The unconscious has no time. There is no trouble about time in the unconscious. Part of our psyche is not in time and not in space. They are only an illusion, time and space…”
- and how poor unconscious Matter evolved in time before on some planet some psyche appeared...
Or - a next statement about the time that is far away from the correct understanding what is the notion/phenomenon "Time"...
Cheers
Dears Allan and Panagiotis
According to relativity you are right. According to special relativity, speed of light in vacuum is a universal constant for all inertia observers, but other quantities like momentum, length, mass and time change according to observational frame of reference.
Dear Sergey
In quantum mechanics, quantity of time is proposed in a more fundamental style. For example, in standard model a photon that moves with constant speed of limit , does not experience "time passing". Moreover, some theories based on quantum mechanics do not accept the existence of time in quantum scales.
So this question arises: what is the properties of a particle that could be really a fundamental particle? A fundamental particle should be a particle that is not decayed under any condition or is not convertible into other particles. Such a particle must be constant mass (energy), therefore, the value of speed must not change.
By this definition of fundamental particles, that standard model presents, particles are not fundamental, because their masses are not constant and they are convertible to energy.
Dear Dr. Shevchenko,
You wrote, among others, ‘a next senseless statement about the time...’.
Obviously, you referred to my answer.
By the way, what are the previous senseless statements?
Anyway, the statement in my answer, which has come from Carl Jung, a great man in the field of Psychiatry, is undoubtedly not senseless. The work of Carl Jung is very informative and widely acceptable worldwide.
In addition, I am surprised by the use of the word ‘senseless’ in a forum like RG net.
Really, do you think that it is polite?
Regards
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Jung
Dear Dr. Shevchenko,
After my second answer, I saw that you have modify your last answer, removing ‘senseless’.
Thank you for the new phrasing of your last answer.
Regards
Regarding the phrase 'Or - a next statement about the time that is far away from the correct understanding what is the notion/phenomenon "Time"...', a topic can be seen by different perspectives, approaching or not, each other.
Nevertheless, I have the sense that the 'truth' about the 'illusion of time or not' is still far away.
Dear Aristidis
I agree with you. We are not neutral to time.
In addition, different physical phenomena to different conclusions about the time arrives. For this reason, thermodynamic perspective and relativity is different and results will not be identical.
Dear Ljubomir
Thank you for interesting link, that is a useful discussion.
In an obvious world, physical time does not exist independent of matter (energy).
Whenever “time” is involved, one clock is associated, because the man has also a physical existence and consequently he is a clock, too. On the other hand a physical existence (able to being obvious) is made in its own space, and the moment it is created, its time starts. Therefore, man is a clock, too and when we talk about the nature of time, apart from comparing the rhythm of clocks’ movement, nothing else is explainable in physics.
Illusions must be present in a person's life, but does not dominate. Without illusions of life is pessimistic.
The ticking clock is fact. And passing time is fact for each clock.
But every clock (such as man) is made up of the particles that does not experince passing time.
@Hossein Javadi "The ticking clock is fact. And passing time is fact for each clock."
Can you explain step-by-step a physical process of interaction of so-called flow of "Time" and a clock?
Dear Allan
There is 4 standpoint on time and time dilation.
A. special relativity, time and speed
B. general relativity, time and gravity
C. thermodynamics, time and entropy
D. quantum mechanics, time and fundamental particles
So, it is impossible to explain them in a comment. You can study them at pages 65-81 of following link;
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302313653_Adaptive_Review_of_Three_Fundamental_Questions_in_Physics?ev=prf_pub
Article Adaptive Review of Three Fundamental Questions in Physics
Dear Hossein, my question was about a measurement of so-called "Time", not about time dilation or relativity.
If you have a measurement device, you must be able to explain a physical way of its operation. In case of a clock, you must explain a physical interaction of so-called flow of "Time" and indication of a clock.
If you cannot do that, you cannot say that a clock makes a measurement of Time.
time is not an Illusion, but it depends on how it is defined. for instance, if it is defined as Motion of matter, then it should have min. 2 dimensions (according to velocity and acceleration, in other words: variation of space, and Variation of Variation of space)
Dear Hossein,
Again (see SS post on 2 page and the links in the post) “Time” and “Space” are utmost fundamental Rules/Possibilities that act in whole “Information” Set, including, of course, in sub-Set “Matter” and in [non-material] sub-Set “Consciousnesses”, “logically”forming concrete different “spacetimes” for every singled out system [singled out sub-Set], including, for example, spacetimes for Matter and for humans’ consciousnesses. Thus both - “Time” and “Space”, including for Matter exist fundamentally objectively, if somebody has some illusions that is peculiar problems of this somebody.
In Matter these possibilities are observed as the dimensions and Matter’s spacetime is [5]4D, (i.e. having two [“true” and “coordinate”] times and three space dimensions) Euclidian “empty container”. At that “…For example, in standard model a photon that moves with constant speed of limit , does not experience "time passing"…” - that isn’t correct completely – photons indeed don’t move in the coordinate time [i.e. in the “time what clocks show”], but all/every material objects, including photons, move in the true time with equal speed that is equal to the speed of light and so all/every objects in Matter are always simultaneously in the same true time moment
[independently on their positions in the coordinate time, i.e. independently on – what any clock show or what age has a human; when in the coordinate time the motion is slowed down if an object moves in the 3D space with non-zero 3D speed – e.g. “twin paradox”]
and so all material objects can interact [and interact].
Etc. - again – the thread’s question essentially was discussed in a number of RG threads; when I usually don’t like to repeat in fact written already posts, so more – see the SS post on the 2-th page and the links.
As to what is “fundamental particle?” – that seems isn’t principal question in this thread; and, regrettably, it cannot be substantively answered in a short post.
Cheers
Dear Sergey
You have written"The Time isn’t an illusion..." I wrote: "The ticking clock is fact. And passing time is fact for each clock." Let me add that everything (such as observable bodies and even fundamental particles) is a clock, so for them time is not an illusion.
Quantum mechanics investigates about time from both experimental and conceptual dimensions. Although paradox of twins was proposed in relativity, but quantum mechanics claims, photon does not experience passing time. Photon travels in space milliards of light years and when it enters to light systems on the earth, behaves like photons in which have been created on the earth and in the lab a moment ago. Is photon stationary (static) on the axis of time? In other words, is photon moving in the space that does not experience passing time in the words of quantum mechanics, but motionless in the time? It means that here this question that, is not there a space-time to the relativistic concept for the photon? Essentially, what is the relation between space and time with a physical object (existent) for example (e.g.) a stone?
Stone interacts with other physical existents. The question is: what is the relation between stone, space and time? Is stone a physical existent in the framework of space and its position changes on the axis of time too? Suppose that this stone has occupied a part of space and while there exists in that space, it cannot be substituted by other object. This is exterior (appearance) of this event that we can vacate the occupied space by stone and substitute it with another object. If we throw the small stone outside the room, has been vacated the space occupied by stone? The answer is positive from the view of an observer that has sat down in the room and can substitute another thing instead of empty space of stone. It means that the empty volume in the room has increased. However, generally in fact, the stone has not egressed from the space that had occupied, but it has taken its space along with itself.
By egression stone from the room, even if a complete vacuum holds in the room, again a new space substitutes by a space in which it had already been occupied by stone from mathematical dimension (not physical). For example, vacate the water inside a glass and fill it by syrup. Have you assigned the space of water to the syrup? The answer is negative. Water took its space with itself while vacating and syrup entered into the glass along with its space. Perhaps, you can vacate the air among molecules of water, but you cannot get the space among molecules of water (the space mixed with molecules of water). Generally, mass (or energy), space, motion and time have been mixed and are inseparable from each other.
Now pay attention to motions inside the structure of stone atoms or water of glass, do you can stop their movements? You can to stop the stone relative to a system, but you cannot make motionless its elements such as electrons. Generally, mass (or energy), space, motion and time are intertwined and inseparable from each other. Changing motion properties including speed of stone relative to a system is something that appeared for us, while it is partial of inherence of formed particles of stone. We move the stone. By increasing the speed of the stone, according to relativity, swing electrons around the nucleus changes. So, there is a relation between the transmission speed of stone and rotation of the electron around the nucleus. This relation between transmission and non-transmission speed is the reason that a cesium atom at different speeds, slow or rapid fluctuations that are different evokes the time dilation. So, the motion of the constituent particles of stone and time are intertwined. Generally, the mass (or energy) with space, movement and time are intertwined and are inseparable which other that we can observe, detect or visualize a physical being. Image or visualize a physical entity in our mind is something and its physical reality is something else. If these two (phenomenon and physical reality) were unit, we did not need to research and think about the reality of a physical entity and everything was clear for us, but it is not. Our knowledge of the physical beings is the result of centuries and continuous efforts that we have reached to modern physics. There is three attitudes about time in the modern physics. One is based on relativity, other is a result of quantum mechanics progress and the third attitude of thermodynamics. In all three views, space, mass (or energy) and movement are the intrinsic properties of a physical entity, but there is considerable differences view about time.
@Sergey Shevchenko "Thus both - “Time” and “Space”, including for Matter exist fundamentally objectively, if somebody has some illusions that is peculiar problems of this somebody."
AZ: That is a big problem of science because an absence of a relationship between theories and experiments leads to growing illusions in the science.
For example, many persons in this thread of discussion think that a clock makes a measurement of time. However, nobody can answer an easy question about the physical interaction between a so-called flow of Time and a physical (mechanical) clock.
That illusion leads to many other illusions and denies a scientific method of research. As everybody knows, a scientific method requires a physical support (outside the human mind) by physical measurements for every idea that appears inside the human mind.
Every idea that fails that test cannot be treated as a scientific one. The idea of physical Time fails that test also because nobody can explain a physical interaction between a so-called flow of Time and a physical (escapement) clock.
Therefore, Time does not exist as any part of a physical reality of the universe.
Dear Allan
You have written:"Every idea that fails that test cannot be treated as a scientific one. " Sure, in addition we are not seeing the world out of it. We are a small part of the world that we live in. Also, no picture covers all the landscape, the physical events are not in our minds, and we will process our personal phenomena in mind that usually are far from the reality.
We describe a personal phenomenon, it will bring judgment and the others are compared with the phenomenon itself. In discussion, a common phenomenon will be created that is closer to reality. The history of science shows that even a common human phenomenon isn’t all reality. Physicists in order to make the joint phenomenon close together and prevent dispersion of votes and results used mathematical models. Therefore physicists used mathematics to describe reality.
Scientific theories do not show the laws of nature, but are our understanding of physical phenomena to explain the nature and closeness of the common phenomena to the dominating rules of nature. So no theory is perfect, even if expressed with mathematical formulas.
But about the time, a lot of experience shows time does not exist at the sub-quantum scale. For example, consider to pair production and decay (also Dirac Sea), energy converts to matter and vice versa.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303988070_Generalization_of_the_Dirac%27s_Equation_and_Sea
Article Generalization of the Dirac's Equation and Sea
Yes dear Ljubomir Jacić and all "Time is an illusion. ~ Albert Einstein"
The observations in Hossein's original question would seem to suggest that if it exists, time is a phenomenon that only has meaning beyond the quantum level and whose displacement is defined with respect to each observer. This would seem to indicate that time is simply the measure of the separation between the instances of each composite observer.
Dear Kevin
Exactly, you have provided a clear and simple explanation about the argument, thank you.
World lines of a real photon and a virtual photon in Minkowski space-time is the edge of real space-time where real photon is moving in vacuum with speed c, in this edge, vacuum energy is produced and appears. Thus, in the edge of Minkowski space-time, electromagnetics and gravity are unified with each other. The electromagnetic radiation is blue-shifted when it is falling in the gravitational field.
We consider a small cutting in the structure of the photon and its surroundings in vacuum and investigate its mechanism in the boundary of Minkowski space-time. In this small incision real space-time, virtual space-time and non-obvious space are involved with each other and time does begin. Page 75 of following article:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302313653_Adaptive_Review_of_Three_Fundamental_Questions_in_Physics?ev=prf_pub
Article Adaptive Review of Three Fundamental Questions in Physics
Hossein Javadi "So no theory is perfect, even if expressed with mathematical formulas.
But about the time, a lot of experience shows time does not exist at the sub-quantum scale."
AZ: Your statement leads to a grave problem that can be formulated by one question. How does Time appear beyond sub-quantum scale? That makes the situation worse than ever because it makes two controversial categories of Time instead of one and the illusion of Time only doubles.
The righty theory reduces the set of categories it uses and eliminates all fake (or redundant categories coming from the human mind).
You should remember this. All theories mentioned above like Einstein's theory and QM rests on the same old experiment. That is Michelson-Morley experiment with light and its so-called "Null result".
However, modern Michelson-Morley experiments with various signals in various medium show the same "Null result". For example, works of Norbert Feist (a German researcher) show that null result for acoustic signals in the air.
Therefore, all speculations about a unique way of propagation of light in space proposed by Einstein are not correct any longer because other signals show the same law of propagation regardless any medium. Therefore, Einstein's point of view on Time becomes wrong also.
My paper mentioned below, explains that law in the form of ELM (a universal law) of propagation of any signal in every medium. The paper also explains the way of operation of a physical device (SMA) that exceeds all restriction of MMX.
As a result, application of SMA eliminates a lot of old illusions of so-called "basic categories" of physics including "Time". That category is redundant for the device.
That is the reality of modern research in physics. I guess, you are ready now to read this paper.
Article Philosophy, physics and mathematics of relative and absolute motion
Dear Allan
Please give me a simple answer, do you believe "is there an absolute motion in nature?"
Dear Hossein,
“…" I wrote: "The ticking clock is fact. And passing time is fact for each clock."..”; as well as
“…For example, many persons in this thread of discussion think that a clock makes a measurement of time. However, nobody can answer an easy question about the physical interaction between a so-called flow of Time and a physical (mechanical) clock. ..”, and
“…if it exists, time is a phenomenon that only has meaning beyond the quantum level and whose displacement is defined with respect to each observer…”
all such claims aren’t completely correct. Again – “Time” (and “Space”) are some utmost fundamental Rule/Possibilities from the set of the Rules/Possibilities [in the informational conception – “Logos”] that [Logos] determine – what is the information and how something must be build to be an information.
Everything what exists in our Universe and outside, is/are some informational patterns that are elements of the absolutely fundamental and absolutely infinite “Information” Set; and the Set is fundamentally real. Since any information cannot be annihilated, the Set principally exists always, or “in absolutely long time interval”; correspondingly “Space” and “Time” exist/act always and absolutely objectively/really [the notion “objective/subjective” appears only in relation to interactions in the systems “a human’s consciousness / the consciousness environment (material and non-material, i.e. social ”] also.
The notion “Time” [and analogously its analogue “Space”] as the possibility establishes that
- [though the notion/phenomenon “Change” is logically self-inconsistent notion, as that Zeno proved 2500 years ago]
that changes of some objects/systems of objects are possible, what is realized in the Set as the “time dimension[s]”; and so some changes of some object/system of objects proceed in some the object’s/system’s “time/temporal dimension”.
As the Rule Time establishes that between different states of a changing object always must be non-zero “time interval”. Thus there is no some independent “time flow”, however if something changes then this process obligatorily is accompanied by some increasing time interval.
- that above is rigorous ontological definition of the notion “Time”.
As the possibilities Time and Space for the concrete system/sub-Set “Matter” form concrete [5]4D Euclidian spacetime.
Besides there is a popular commonplace definition of the time – “time is what clocks show”, but it is incorrect by at least two reasons – clocks don’t show the time, since, again, the time is the possibility/dimension; clocks show the rate and the sum of the changes of their internal states. At that the time, including in Matter’s spacetime, hasn’t some own “time unity”/ “scale”, the unique condition above is that the time interval must have non-zero value; and so clocks can show only relative rates/sums [the durations] of temporal intervals in systems where are at least two changing objects. The informational system “Matter”, which in certain sense is like a computer, works uninterruptedly with highly stable operation rate, and so humans can make clocks that effectively compare rates/durations of processes in different material systems.
Matter’s spacetime includes two temporal and 3 spatial dimensions, more see, for example, SS post here: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_the_true_objects_really_contract_at_relativistic_velocities#57d26825217e2043d52948f3
Cheers
Of all the illusions within our present 3D distortion, understanding the deception of space/time vs the reality of time/space is one of the most difficult for most to escape. If Space/Time (Physicality/Matter) is the illusion, then Time/Space (Anti-Matter) must be the reality.
http://www.focusonrecovery.net/mattersoffaith/space_time_illusion.html
Illusion is the last chance for a person depressed to believe in the beauty of life.
Hossein Javadi "Please give me a simple answer, do you believe "is there an absolute motion in nature?"
The SMA that I mentioned above, has many reasons to exist, and determination of an absolute motion is one of them.
MMX type experiments cannot give an answer on that question because of ELM (a constant duration of any round-trip experiment or experiments with mirrors in any signal-medium combination).
Today, it is possible to build that device in any concerned University.
Krishnan Umachandran: "If Space/Time is an illusion, then Time/Space must be the reality."
AZ: Science does not anything with sophisms.
To think about Space/Time or Time/Space you should give a definition of both categories. Otherwise, you have the relationship of nothing to nothing that leads consequently to one more nothing.
Unless one realised things practically everything appears as illusion. If you feel your image in the mirror is an illusion you are right and wrong. You can't touch,talk, interact with the image hence it is correct. Without you ,your image is impossible, hence wrong.Humans started imagining time,later realised and now it can be measured and also it is considered as the dimension.Time is reality like software in the computer, though we can't feel it by our sence organs it is a realty in applications.
Dear Sergey
"...Since any information cannot be annihilated, the Set principally exists always,..."
The main problem is that information is transmitted by what?
Dear Allan
".... an absolute motion is one of them." What about the terms of absolute time?
Dear G.S.,
>.... though we can't feel it by our sence organs it is a realty....
Dear Hossein,
“…The main problem is that information is transmitted by what?..”
- here is no problem, if you understand that the information as absolutely fundamental essence/phenomenon as that is proven in the “The Information as Absolute” conception – see the link in SS post on 2-nd page. In the reality there is/are nothing besides the information in our Universe and outside [i.e. in the “Information” Set], when information doesn’t require something “non-informational” to exist/be stored/ be transmitted.
The example from the paper in the link: let there is nothing, including there are no “storages of information” – minds, papers, stones, hard disks, flesh cards, etc., etc., etc.; and so there is no all information that was written in these storages.
But after disappearing of the storages above the next the information appears - as the data that “there are no/disappeared “storages of information” – minds, papers, stones, hard disks, flesh cards, etc., etc., etc.; with all information that was written in these storages”. And this evidently true informational pattern, which evidently “cannot be written on something”, evidently contains all true and absolutely exact data about every of the storages above and all information that was written in the storages.
Thus for information there is no necessity to have some “storages”, the information can be/is a storage / transmitter of information; again this fact is a consequence of the fact that information is absolutely fundamental.
When the essence/phenomenon “information” – and the “Information” Set as well – are very interesting and paradoxical essences/phenomena…
Cheers
Dear Panagiotis Stefanides
If our heart beats at 77 times/minute(pulse rate) we are leading a healthy life,if not we have to search for a doctor. Time has a role play in almost all walks of life.Actually you know why humans invented numerous measuring instruments?.To sense the parameters which are beyond sensible range of human organs& to bring it to sensible range of human organs(vision,hearing,smell,touch&taste). Time is one such parameter.
In my view, the journey of life is so beautiful which we name as TIME can never be illusion. This journey is different for everyone which doesn't make it illusive for others.
>...the journey of life is so beautiful which we name as TIME ...
Thanks for elaborating my opinion Panagiotis. I was not aware about the facts you told.
Dear Sergey
You have written: "Thus for information there is no necessity to have some storages,..."
I agree with you, but by different opinion, in CPH theory everything is made of sub quantum energy, and sub quantum energy contains information.
https://www.researchgate.net/project/Creative-Particles-of-Higgs-or-CPH-Theory
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303988070_Generalization_of_the_Dirac%27s_Equation_and_Sea?ev=prf_pub
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280113834_Graviton_Virtual_photon_and_Quantum_Chromodynamics?ev=prf_pub
Article Generalization of the Dirac's Equation and Sea
Article Graviton: Virtual photon and Quantum Chromodynamics
Dear Anjali
You have written:"In my view, the journey of life is so beautiful..." I agree with you, time is a real quantity for human, but is does not mean time exists for every physical being.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279531060_Graviton_physical_time_and_thermodynamics?ev=prf_pub
Article Graviton: physical time and thermodynamics
Yes, time does appear to be a very interesting phenomenon -
From our vantage point, the 'irreversibility' of the flow of events (based on the ever-increasing entropy, from the thermodynamic perspective), grants us a sense of linearity and 'progressing forward' - with a convenient ordering of events, from past to the future.
(and thus, "All the king's horses and all the king's men / Couldn't put Humpty together again.")
However, it would seem that 'information' might not be suffering from the same types of limitations -
In addition to 'bending the rules' on what we though to be an impervious boundary to velocity, the speed of light (entanglement experiments demonstrated communication faster than the speed of light, by an estimated factor of 10,000) it would now also appear that, the long-standing barrier of the 'asymmetry of time' (and therefore, of entropy??) might also be in question.
A recent experiment managed to demonstrate particles (and heavy ones, at that - atoms, not even photons) sending information back from the 'future', in order to collapse the probability-wave equation in the 'present':
* http://www.digitaljournal.com/science/experiment-shows-future-events-decide-what-happens-in-the-past/article/434829
How might we interpret these experimental results - in terms of the 'unidirectional arrow of time', and its implications on our notions of 'causality'?
For instance, might this imply that we live in a 'super-position' universe even at the macro level - as some are suggesting; where all of the possible / likely states exist simultaneously, and 'at the same time' - until one is observed and therefore selected?
And, can that 'observation / selection' occur 'in the future' - whatever that might mean - and then, propagate to the 'past'?
And if so, what might that suggest about the nature of information, and its posited role (could information be 'gluing' and 'stitching together' the contiguous fabric of the perceivable universe in some way - when it comes to collapsing / selecting observable realities from the multitudes of the possible / probable quantum states?)
This might also raise interesting questions about the 'boundedness of time', as it applies to information.
For instance:
1) What might define the 'boundaries' of a particular 'event' within the multiple probabilities wave-equation / quantum states 'soup'? How do things get differentiated from one another?
2) Are there different laws / rules of 'time' that apply to 'information'?
3) Is 'information' traversing through a higher-dimensional space of some sort (as some have been suggesting), giving the illusion of increased 'speed' and velocity of propagation - from our 'lower dimensional space' vantage point?
4) And if so, what might all of this imply about the nature of time, information, and the observer - in particular, who's 'collapsing the quantum states' when no-one's looking (and thus creating a neatly contiguous universe)?
Certainly, as a scientific community and a global culture, we seem to be on the brink of something important and perhaps even momentous here -
It's glad to be a part of this discussion . I have so much of information. Thanks Hossein.
Dear Goran
You have mentioned to the interesting and profound items, thank you.
the Standard Model describes the phenomena within its domain accurately, it is still incomplete. Perhaps it is only a part of a bigger picture of the modern physics which includes the deeper and hidden layer of subatomic world that has been dipped into the darkness of the universe.
The Standard Model, CERN Document Server, http://home.cern/about/physics/standard-model
The question is, where is the hidden part of modern physics? Hidden part of modern physics lies beyond the uncertainty principle. Included in the sub quantum scale, where quantum interactions between photons and gravitons done.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303988070_Generalization_of_the_Dirac%27s_Equation_and_Sea
Article Generalization of the Dirac's Equation and Sea
@Hossein Javadi “The question is, where is the hidden part of modern physics?”
Yes, there is many “hidden parts” of modern physics. The problem is this.
Sometimes researchers do not understand the phenomenon that they face. As a result, they “produce” a postulate to make “explanation” of the phenomenon. That situation is critical one because researchers produce that postulate(s) on the ground of their prior experience. As a result, they usually do not understand the meaning of “unusual data” coming from the experiment. Therefore, such method leads to huge illusions because a new phenomenon “becomes explained” by postulate(s) instead of a step-by-step physical explanation.
The best example of such way is Relativity. They find out that Michelson-Morley experiment gives so-called “null” result that stays on the contrary to their theoretical predictions. Later, Einstein proposed a theory that light has its unique reference frame that is independent of any moving observer. It looks like a “great achievement” until 21-th century.
A few years ago (from now) something strange was noticed. There was an absence of acoustic Michelson-Morley experiments. Nobody care about that until German researcher Norbert Feist conducted acoustic Michelson-Morley experiment by himself. To his surprise that experiment stays in contradiction to the “theoretical predictions” of Michelson too and shows the same so-called “null” result.
In other words, propagation of sound waves in air or water shows the same “null” result as well as all experiments with light. Relativity gives not any explanation for such phenomena.
Therefore, acoustic Michelson-Morley experiment falsifies Relativity because Relativity predicts some difference in signal propagation that should be determined in a physical experiment with acoustical signals.
Moreover, such experiment can be reproduced easily in any lab. Therefore, Relativity becomes an illusion as any other falsified theory.
We have a lot of illusions in modern physics. We should eliminate all of them to have a clear view on the physical world.
@G.s. Vasantha Kumar “Humans started imagining time, later realised and now it can be measured and also it is considered as the dimension.”
AZ: We are going in circles. You should read previous posts of this discussion.
A researcher should be able to describe a step-by-step operation of any measurement device that he uses. Otherwise, he cannot be sure that data coming from the device has any useful meaning.
Michelson, Morley, and Einstein were done the same mistake paying no attention for acoustic experiments with signals (see my previous post).
You are doing the same mistake now with your claim that time can be measured. However, you cannot explain step-by-step a physical interaction between so-called ‘”Time” and a clock.
Therefore, you cannot be sure that data coming from a clock has any useful meaning.
Dear Allan
In my view, Relativity is not wrong, it need to develop.
The Einstein mass-energy equation E=mc2, the relativistic mass, relativistic form of Newton’s second law, the fundamental principles and equations of modern physics by generalizing this anomaly will be challenged. Some other observations and results make possible the speeds higher than speed of light which is not rather incredible and it will not be impossible; it only requires a change in today’s attitudes towards relativity and quantum mechanics. Thus this paper, from a new approach, turns out to merge the fundamental principles of quantum physics, relativity and classical mechanics through a new definition of quiescent state of particles like photon, and attempts to present the reasons and the possibilities of the existence of the superluminal speeds. At the beginning of the 20th century, Newton’s second law was corrected considering the limit speed c and the relativistic mass. At that time there has not been a clear understanding of the subatomic particles and basically there was little research in high energy physics, if we ignore the zero rest mass of photon, much better and more real physical phenomena may be investigated.The speed of the created particles is a function of the internal interaction and the mechanism of creation of subatomic particles, and the external forces that are exerted on them.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306271544_Infrastructure_of_CPH_theory_Force_from_Aristotle_to_Modern_Physics?ev=prf_pub
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270339919_Interactions_Between_Real_and_Virtual_Spacetimes?ev=prf_pub
Article Infrastructure of CPH theory, Force from Aristotle to Modern Physics
Article Interactions Between Real and Virtual Spacetimes
@Hossein Javadi: “Some other observations and results make possible the speeds higher than speed of light which is not rather incredible and it will not be impossible; it only requires a change in today’s attitudes towards relativity and quantum mechanics.”
AZ: Suppose that is correct. However, information from CERN “Faster than light” neutrino experiment was denied by the scientific community. Can you tell me why does it happen? Why did not you tell CERN that the result of the experiment is correct?
Dear Allan
In observable space-time Real space-time), speed of light is the limit of speed. So, nothing moves faster than light speed in real space-time. Faster than of light speed happens in virtual space-time.
Please see "Interactions Between Real and Virtual Space-times" in my last comment.
@Hossein Javadi “nothing moves faster than light speed in real space-time. Faster than of light speed happens in virtual space-time.”
Dear Hossein,
We are coming again to the main question of science. Where is the human mind meet the reality? You can make any calculations and make publications of many papers with a description of virtual particle that cannot be detected by a physical instrument (or something else like that) but nobody pays attention on your papers because you deny meaningfulness of your papers by yourself with speculation about IMPOSSIBILITY of physical detection of any result that you predict.
Physics as a branch of science means physical support of any theory by physical measurements. To make such measurement a researcher should clearly understand the way of action of his measurement device and physical interaction between a measurable value and the device. That is the only one possible way for any measurement in physics.
Therefore, any speculations in physics about undetectable entities become useless because that is the only one possible way to separate reality from illusions.
Using the same way I can ask you something more.
What if I offer you a description of a physical device and its way of action that supports the idea of Anisotropy of light propagation? Can you reject Relativity after that?
Dear Hossein,
You said "So, nothing moves faster than light speed in real space-time. Faster than of light speed happens in virtual space-time. Please see "Interactions Between Real and Virtual Space-times" in my last comment."
I think it is better to illustrate the problem within the framework of new transformation which expresses about the reality "speed of light is locally constant and equals to the speed of light in vacuum". But Globally the speed of light is variable. In this case this transformation must be vacuum energy dependent, and in this case faster than light is possible observed globally according to vacuum fluctuations by the uncertainty principle. In this case virtual particle and photons are real, but we can't understand they are real because we are forced to understand nature according to LT by keeping on reciprocity, and that means the reality must be observer independent. That is a big mistake in physics. The reality is observer dependent as in the Copenhagen school. According to my transformation space is invariant, and it is only time which is related to time dilation. In this case by the time dilation we propose the delay or the retardation in space and time in which resulted the variability and the anisotropy of the speed of light globally.
FWLR metric describes a homogeneous, isotropic expanding or contracting universe, thus according to that Are all frames of reference truly equivalent?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Are_all_frames_of_reference_truly_equivalent
I solved this question by considering the delay or the retardation, and according to my transformation all frames of reference truly equivalent, and the speed of light globally anisotropic, and that explains the CMB anisotropy. In this case we could solve also the problem of global and local in SRT. Local versions of the (special) principle of relativity say that if the same type of experiment is conducted in two isolated, unaccelerated laboratories, then the outcomes of those experiments must be the same. Global versions of the principle say that if you take a physically possible world and boost the entire material content of that world, you get another physically possible world. Global and local in SRT are independent, so how can we solve this problem? I solved this problem in my theory!!! According to my the connection between what is global and what is local is related to the uncertainty principle by the vacuum fluctuations.
Also what about Sagnac effect??
Take my transformation x=R2(x'-vt') t=R2(t-vx'/c2) y=Ry' and z=Rz'
Space is invariant and it is only time which is related to time dilation. My transformation by considering the delay or the retardation is a transformation of acceleration by the vacuum fluctuations. It expresses about the wave-particle duality and the uncertainty principle.
Take the time term in my transformation, we get
t+=R2(t+vx'/c2) and t-=R2(t-vx'/c2) thus from that we get delta (t)=t+-t-=R2(2vx'/c2) and since space is invariant then we get x'=x=L and in this case we get delta (t)=R2(2vL/c2)
Which is exactly the same result of explaining Sagnac effect in the framework of ether theory but instead of the ether theory it is vacuum energy dependent, and by the equivalence principle, it is gravitational potential dependent. Also according to my transformation the Sagnac effect on a rotating plate, the speed of light is also shown to be anisotropic globally by the uncertainty principle by the vacuum fluctuations.
Review these papers
Classical and Relativistic Derivation of the Sagnac Effect, Wolfgang Engelhardt
http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.4075
And http://physicsessays.org/browse-journal-2/product/1499-26-yang-ho-choi-on-constancy-of-the-speed-of-light-in-the-global-positioning-system.html
Also that explains why Aether field rejected by Michelson Morley experiment in 20th century, but now in 21st century Higgs field is accepted ?
Higgs field can be explained completely according to my theory. It is now QFT!!!
http://physicsessays.org/browse-journal-2/product/1499-26-yang-ho-choi-on-constancy-of-the-speed-of-light-in-the-global-positioning-system.html
Dear Azzam,
You use some notion of “Time” in your theory. Can you tell us (the participants of this discussion) the exact definition of time regarding your theory and step-by-step interaction of that “Time” with physical measurement devices?
Dear Allan Zade,
Time is related to mass only, and by creation of mass it is resulted the concept of time as the past, present, and future. If all the mass is changed to photons of rest mass is zero, then in this case there is no past or future, it is only present. That means same as energy is conserved, then information is conserved also. This is the problem of Hawking's theory of the black holes which is leading to the information paradox which is solved in my theory. In my theory in the black hole, all the rest mass of the object changes to photons of rest mass is zero, and thus the object will move to the speed of light locally. In this case energy is conserved and information is conserved also.
Also since my theory is the Copenhagen school, and at the same time my explanation of Sagnac effect gives the same result of the classical theory of the ether theory, but in my theory instead of the ether, it is vacuum energy dependent. In classical mechanics, a special status is assigned to time in the sense that it is treated as a classical background parameter, external to the system itself. This special role is seen in the standard formulation of quantum mechanics. It is regarded as part of an a priori given classical background with a well defined value. In fact, the classical treatment of time is deeply intertwined with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, and, thus, with the conceptual foundations of quantum theory: all measurements of observables are made at certain instants of time and probabilities are only assigned to such measurements.
Please read my paper here http://vixra.org/abs/1206.0002
@Azzam K Almosallami: “In classical mechanics, a special status is assigned to time in the sense that it is treated as a classical background parameter, external to the system itself. “
AZ: That is correct. Moreover, they used a clock to make measurements of so-called “Time” in a classical scenario of measurements.
Tell me please, what type of physical device do you use (in your theory) to make measurements of “Time”?
If you use a standard clock, how does a mechanical clock “measure” all phenomena mentioned in your theory?
Dear Allan Zade,
You said "Tell me please, what type of physical device do you use (in your theory) to make measurements of “Time”?"
My theory is quantum theory and Copenhagen school. The reality is observer dependent. My transformation expresses about the wave-particle duality and the uncertainty principle. In my theory the motion is related to the wave-function. When you make a measurement, then you make this measurement at a certain point in space at a certain point in time according to your clock, and that means you make a localization. In this case the wave-function collapse. During the motion there there is no at a certain point in space, and in this case the uncertainty principle plays the rule in the measurement by the entanglement. In my theory there are two pictures of the moving object, and these two pictures are separated in space and time but they are entangled with each others by the invariance of the energy momentum four vectors. That is why the motion must be defined by 4-D according to the vacuum, while the collapse of the wave-function is defined by 2-D. In my theory the motion of the clocks locally are events same as the motion of all events locally in my space and time. Since in my theory the reality is observer dependent, in this case different times are a special cases of different observers according to different vacuum energy (gauge), and that leads to time is an entanglement phenomenon, which places all equal clock readings (of correctly prepared clocks - or of any objects usable as clocks) into the same history.
Dear Hossein,
“…in CPH theory everything is made of sub quantum energy, and sub quantum energy contains information…"
- everything what exists in our Universe and outside is/are some informational patterns/systems of patterns – (the proof - see the link in SS posts on 2-nd page, useful the post on 6-th page here), however the patterns are different, of course; even some patterns aren’t, in certain sense, some “usual information”, i.e. a some [including changing] data.
First of all that are Rules/Possibilities – in fact grammar Rules/Possibilities that are elements of the “Logos” set [again – see SS posts above on 2-nd –6-th pages here], that determine where and how something must be placed/built to be some information. The energy is a next Rule/Possibility from the “Logos” set, or, more correct, a “force” that is necessary, with the Rules/Possibilities “Change” and “Time”, to change something because of logical self-inconsistence of the two last notions/phenomena; at that the more energy the more information change, provided that other conditions are equal.
Thus the phenomenon “Energy” acts on whole “Information” Set; but, again, it doesn’t contain – in certain sense - some concrete information about concrete changing object; in Matter – about material object, in a human’s consciousness – about a thought, etc.; there can be, for example in Matter, a number of sources of energy, which [energy] can be transmitted to the same object resulting in the same changes.
Cheers
Maybe it is the tenth thread on this fascinating topic. As a kid I was walking on a sidewalk and observing what ahead of me I was telling myself in the future I will walk to that spot ahead there and it will be the present at that moment and what is behind me, was at some point in my present under me. At some point I tried to catch the exact moment when what was ahead come under me and then recess in the past. I was not able to catch it and this experience of the passing of time triggered my curiosity about the question ''What is Time?''. I was 12, and so I went to my school library and to the city library and look at all the books (for kid) that was explaining ''Time''. They spoke mostly about clocks and how time was measured and none of these was answering my question ''What is Time?'' in a way that would have explained my experience on the sidewalk. Then in grade 11, I had my first class of physic and we did the falling body experiement where an instrument record the position and time of a falling body and our task was to make a plot of x(t). I was puzzled by the fact that were plotting it from t=0. The teacher explained that t=0 is arbitrary and we convently choose it when the body start falling. That trigger another puzzling question? Why is it that in that experiment all the time are equivalent but in my experience there is only one time which is NOW. In the physical experiment there is not a privilege NOW. This is a major difference between time and space in our experience. There is a privilege HERE but we can move it the way we wanted but have no way to come out of the NOW, we have absolutly no way to travel in that mathematical dimension of time as we do in the mathematical dimensions of space. But we can time travel only in our narratives but not in our actual life. But physics do not include into its mathematical representation of time these fundamental differences: privilege NOW. TIme is mathematically represented by a variable t. This is Galileo's invention to have geometrize time. It is probably the biggest physics discovery and the biggest limitation of physics. Dynamic and space time were invented. Who say geometrization say immobilisation which is antithesis of change. All what can be specified with an equation with a variable t in it is not changing in spacetime. It is totally frozen. Nothing change in spacetime. Since science is about what does not change, i.e. ORDER then it make perfect sense that that nothing change in spacetime. But our world change and not only in a prescribed ordering way. The cosmos has evolve and is doing it right NOW. But the scientific language can only express what is fixed and change that are not predictable cannot be expressed in this mode of expression because creation add new order and is not contain in the previous order. This cannot be expressed in any scientific theory.
What we perceive is not real, a good link.
http://luxemodo.com/best-optical-illusions/
Dear Azzam
I agree that generally the speed of light is not constant.
Page 30 article below
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302313653_Adaptive_Review_of_Three_Fundamental_Questions_in_Physics?ev=prf_pub
Article Adaptive Review of Three Fundamental Questions in Physics
Dear Allan
Relativity (like all scientific theories) is not a complete theory. However, the impressive relativity is consistent with the experience.
So to abandon relativity, should be replaced by a better theory that we have not now.
Dear G.s.
I thank you.I agree entirely as far as clock is used for timing.I donot agree that passing of time intervenes to body complexities and changes.
For each individual body changes are independent of whtat time clock indicates!
Regards
@Hossein Javadi: “I agree that generally the speed of light is not constant… Relativity (like all scientific theories) is not a complete theory. However, the impressive relativity is consistent with the experience.”
AZ: Very well, we are going closer to the right understanding of the situation. To understand the grave mistake of Relativity, we should go back to the beginning of that theory. As you remember, relativity was born after Michelson-Morley experiment that gave so-called “Null” result in an attempt to determine Earth-to-space motion by means of light propagation through space (by Michelson interferometer).
That device had two arms. Each arm sends a light beam to the mirror and reserves a mirrored light. The device makes a comparison of full duration of a light signal propagation along of each arm. It was proposed that different orientation of the device relative to Earth-to-Eather motion causes the different duration of the signal propagation along the arms.
That was the problem of the researcher because such device never gives that result by a principle of its operation. Later experiments with acoustic signals show the same constant duration of acoustic signal moving back and forth from the signal source to the mirror and back to the signal source. I mentioned in this discussion papers of Norbert Feist who conducted such experiments by himself.
Therefore, the basic idea of the experiment was wrong BEFORE the experiment. Michelson had no problem to test his idea against signals in another medium (like sound-water or sound-air combination), but he did not anything in that area. In other words, Michelson likes to care his illusion instead of real physical tests of the idea! That is a critical mistake of any researcher.
Later, his Interferometer shown the result equal to any other device that uses the same way of measurements. In other words, all round-trip experiments (experiments with mirrored signals and moving observers) give a constant duration of signal propagation in opposite directions (to the mirror and back again).
Einstein made the situation ever worse. He postulated (made claim without any physical support) that the light spends the same time going from the point A to the point B and from the point B to the point A. That was the idea without any physical support. Michelson’s interferometer cannot split the experiment and ever gives only the full duration of propagation of light in two opposite directions. That was another grave theoretical mistake before the creation of Relativity.
The right device (WO/2015/040505) that eliminates all those problems appeared many decades later. The device splits a round-trip experiment with any signal in any medium (including light-space combination) for two one-way experiments and determines two values simultaneously after each experiment. Those are the signal-to-medium speed of motion and observer-to-medium speed of motion that crushes all illusions of Relativity and 20-th century physics by physical experiments as well as all restrictions of relativity.
Therefore, the right experiments contradict Relativity and make the theory falsified (before its creation).
Would you like to know more? Please, read the following paper carefully.
Article Philosophy, physics and mathematics of relative and absolute motion
Dear Hossein Javadi,
You said " I agree that generally the speed of light is not constant."
The speed of light is not constant globally and it is anisotropic globally. But locally the speed of light is constant and equals to the speed of light in vacuum. This is the problem of global and Local in SRT. I do not know how you solved this problem in your theory???
Local versions of the (special) principle of relativity say that if the same type of experiment is conducted in two isolated, unaccelerated laboratories, then the outcomes of those experiments must be the same. Global versions of the principle say that if you take a physically possible world and boost the entire material content of that world, you get another physically possible world. Global and local in SRT are independent, so how can you solve this problem?
Also according to your theory are all reference frames equivalent. And how can you explain the CMB anisotropy?? How can you explain the dark matter or dark energy, and what about the infinities resulted in GR???
Dear Allan Zade,
you said "Very well, we are going closer to the right understanding of the situation. To understand the grave mistake of Relativity, we should go back to the beginning of that theory. As you remember, relativity was born after Michelson-Morley experiment that gave so-called “Null” result in an attempt to determine Earth-to-space motion by means of light propagation through space (by Michelson interferometer)."
Yes you are right!!!
Michelson experiment explained completely according to my transformation, where the speed of light is locally constant and equals to the speed of light in vacuum. Take my transformation x=R2(x'-vt') t=R2(t-vx'/c2) y=Ry' and z=Rz' in this case you get the speed of light is locally constant and equals to the speed of light in vacuum.
Now what about Sagnac effect;
In my transformation, space is invariant and it is only time which is related to time dilation. My transformation by considering the delay or the retardation is a transformation of acceleration by the vacuum fluctuations. It expresses about the wave-particle duality and the uncertainty principle.
Take the time term in my transformation, we get
t+=R2(t+vx'/c2) and t-=R2(t-vx'/c2) thus from that we get delta (t)=t+-t-=R2(2vx'/c2) and since space is invariant then we get x'=x=L and in this case we get delta (t)=R2(2vL/c2)
Which is exactly the same result of explaining Sagnac effect in the framework of ether theory but instead of the ether theory it is vacuum energy dependent, and by the equivalence principle, it is gravitational potential dependent. Also according to my transformation the Sagnac effect on a rotating plate, the speed of light is also shown to be anisotropic globally by the uncertainty principle by the vacuum fluctuations.
Review these papers
Classical and Relativistic Derivation of the Sagnac Effect, Wolfgang Engelhardt
http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.4075
And http://physicsessays.org/browse-journal-2/product/1499-26-yang-ho-choi-on-constancy-of-the-speed-of-light-in-the-global-positioning-system.html
Also that explains why Aether field rejected by Michelson Morley experiment in 20th century, but now in 21st century Higgs field is accepted ?
Higgs field can be explained completely according to my theory. It is now QFT!!!
Dear Allan
AZ: "Very well, we are going closer to the right understanding of the situation."
There are various theories in physics, but nature is unique. This is not nature's problem that we have various theories; nature obeys simple and unique law. So, we should improve our theories.
In my view we need to combine classical mechanics, relativity and quantum mechanics, and start point is reconsidering the relativistic Newton's second law;
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280491440_Reconsidering_relativistic_Newton%27s_second_law_and_its_results?ev=prf_pub
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279185909_Graviton_and_Newton%27s_second_law?ev=prf_pub
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279446746_Graviton_and_cosmology_equations_before_the_Big_Bang?ev=prf_pub
Article Reconsidering relativistic Newton's second law and its results
Article Graviton and Newton's second law
Article Graviton and cosmology equations, before the Big Bang
Dear Sergey
It seems that we fundamentally disagree about information. In my opinion, there is not information (and also information transfer) without energy. In fact energy and information interwoven and inseparable.
Dear Azzam
"The speed of light is not constant globally and it is anisotropic globally. But locally the speed of light is constant and equals to the speed of light in vacuum."
I agree with you. My problem and work is to understand and describe the structure of photon.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303988070_Generalization_of_the_Dirac%27s_Equation_and_Sea
Article Generalization of the Dirac's Equation and Sea
Dear Panagiotis
Nature has implanted a biological clock in every organism ,long before humans created clock.The clock so implanted decides physical features of organism like child, adult young, old and so on.every moment body gets modified according to the biological clock.
Dear Hossein,
You said "There are various theories in physics, but nature is unique. This is not nature's problem that we have various theories; nature obeys simple and unique law. So, we should improve our theories. In my view we need to combine classical mechanics, relativity and quantum mechanics, and start point is reconsidering the relativistic Newton's second law;"
I see all of your theories are built basis on the concept of "Graviton". That graviton is built basis on the Concepts of SRT and GR.
Basis on your proposed graviton which is impossible to be existed in nature, I asked you about the problems of SRT and GR.
The fact is that there is no graviton! It is only photon!!! But we can't understand that because we are forced to understand nature basis on the concepts of SRT and GR.
I hope Hossein to answer my questions since you proposed graviton!!! How could you solve the problems of SRT and GR in order to accept graviton and propose it in your theories!!!?????? Are there really graviton!!? Or it is only an illusion!!??
Relative to your paper "Graviton and cosmology equations, before the Big Bang"
There is no big bang, and this is the reality!!! I asked you about the CMB anisotropy but you do not answer me!!! FWLR metric describes a homogeneous, isotropic expanding or contracting universe, thus according to that Are all frames of reference truly equivalent?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Are_all_frames_of_reference_truly_equivalent
I solved this question by considering the delay or the retardation, and according to my transformation all frames of reference truly equivalent, and the speed of light is globally anisotropic.
Review this RG,
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_we_accept_that_the_high_redshift_of_a_Quasar_indicates_its_distant_while_we_ignore_that_the_brightness_of_the_Quasar_indicates_its_nearby
You said "I agree with you. My problem and work is to understand and describe the structure of photon."
But you can't understand the structure of photon basis on the wrong proposed particle "graviton"!!! What about if the graviton is photon also!!!??
You said "So, we should improve our theories. In my view we need to combine classical mechanics, relativity and quantum mechanics, and start point is reconsidering the relativistic Newton's second law;"
I did that completely!!! Because of that my theory QFT!!!!! Because of that my theory solves all the problems in physics from Higgs to Galaxies!!! All the experimental results from Higgs to Galaxies agreed with my theory!!!!
Dear Azzam
If graviton is able (of course with new definition) to describe physical phenomena, So it exists. Remember how photon entered to physics.
Dear Hossein,
You said "If graviton is able (of course with new definition) to describe physical phenomena, So it exists. Remember how photon entered to physics."
If relativity is incomplete theory, and graviton is proposed by incomplete theory, then how graviton will exist in nature by incomplete theory!!!??
Photon proposed by a complete theory of quantum theory, because of that it is existed!! But graviton is impossible to be exist!!! It is a big mistake to build a new theory basis on assumptions of incomplete theory!!! That is only wasting time!!
In my theory no need to graviton, no need to dark matter or dark energy and infinities disappeared, it is only photon!! My theory is quantum field theory and every thing is relativistic and quantized even Newton's second Law. Energy is conserved and information is conserved.
http://physicsessays.org/browse-journal-2/product/1490-18-azzam-almosallami-reinterpretation-of-lorentz-transformation-according-to-the-copenhagen-school-and-the-quantization-of-gravity.html
@Azzam K Almosallami: “Michelson experiment explained completely according to my transformation, where the speed of light is locally constant and equals to the speed of light in vacuum. ”
AZ: In case of motion relative to a medium, classical mechanics has two type of speed. Those are an observer-to-medium speed of motion and medium-to-reference frame speed of motion. In case of water, both types of speed are easy to be found.
In case of light, we have not any detectable “reference frame at absolute rest” looking from the relativistic point of view.
However, the device mentioned above SMA or (WO/2015/040505) gives an answer on that question. It determines two type of speed. Those are light-to-space speed and observer-to-space speed. They are completely different.
All modern round-trip experiments show some constant observer-to-light speed of motion that does not equal for light-to-space speed OR observer-to-space speed and mistaken in relativity as true "speed of light in a unique reference frame." We have observable constant only for that speed. That is incorrect because round-trip experiments cannot make one-way measurements separately and detect the different duration of light going in two opposite directions. That is matter of measurement (not matter of mathematics). As a result, wrong way of measurement multiplied on wrong postulates gives completely wrong results.
All speculations on this discussion use a notion of the speed of light. However, there are two speeds of light in physical measurements
- light-to-space speed of motion
- observer-to-light speed of motion
They are separated by an observer-to-space speed of motion. As soon as an observer-to-space speed of motion becomes greater than zero, observer-to-light speed becomes unequal to light-to-space speed. Michelson, Morley, Einstein and others never had such device that possible to exist on the modern technological level.
We need only the right experiment to see those values by physical experiments. As a result, all “transformations” and mathematics are incomparable with this situation. There is not also “local” or “global” speed of light because there is only one “speed of light” in Relativity instead of three interacting speeds in physics.
Therefore, the solution comes from physics (not from mathematics).
@Azzam K Almosallami: "But we can't understand that because we are forced to understand nature basis on the concepts of SRT and GR."
AZ: That is correct because the problem appeared before creation of relativity and should be solved in categories that existed before relativity without any relationship with any category created later (by relativity).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Mechanics
- Classical Mechanics