Alternative Models of Reality

John Cox

Bud,

Very good and sane points, and I appreciate your stating it as a pragmatic paradigm rather than fact of reality.

My distinction between existential and material might best be described as energy being the materialization of spacetime, though I don't think we can separate space, time, and energy fundamentally. Matter itself in my scheme of things is when despite the profoundly transient nature of the continuum in continuously replenishing itself, the resultant energy is confined to a locality by there being a limit to the speed of time that is equivalent to light velocity. So in relation to that total field volume which would reach a minimum density at an empirical limit of cohesion (connectivity) and thus gravitational influence at a finite radial distance in a theoretical free rest mass, what we observe as the material particle is a central core at a density of energy which is great enough to exhibit inelastic properties. I further hypothesize that for a particle to exhibit inertia some portion of the total energy must exist as the greatest density, constant across a finite core volume, that is in a universal proportion to the total energy quantity. (I=ec^2) In answer to Tom's pointed question, it is in that central inertial core volume that the speed of time is nil. And I say nil, because we can't say there is absolute rest without also accepting absolute space and time. From the radial length of the inertial core horizon, outward to the limit of gravitational connectivity, the speed of time increases as a factoral function of light velocity to the limit where it is equivalent to light velocity and therefore the spatial volume does not need to continue to expand to infinity because it is the spatial extension that *stops* not time. Call it the Fifth Dimension, if that helps. Best, jrc

Thomas Ray

"In answer to Tom's pointed question, it is in that central inertial core volume that the speed of time is nil. And I say nil, because we can't say there is absolute rest without also accepting absolute space and time."

There is no absolute rest state, by the uncertainty principle. That doesn't mean that spacetime is not absolute. It means that time and space do not exist independently.

John Cox

Tom,

Thanks for the qualifying remarks, and I might add for the purpose of distinguishing from the purely philosophic, that mathematically what is meant by 'absolute' is the capability to obtain an absolute value from given parameters. Best, jrc

Thomas Ray

This is what makes reversibility imperative. With an independent time and space, the world is only accidental. With reversibility encoded in the initial condition, every point is self-similar to every other, and there is coherence.

Because a point in complex analysis is in fact a line, this self similarity extends to the extremes of the universe via imaginary time.

Steve Dufourny

I am sorry but I must insist about time like irreversible.Our second law of thermo shows us the road of entropy and its Arrow of time.Ask to Eddington please.

We cannot accept that time is symmetric , it is assymetric.Our procees in thermo prove that.The stochastic analyse must be rational when we speak about violations of CPT .The CP violations are just when we utilise a desintegration or when we change so the charges.It is not really a violations of pure symmetries.The time is correlated with the thmodynamic and its irreversibilities.

If now you insert the algebras of Clifford or others with a pure 3D ,and that the time is bad utilised in the symmetries of reversibility, so it is just due to bad parameters inserted in the calculations correlated with the principles of thermo.Time is a duration correlated with entropy.You cannot utilise several false recurrences implying paradoxs like the demon of Maxwell.If it was true avout the violation of the assymetry of time, so it is the same that saying second law of thermo is false.That has no sense respecting the Arrow of time of entropy in its pure irreversibility.ENTROPY INCREASES !!!

You uses badly the Tools ofmaths without respect of foundamental laws.

Eddington, Maxwell and Clausius d laugh really !!!

Thomas Ray

Sorry, Steve, but Hawking radiation contradicts everything you say.

Steve Dufourny

I beleive strongly that your main errors is about the interpretation of CPT Theorem and the violations of symétries.It is just due to utilization of numbers , imaginaries implying false rotations, probably the sense in your cases.

And the Lorentz invariances in all that???

All these errors imply a false interpretation of the Minkowski space time and its irreversible laws.

Steve Dufourny

Tom, the radiations of Hawking ara just ejections of gravitons and correlated gravitational waves.I don't see a problem in the analyse of entropy of BH.The second law is respected.It is just the same that the ejections of our sun.It is a process linked with its intrinsic properties of nuclear rections by fusion.

If the BH are composed by particles above our lectromagnetism and thermo.That does not mean that our laws disappear about matter and energy so entropy.

I don't see the radiations of Hawking inserting CPT violations.The BH has a volume, a charge, a density, an intrinsic entropy, a time assymetric correlated with thesecond law.It is just that we must insert other parameters about gravitational énergies instead of electromagnetism énergies.I don't see the necessity to have a time reversibility for a better understanding of what is a BH.It is not a door or a time machine giving us a parallel universe and the anti matter is not a problem also.It isjust a sphere with several rules,the increase of entropy respecting the arrowof time is essential so.iTs intrinsic dynamic respects the invariances of Lorentz, the secondlaw of thermo and also the CPT theorem at my humble opinion.I beleive strongly that it is a better road to understand the rules and properties of our BH.

The space time is deterministic and empiric.

I am persuaded that the main error is in the utilisation of geometrical algebras and their meanings about time and entropy.

It is logic in fact.

Regards

Thomas Ray

Here is what Vesselin Petkov says about it, and with which I agree:

"All physicists would agree that one of the most fundamental problems of the 21st century physics is the dimensionality of the world. In the four-dimensional world of Minkowski (or Minkowski spacetime) the most challenging problem is the nature of the temporal dimension. In Minkowski spacetime it is merely one of the four dimensions, which means that it is entirely given like the other three spacial dimensions. If the temporal dimension were not given in its entirety and only one constantly changing moment of it existed, Minkowski spacetime would be reduced to the ordinary three-dimensional space.

"But if the physical world, represented by Minkowski spacetime, is indeed four-dimensional with time being the fourth dimension, then such a world is drastically different from its image based on our perceptions. Minkowski four-dimensional world is a block Universe, a frozen world in which nothing happens since all moments of time are given 'at once', which means that physical bodies are four-dimensional worldtubes containing the whole histories in time of the three-dimensional bodies of our everyday experience. The implications of a real Minkowski world for physics itself and especially for our world view are enormous." ~ Vesselin Petkov, Ed. Relativity and the Dimensionality of the World, Springer, 2007

Thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, Bell's theorem are valid in the domain of information theory. The cosmic code belongs to cosmology.

Steve Dufourny

It is a choice to think in this road where the violations of CPT symmetry are a reality.

My choice is to think in a Copenaghenian way.It is the same with the quantum entanglement and the spooky at distance.It was just a extrapolation of beleifs by Einstein considering two states like on, dépendent.Copenaghen says us that these states are not dépendent.It is still a choice to think in two ways.

If it was the case Tom,we could teleportate a quantum particle without a point of departure and a point of arrivals?How is it possible considering that we must reencode the entanglement without informations.The lumin aether has no answer,andif it exists an aether it is gravitational,so the electromagnetic waves are not sufficient.In all the cases, it is not possible and I don't speak about this second law of thermo furthermore.

Regards

John Cox

Tom and Steve,

Petkov puts his finger on the very bone of contention, Minkowski spacetime IS frozen! But I think it was Minkowski himself whom early on stated that (because) we have no way of knowing if the scales of time and space are different, we just assume them to be the same. That pretty much assures a mathematical freeze-up. Maybe its time we pull our stick out of the mud and go on.

I just went back to June 7, 2013 and my first post to this forum in the blog: Evolving Time's Arrow. I'll reiterate but if you preset [order posts to] most recent first; and go to articles and the Title, it was the last posted to that thread. The conjecture goes like this:

The scale of a span duration in the dimension of time and that of a span of distance in the dimension of space are set by the initial condition of an intersection of the two. A span of time comparatively shorter than a span of distance will induce the time parameter to extend to equalize with space. But that in turn will induce the spatial length to respond by lengthening, and that initiates a 'leap-frog' condition of co-dependent extension until the differing lengths reach a self-replicating ratio such as the Golden Mean at light velocity. If equally commensurate spans of time and space were to intersect, time would not be induced to extend but would exist as a static appearance of space. An intersection of a longer span of time with a shorter one of space, would induce time to successively shorten in an annihilation leap-frog sequence. Physically, we obtain an Arrow of Time, but with a rationale that also permits localized apparent reversibility for potentially brief enough durations in proper time to account for laboratory observations in particle research which indicate such.

As to any objection as to why the temporal dimension should be initially responsive rather than the spatial, permit me to reduce our choice of geometries to the simplest; we need three axes to determine that a change in volume of a sphere is uniform but only one time dimension which can coexist on each spatial axis. Begging a 3:1 advantage, time moves more freely than space. It is dynamic, not frozen. The difference between rectilinear space and curvilinear space is the origin of energy.

Heck! If we are to admire the likes of Einstein, Minkowski, Bohr, Heisenberg et al, as bold creative thinkers, why can't we go beyond what they left unfinished and be bold ourselves? There is a zany spoof on TV called The Big Bang Theory and in one episode Leonard finally gets the nerve to ask Penny for a date and while at dinner they ask the usual "what's new?" questions and Leonard (an experimental physicist) replies, "Nothing. Physics hasn't discovered anything new in eighty years." How tiredly true. It's just gotten unGodly complicated. :-) jrc

Steve Dufourny

You make me more crazzy that I am Mr Cox.:)and you also Tom, you make me crazzy.

Universaly yours

Thomas Ray

"Begging a 3:1 advantage, time moves more freely than space. It is dynamic, not frozen. The difference between rectilinear space and curvilinear space is the origin of energy."

The origin of inertia, John. What is it you think I've been arguing? The Minkowski spacetime metric - is symmetrical to - - - . One can choose either either side, and it will always revert to the other within 7 steps of an 8 dimension geometry (the Joy Christian framework). Because we experience the 3-sphere as a 4 dimension projection of that framework, the 3-sphere is our measurement basis.

This is the random walk algorithm of time I described.

John Cox

Tom,

I thought you might find agreement in that, though no doubt at a much deeper level than my own humble intuition. Thanks for more instructive insight of your methodology. You argue that while you agree with Petkov's summation of Minkowski spacetime producing a 'snap-shot' of the universe in which 'all moments in time happen at once'; when subjected to projection in an 8 dimensional topological measure space, each moment can be extracted in its own proper time (?).

Keeping in mind that at my level of play I have to be reminded that the strict technical definition of 'metric' is a square matrix set of signs, the assumption that the operational scales of time and space are identical would make the Minkowski metric simply a basis, wouldn't it? Patience, :-) jrc

Steve Dufourny

You prefer so Tom, the works of Lisi and Joy instead of mine :)

I am sad that you prefer the anti thesis instead of rational proportions.

:)what a world ,violations of foundamentals everywhere.

Regards

Steve Dufourny

I found where come from your errors.

It is just due to a bad interpretation of several theories.The Kaluza Klein theory , the Minkowski space time,the lie algenbras and the Clifford algebras more the M Theory.It is just due to a bad understanding of what are the dimensions.The extradimensions are just misunderstood where we loose our proportions at the planck scale.The link between electromagnetism and gravitation is so bad interpreted.The violations are just due to several errors in the utilisations of symmeries due togeometrical algebras.The violations of bell's inequalities, it is the same.The second law ofthermo can be respected even for the bridge between electrom and gravitation.The vectors must be well analysed after all.The proportionswith the 3d sphères are essential and thegeometricalalgebras must respectthese essentials for a correct analyseofproportions.The cinetic energy can be linked with the Arrow of time, irreversible and the increasr of entropy.The phases of encoding electromagnetic or gravitational can follow the rational roasd of thermo.It is just that we have a kindof bridge between these tow kindof energy.If the symmetries and vectors and dimensions are bad utilised, so we have problems in the calculations of these said 3D proportions.The spacetime is just a tool ,and time is not really a dimension.It is a duration in one sense.If tou cansider extradimensions at the planck scale, it is always in meter even with tori or others.

My model of spherisation with 3D sphères respect allthese universalproportions, essential respecting our laws.They turn so they are and the encoding of informations, bosonic or gravitonic can be rational and empiric.I don't see a necessity to have extradimensions, we have our mesures after all andit is essential for the calculations of what is entropy.

The lie algebras or Clifford algebras must be utilized in respecting the physicality and its proportions.The Arrow of time and the entropy like chief of orchestra.The spherical volumes and the finitenumber for the uniqiuenss serie must be an essential at my humble opinion.If not we have not the good proportions in the calculations of what is entropy and massin increasing due to encodings of evolution.The phases , thecinetic energy, the mass, the density, the volume, the charges,....All these proiportions are universal respecting thesecondlaw of thermo and the invariances oflorents, the CPT symmetry and bell's inequalities.

In conclusion, we cannot extrapolate what we want with the geometricalalgebras,and the conclusions must be empiric,the rest is vain.

Don't forget that the gravitational energy is also an energy, so the secondlaw is important.Even ifit different than electromagnetism, it is an energy also Under the law of an Arrow of time irreversible.How can you have a phase of encoding if this arrowof timeis not respected considering the increasing of entropy and mass???

Steve Dufourny

Let's take our BB and the evolution on this arrow of time at universal scale purely linked with the quantum scale

I see personaly the Big Bang in a spherical accelerated expansion correlated with inflation and the dark energy.Let's imagine a central BH to our universal sphere.Let's imagine that it is the biggest spherical volumles and that this central sphere has caused the big bang and that also it produces gravitons(the smallest spherical volumes).So we can correlate with the gravitational universal spherical aether wave and its maximum linear velocity. The aroow of time is irreversible respecting the second law in thermo, so it can be correlated with the entropy in increasing and the correlated mass due to phases of encoding of bosonic informations and gravitonic informations.These informations are encoded in our nuclies, coded also from this BB.If we see the quantum uniquenss and its entangled sphères like a relative foto of our universe and its cosmologicalspheres, so we have a finite number and it becomes relevant considering the proportions of encoding respecting this entropy increasing.The mass, the density , thevolumes , the cinetic energy, the spin, the orbital motons,the charges of sphères can show us theroad of constants ,spherical and correlated proportions.We don't need violations to encircle our BB and evolution after all, all the proportions can be calculated withnempirism .

[deleted]

Here is a globalpoint of vue.

Let's take the sphere homology of Poincarré and the 3SPHERE.Even with the geometricalalgebras and the M Theory and the KK theory,we rest in 3D evenwith thehomeomorphism.It is how you interpret the different forms implied by this homeomorphism.If furthermore the rotations and the symmeties or the imaginary numbers are utilised in a geometrical algebras wanting to show us the road of physics at planck scale.The choices of domains are essential.

The dimensions rest always in the 3sphere at all scales, planck scales, quantumscales and cosmol scales.If not, we cannot have the good proportions about the foundamental calculations of what is gravitation linked with mass and entropy on a pure irreversible Arrow of time.

The shape of our universe needs of this spherisation and sphères for the rotations of evolution considering the increase of entropy linked with the phases of encodings.If the spherical volumes are not well understood, we cannot have good results.

There are really a problem in the categories of space when I analyse the whole of the works in geometricalalgebras.It is evident that the problem is topologic and about the sysmmetries and breaking of foundamentals.That is why these works imply so many confusions in the understanding of this universallink between electromagnetism and gravitation.The sense of rotations and the spherical volumes can answer to this bridge between electrom and gravitation at all scales, planck scale, quant scale and cosml scale.It is evident at my humble opinion.The good way is torespect the 3D sphere in a minlowski space time respecti,ng the 3D insertions of other 3D sphères with a time like constant of evolution correlated with an irreversible Arrow of time correlated with this increase of entropy.It is not possible in an other way it seems.Really the roations and sphères are necessary.The dark matter can be understood with these universal spherical volumes.And dark energy also.They are also in the quantum world this dark energy and dark matter,theaim is tofind where with the entangled sphères encoding other sphères, bosonic and gravitonic.The link with the cosmological sphères is very relevant when we consider a finite number and thespherical volumes.

John Cox

Steve,

Sorry, but I really don't follow what you are trying to say. Other than its obvious you do not understand Tom's efforts are towards maintaining the necessary mathematical symmetry ( just like 3+4=7 is symmetrical to 7-4=3 ) to ensure integrity in a multi-dimensional complex analysis, while still producing a progression that correlates to an Arrow of time relativistically connected not only between localities in one scale, but transcendent across all scales. So reversibility in complex analysis means computational compatibility, not physical time running 'backwards'.

Consider how you might be sitting at ease at a lunch counter, and how fluid your bodily movements are as you raise a glass of water (or wine is nice) without bumping your neighboring patron. You don't even think of the geometric calculations going on in your mental processes. Perhaps they emerge from a form of mathematical relationships that we haven't yet invented! But what we have to work with currently in spatial/temporal analysis is an orthogonal intersection of three complex planes, creating eight (8) octants of a spherical zone. Now... we can't refer to a point behind us in relationship to a point in front of us as if there was a straight line connecting the two that bisects the center point of the intersecting planes. That would make everything behind us upside down and backwards like light squeezing through a lens. So we have to assign a system of what direction we rotate when we go from one octant to another in locating a point so that if a point is behind us we can call it a minus (-) but still keeping a basic orientation to what is directly above us as a plus (+). And then this system extends to each of the eight octants in relation to any other. Oh Yes! it is complex analysis! But that is the best we have to work with. The non-commutative algebras that become necessary to keep the rotation (not physical, but systemic) all going the same directions without conflicting require using negative values, but that means that multiplying a (+) and a (-) will always produce a (-) product and multiplying either a (+) and a (+), or a (-) and a (-), will produce a (+) product. Reversibility of the time parameter simply means checking that the resulting (+) or (-) product is allowable in that point's location in relation to the co-ordinates on the quadrants of the planes that it correlates to. Imaginary time is not time that is simply 'imagined', but is called imaginary because of the use of the 'imaginary number' (i) making sign reversal possible and the analytical rotational scheme intact so that some things don't wind up being upside down and/or backwards at their location correlated to points on the complex planes.

What I was saying in dredging up a conjecture that disputes the assumption of the operational scales of time and space being identical, is that such an assumption being non-differentiated produces a static picture of 'all moments in time happening at once'. So while analytically while one time measurement applies to three spatial measurements, does endow time with a dynamic nature, we also must treat the special case of the scale of a span of time and the scale of a span of space being equal as a baseline value that may or may not exist naturally. Cordially, jrc

Steve Dufourny

Any universalmeaning, just a pub for some friends violati,g our foundamentals.Id you don't understand , so return at school of foundamentals.But perhaps you prefer to study the works of lisi and Joy and Tom.

Your associativity, you commutativity are ruin of souls.The rest is vain.

What I say is simple, you don't understand the generality of our universe and its foundamentals.

Study what is the geomatrical algebras correlated with rational physics please before pondering these stupidities of anti thesis of nothing for nothing.

It is ironical you know for me.

Regards

« Previous Page Next Page »