Black Holes Do Not Exist, claims Mersini-Houghton

Vladimir,

Any comment on my old essay? Just checking with you since not too many

people around here address problem with this approach or angle i.e.

ontology, metaphysics ... the basic source of our experiences..

Thanks,

Marcel,

Jonathan,

The faster ones have a slower clock rate, a la relativity, since the combination of external motion and internal activity can't exceed C, so internal activity, ie. clock rate, has to slow.

If you have read the above exchange, then you might have noticed it was only Tom who directly correlates energy with clock rate;

"two spring powered clocks with equal potential energy tick at the same rate. Man, are you ever confused."

As it is, if the faster moving one simply has more energy, then it has more resources to access, in order to persist. You might say there is more sand in it. Though momentum might not be a factor, other than slowing the internal rate.

Regards,

John M

Tom,

YES!!!!! The energy is conserved, not the form! That is because energy PERSISTS!!!!! It is what constitutes presence/present! Time is the effect of it creating and dissolving form!!! Thus these forms go from potential to actual(present) to residual(setting boundaries for subsequent form, as the energy propagates through these forms.

Wow. Was that just a slip, or did you mean to agree?

Regards,

John M

Jonathan,

Think of energy as amplitude and clock rate as frequency. Related, but definitely not the same.

In my original description, I very clearly stated that with two clocks with equal energy, the one with the faster clock rate will burn out quicker and so recede into the past faster.

Regards,

John M

John Merryman,

"Think of energy as amplitude and clock rate as frequency. Related, but definitely not the same."

So if a moving muon had a heartbeat (oscillation) and all muons had a lifetime consisting of a billion heartbeats (like tortoises & hummingbirds) if you somehow slow the muon's heartbeat (divert the energy of oscillation to the energy of velocity) then the muon will naturally "live" longer......

is that close to what you're suggesting ?

Objects can get heat from internal energy, by gravity compression, for example, or nuclear or chemical reaction, of from outside.

"Where does an object gain the energy to heat up, except from outside its original volume?"

"You stare out into space at night and a proper appreciation for what is being perceived has to include the enormity of space, yet for time all we can perceive is that which is present and the process of change. All else are conclusions drawn from information contained within the state of the present."

Likewise, you stare out into the past since all that we see is the enormity of the past as proper time. The local changes occur in our local time and we perceive both past proper time and local action time. Space is a convenient and useful artifice of consciousness that allows us to nicely keep track of the two time dimensions and their phase as spatial displacements among other objects as landmarks or reference points.

Points, lines, planes, and volumes are very nice representations of space as well as our number system and geometry. These are simply useful tools and can literally be just about anything that we want them to be for the task at hand: predicting action. You seem to argue a lot about the nature of space, but space is just what we make of it, no more, no less.

And now you argue about the nature of time. I particularly enjoy the "block time" definition of time. Defining time as time seems to resolve issues for people, but for me, time is still just time. Likewise, matter is matter and action is action...these are the next things to argue about.

Space, though, you do not have to argue about since space is only what we imagine is matter action in time. Time is what clock's measure. Why? Because the universe is a clock full of clocks. Each action comprises moments of matter to make objects. Each object is an action composed of moments of matter...and each clock is an action composed of ticks as moments of matter.

Honestly, Julian Barbour did a nice essay on least action...get it...action and that action explained time from the moment of matter in the action, a test particle. By using big words and an elaborate story, Barbour ended up saying that time is what clocks measure.

From the beginning John,

When comparing X-rays to visible light, they are said to have higher energy. That is; when comparing the impact photon for photon, x-rays have much more penetrating power - while gamma rays and cosmic rays have more still.

In the example Tom cited, he was saying that muons going near the speed of light last longer than the ones standing still. That is; when muons move extremely fast, they have a higher energy and obtain great penetrating power.

They are, in fact, a component of cosmic rays - since that term is a general one representing various types of near light speed sub-atomic particles, and other sources of extremely high energy like very high energy photons.

All the Best,

Jonathan

And the translated point is..

If high energy muons are those moving near the speed of light, and those are the ones with a longer lifetime, that that demonstrates the time dilation effect of Relativity. I think that's what Tom was trying to point out. Tom was explicitly saying that the particles with very high kinetic energy were moving near the speed of light and appear to be aging more slowly.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Yes Tom,

You have to understand why infinity and singularities are mathematical constructs without concrete physically real counterparts. Ask ordinary people for telling you any countable item. Since they don't think like you in a castle in the air of abstract notions, they will certainly agree on that all tangible items are finite. Well, it is not feasible to count all trees on earth, in particular because it is difficult to decide whether or not an object of consideration is a tree. However, a tree is a real and therefore countable item. The same for the number of stars in a German nursery rhyme: "God the Lord did count them all in order to make sure, not a single one is missing." Cantor is greeting.

Eckard

Steve,

It could also be argued that when you stare out into space, you see the residual effects of past time. Much as walking through Rome, you see the residual effect of past eras, but there are not the peoples from those eras milling about. Just as the light from a star ten lightyears away, arrives at the same time as a light from a star twenty lightyears away. Those stars are currently radiating energy which will have to physically travel the required distance and do it as physical presence, since there is no time dimension at the speed of light.

While space has no physical properties, or defining structure, so it can be easy to dismissed, but this lack of physicality means there is nothing to define, limit or warp it, so the only qualities left are neutrality and infinity.

Jonathan,

So that means the faster muon has much more energy, like a bullet fired from a gun has much more energy than one just sitting there.

Sorry this is quick, due to having to rush..

Regards,

John M

Jonathan,

To further clarify; If you have two objects of equal density, one has significantly greater velocity and the measure of duration is penetration, then it would constitute two clocks with unequal stores of energy, kinetic in this case, while frequency declines over the course of penetration. So yes, the one with greater velocity would "live" longer.

As for Tom's response, that was to a comment I made to Peter, explicitly changing the topic from quantum effects, to basic mechanical ones, in order to simplify the argument that time is a measure and effect of change, not some underlaying dimension for it.

As I keep arguing, by reducing time to measures of duration, physics simply codifies our perception of time as a vector from past to future events, since as individual points of perception, we experience it as a sequence of events, rather than the actual cause, which is this process of change forming and dissolving these events, thus it being they which go from future/potential, to actual/present, to past/residual. Keep in mind that potential necessarily precedes actual.

Duration doesn't transcend the present, but is the state of the present between and during the occurrence of events.

Tomorrow becomes yesterday due to change, not traveling the flow of time from yesterday to tomorrow.

Regards,

John M

" ... I very clearly stated that with two clocks with equal energy, the one with the faster clock rate ..."

And you are very clearly wrong. The physics of synchronized spring powered clocks is identical to two objects in simultaneous free fall in a gravity field. They fall (or tick) at the same rate.

Jonathan,

If you want, read Tom's most recent comment, from last night, in the subthread above(starting Oct 15), where he, I suspect inadvertently, argues my own proposition that energy is conserved, ie. persists, while form, ie. inFORMation, is transient. So the present being the state of the energy, while time is an effect of the changing form.

Regards,

John m

"... the faster muon has much more energy, like a bullet fired from a gun has much more energy ..."

At the initial velocity only. A bullet fired parallel to the plane in a gravity field at the same time a bullet is dropped from the height of the gun's muzzle will find the bullets impacting the ground at the same time. Only gravity affects the bullets' acceleration; there is no horizontal velocity. This is high school physics -- the projectile problem as explained by Galileo.

The relativistic case of muon life compares decay rates, not velocities. The more energetic muon from deep space under minimal gravity influence lives longer than an identical muon born under the influence of Earth's gravity.

"... my own proposition that energy is conserved, ie. persists, while form, ie. inFORMation, is transient. So the present being the state of the energy, while time is an effect of the changing form."

Nope. Energy conservation is a consequence of the laws of motion. Time is conserved along with energy.

"If you convert its energy to momentum, it would have a much shorter lifespan ..."

Nope. Energy and momentum are the same thing. What you mean to say is to convert the potential energy of particle rest mass into kinetic energy -- in which case the particle will have a longer life, not shorter. Remember it the way Einstein did: "Moving clocks go slower."

Lyle, John,

Yes. That's quite equivalent to the 3D wave (helix) my essays etc discuss.

If a muon is considered as a 'spring' and the 'front' end is accelerated first it will then stretch the spring (redshift). The wavenumber and total energy are the same, but the number of 'waves' per unit TIME are reduced for any one speed. As the speed has increased (the acceleration) the muon gets further before it dies.

Now the discrete field model can also resolve CP violations in that model! Remember the 'spring' is also rotating. Which way? A 50:50 distribution of both of course. So how many 'waves' arrive per unit time with one spinning the 'positive' direction rather than negative at that particular orientation? (you may need to check out 'non-mirror symmetry' of spin to get your head totally round that!)

Ergo; Half of moving rotating bodies are found to rotate counterclockwise, and half are found to go 'faster' on interaction (when they're approaching you) but all APPEAR to go faster when approaching than when as relative rest purely due to changing light travel time. (Doppler shift)! You may need to read that a few times, and NOT first try to rationalise it against old incomplete doctrine!

Let me know if the logic emerges (it surely won't for some).

Best wishes

Peter

" ... a tree is a real and therefore countable item. The same for the number of stars in a German nursery rhyme ..."

Still trying to get you to commit to what "concrete and real" means. So it means "countable items"? Do you want to stick with that?