Time as an Emergent Phenomenon: Traveling Back to the Heroic Age of Physics by Elliot McGucken

Thanks for the comments John,

Yes--perhaps you can interpret it that way, but for the moment I'm trying to keep things as simple as possible, by stating that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions: dx4/dt=ic. Einstein's Relativity may be derived from this simple postulate and its equation, and too, it unfreezes time, it liberates us from the block universe, and it accounts for quantum mechanics' nonlocality and entangelment, as well as entropy and time's arrows in all realms.

There may be many ways of interpreting a fourth expanding dimension, as you suggest. What do you mean by "quantum constant?"

I propose that a fundamental invariant of the universe is dx4/dt = ic. It is this deeper reality that leads to the constancy of c--both its independence of the velocity of the soure and the fact that it is measured to be c for all observers. dx4/dt = ic accounts for both of these c's in different ways, with the same physical model. It does not simply state that c is constant, but it also states "why."

Time--the t in dx4/dt--is the time we're all so used to--the time we see ticking away on our watches. Now this time is typically measured by some process that involves the propagation of photons, or changes in energy, be it an unwinding clock spring, an oscillating quartz crystal, or an electronic circuit. t is then ultimately tied to the propagation of photons, which are just matter surfing the fourth expanding dimension. And so it is that relativity's math inherits this notion of the fourth dimension, as relativity was born by comntemplating the propagation of light--photons. We define time by the propagation of light, and then we measure the propagation of light via time. This tautology has lead to c's constancy and too, one can see how it is the fount of realtivity's beauty--for think of the very word "relativity." It means that the way we measure physical reality is "relative" to how we are moving through space-time. Does it not make sense that measurements utilizing meter sticks, clocks, and light should be relative to motion, when both the clocks as well as the light depend on photons, which are surfing the fourth expanding dimension, which meter sticks are rotated into, and thus foreshortened in our three spatial dimensions, whenever they move? But yet, there are invariant entities, such as interval, c, and rest mass, and that's what physics has always truly been about--the rock-hard invariance of a physical reality.

MDT proposes a deeper invariance dx4/dt = ic, from which the invariance of c and the invariance of interval both naturally emerge.

Relativity is really all about invariance--about the physical reality that transcends our "relative" perceptions. Einstein once noted that it could of, and perhaps should of, been called "The Theory of Invariance."

From: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/invariance.htm

"Albert Einstein was unhappy about the name "theory of relativity". He preferred "theory of invariance". The reason is that [one] cornerstone of his 1905 theory of relativity is that the measured velocity of light is the same (invariant) regardless of any relative motion between a laboratory and the source of light. What Einstein feared came to pass when the popular catchphrase of his theory became "everything is relative". It was snatched up by people not acquainted with the scientific context, who regarded the theory as evidence in support of their own social views. { Arthur Miller, from a letter in New Scientist }" --http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/invariance.htm

From: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/invariance.htm

"In actual fact, the theory of relativity is anchored in absolutism -- in the concrete of Einstein's two postulates: The velocity of light is a universal constant, and the laws of physics are constant. He described these postulates as principles of invariance. An insightful textual analysis of the introductory sections of the 1905 paper would have recognized that the two "postulates" specify unchanging principles that serve as the foundations of the theory. In fact, Einstein called his creation an "Invariententheorie," a theory of invariance. The name "theory of relativity" was coined later in a review by German physicist Max Planck. Einstein resisted that name for years, although he reluctantly bowed to peer pressure. The relativistic features of time and space that led to the term "theory of relativity" are derived from the principles of invariance. { quoted from POSTMODERNIST RHETORIC DOES NOT CHANGE FUNDAMENTAL SCIENTIFIC FACTS by Irving M. Klotz, who is a Morrison Professor, Emeritus, in the departments of chemistry and of biochemistry, molecular biology, and cell biology at Northwestern University }

" --http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/invariance.htm

And Moving Dimensions Theory posulates that underlying relativity, as well as quantum mechanics, entropy, statistical mechanics, and time and all her arrows and assymetries, is a deeper *physical* invariance: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions." dx4/dt=ic

Thanks for the comment--hope this helps a bit, and I'll look forward to more!

Best,

Dr. E

Dr. E,

I'm in clear agreement with your model, but it seems to me that you haven't fully considered the implications of it. We view this energy field as expanding, but if in fact it is the constant, which we both seem to agree, than it is our perspective, our intellectually reductionistic, three dimensional model that is shrinking. This seems to me that is what Einstein was pointing to, with light as the constant and gravity as shrinking space. I think there exists some equilibrium of these two sides, but the tendency is to view it from one direction or the other, so that from the perspective of structure, light is expanding, while from the perspective of light, structure is shrinking. There just doesn't exist a stable middle ground to view the full relationship, so since light is uniform, it is the constant. Complexity Theory is a good example, with bottom up process(chaos) as expanding energy, top down order as contracting structure and complexity as the intermediate state.

By quantum constant I'm suggesting a physical reality sans block time. It's not presentism because as a measure of motion, it would be meaningless to describe time as a point or instant, since that would mean the cessation of motion. Peter Lynds develops this particular observation in his essay, though in a different context. Basically it means the quantum state is reality and macroscopic structure, including time, is an emergent phenomena of the inherent instability which causes collapse and expansion.

I submitted my own essay to the contest, titled Explaining Time, that provides some basic detail, although I edited it to the most clear cut points, having learned not to leave too many loose ends when making an initial presentation.

Dr. E:

Thank you for taking the considerable time and effort to carefully explain your ideas that you have taken. I don't want to burden you further, but we seem to be talking past each other. You wrote:

MDT agress 100% with Einstein's and Minkowski's relativity. The fourth dimension is a direction that is orthogonal to the three spatial dimensions.

A dimension cannot be a direction, since directions are a property of dimensions. In 3-space, three orthogonal dimensions are sufficient to define any direction in the space: N-S, E-W, U-D. Mathematically, these three dimensions are three numbers; N-S = 2^1, E-W = 2^1, and U-D = 2^1.

Any radius of the expanding sphere, expanding at the rate of c, reaches a unit value, from zero, in one unit of time. If we freeze the expansion at that point in time and analyze the unit sphere, or its cross-section, a unit circle, we see that, in terms of motion, the length of the sphere's radius is given by the equation of motion:

L = c * t = 299,792,458 m/s * 1 sec = 299,792,458 meters

Certainly, the length of this radius, regardless of the angle from the origin, is constant, never changing. It's a real radius of a real sphere. However, if we consider the values of the x, y, z coordinates of its corresponding point on the surface of the sphere, they cannot, of course, be equal to the value of the radius, they must be approximately .707 times the length of the radius, due to the geometry of the sphere in terms of the geometry of the cube (the rectangular coordinate system).

So, while the radius of the real sphere is L = ct, the coordinates of its corresponding point on the surface, in each of three, orthogonal directions, is .707L. But they each increased, from zero to .707L in 1 sec, so the speed of increase, or the speed in each orthogonal direction, in terms of a given coordinate, is .707c. But isn't this an imaginary speed? Did anything really move at that speed? Of course not. The sphere actually expanded at c-speed. The fact that we can describe the position of the point on the surface of the sphere, corresponding to L, with three, orthogonal coordinates of length .707L, is not anything real, but only a consequence of the properties of right lines and circles.

Therefore, just as there is no actual expansion speed of .707c, there is no expansion speed of 2(.707c) = ict either. If there is no expansion speed = ict, then there is no expansion = ict/t = ic, and if it doesn't exist, how can it have properties?

Hello Excal,

Thanks for the note. I'm enjoying this!

I wrote,

"MDT agress 100% with Einstein's and Minkowski's relativity. The fourth dimension is a direction that is orthogonal to the three spatial dimensions."

It would have been better worded with "The fourth dimension *represents* a direction that is orthogonal to the three spatial dimensions."

Or perhaps simply "The fourth dimension is orthogonal to the three spatial dimensions." Or perhaps "The fourth dimension is orthogonal to each one of the three spatial dimensions."

As MDT agrees with Einstein and Minkowski's relativity, perhaps your argument is more with their formulation of relativity,a nd relativity in general, than with MDT.

Speaking of "directions," Niels Bohr stated "We are suspended in language in such a way that we cannot say what is up and what is down."

The second part of this quote is "The word reality is also a word, a word which we must learn to use correctly."--Bohr

MDT's greater purpose is grasping the underlying physical *reality* that underlies and physically accounts for relativity, quantum mechanics, entropy, time's arrows, and time.

MDT postulates a deeper universal invariant--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions: dx4/dt = ic. From this emerges the invariance of c--both in its independence of the velocity of its source, and the independence of velocity of the inertial frame in which it is measured.

Relativity proposes a block universe. Godel pointed out the paradoxical "timeless" implications of this, as well as its inability to account for time as we experience it, and this problem has largely been swept under the rug, along with curiosities such as quantum entanglement, nonlocality and all the dualities--space/time, energy/mass, and wave/particle. Today we are told that that is "just the wya things are" and not to worry about it. Perhaps this helps explains why physics has not really advanced in the past thirty years... for Einstein stated, "curiosity is more importnat than knowledge."

And thus MDT's center and circumference rests upon asking and answering fundamental questions with a simple, elegant *physical* model that comes with both a postulate of a fourth expanding dimension and an equation: dx4/dt = ic.

From this all of relativity may be derived, and an added bonus is that it accounts for quantum mechanics' entanglement and nonlocality.

As you know, relativity has been very well verified in a cornucopia of experiments and observed phenomena over the years.

However, relativity, as interpreted, came with a problem--a block universe. Relativity's interpretations suggested that time is frozen and that free will did not exist. Relativity implied the possibility of time travel, which visitors from the future have yet to verify, and even more paradoxially, without free will, how can one choose to travel back in time anyways?

MDT has liberated us from the block universe.

The great thing about MDT is that it gives us everything relativity gives us--time dilation, length contraction, and the equivalence of mass and energy--while also libertating us from a timeless, block universe, as well as providing a *physical* model for time, entropy, quantum entanglement and nonlocality, and the equivalence of mass and energy.

Now a major goal of physics has ever been to unify disparate physical phenomena with common principles, postulates, and equations representing something fundamental about our "reality," as Bohr suggested.

MDT suggests a novel, deeper reality in the universe--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions: dx4/dt = ic.

Hello Johnn,

You write, "By quantum constant I'm suggesting a physical reality sans block time."

Yes! I agree!

Change is woven into the fundamental fabric of the universe!

dx4/dt = ic acknowledges this fundamental change from where time, as measured on our watches, naturally emerges.

The invariant expansion of the fourth dimension, expressed with dx4/dt = ic, allows us to keep all of relativity, while also liberating us from a block universe and *physically* acocunting for the flow of time, time's arrows, entropy, and free will. And it also provides a *physical* model accounting for quantum mechanical phenomena such as entanglement, nonlocality, and the uncertainty principle, while showing a common *physical* source for all the dualitiess--space/time, enegery/mass, and wave/particle.

Change is woven into the fundamental fabric of the universe on a quantum level, from where relativity and time emerge!

I'm glad you are not annoyed Dr. E:

You wrote:

"As MDT agrees with Einstein and Minkowski's relativity, perhaps your argument is more with their formulation of relativity, and relativity in general, than with MDT."

No, because in Einstein's case, x4 = ict = iL/t * t = iL is an imaginary length that is the radius, r', of an imaginary sphere, as he pointed out, but the coordinates of the point on the surface of the imaginary sphere are equal to the radius, r, of the real sphere (see the attachment again). Thus, x4, the coordinate point, is real, while ict, the radius, r', is imaginary, so using the imaginary concept as Einstein used it, as a fourth coordinate in spacetime, is perfectly consistent, but using it the way you are using it, is not consistent.

That is to say, for the imaginary sphere, the speed of a given dimension of the expanding coordinate point, x, or y, or z, is equal to c, the length of which is L = ct =1, which is equal to the radius, r, of the real sphere.

Consequently, the coordinates of the imaginary sphere are real, but its radius, r', is imaginary, while the radius, r, of the real sphere is real, but its coordinates are imaginary. If we disregard this fact, we invite confusion.Attachment #1: 1_UnitComplexCircles.jpg

Hello Excal,

I am using x4 and ict exactly how Einstein and Minkowski used them.

MDT agrees entirely with Einstein's Relativity.

My paper quotes Einstein's 1912 Manuscipt, from where it also takes its direct inspiration and equations.

I highly recommend the book!

http://www.amazon.com/Einsteins-Manuscript-Special-Theory-Relativity/dp/0807615323/

Best,

Dr. E :)

P.S. I'm used to forums that keep me logged on throughout the day. :)

Excal,

I think the conversation is circling around the issue of cosmic expansion and how to explain it and how to describe it. While it's not advisable to stray too far from the standard model(singularity/inflation/dark energy) in polite company, I'm of the impression it is a cosmological constant, ie. a curvature or expansion of space opposite that of gravity. Since this would compound the redshift, then the further light travels the faster the source appears to recede, until it eventually appears to be receding at the speed of light, which creates a horizon line over which visible light can't travel, only black body radiation. The source is not actually receding, any more than gravitational lensing actually causes a star to move because its light shifts position. As gravity is described by matter falling together and radiation expands directly out of gravitational wells, at least those weaker than black holes, this opposing expansion is as much a consequence and cause of light radiation as gravity is of mass. So as particular light waves cross this medium, they are redshifted because they are stretched by the expansion, just as when they cross a gravitational field, they are curved. Think in terms of running up the down escalator, the floors are not moving apart, nor are the galaxies, because what expands between galaxies falls into them. Thus Omega=1 and gravity and expansion balance out. Between the valleys of gravity are hills of radiant expansion.

This would be a possible explanation for how Dr. E's fourth dimension is expanding, as a field effect, rather than radially, from a particular location.

Keep in mind that if space were actually expanding, then our most stable measure of it, the speed of light, would have to increase proportionally. Otherwise it's not expanding space, but an increasing distance in stable space, which would place us at the center of the universe, since other galaxies are redshifted directly away from us. If C did increase as space expanded, we wouldn't be able to detect the expansion, since the source would still appear at the same distance relative to our only measure, C.

Hello All!

One thing I hope to do is to set up a site which shares excerpts from notable physics papers and books which support Moving Dimensions Theory, or which ask questiosn or pose problems that are solved via MDT

Here is a passage from page 350 of John A. Wheeler's 1998 GEONS, BLACK HOLES, AND QUANTUM FOAM:

"Theory suggests also that black holes of incredibly small size, at the scale of the so-called Planck length, are forming and dissolving all the time by the trillion, with the dimenions of every elementary particle. At that scale, with spacetime churned into quantum foam, space and time in fact lose their meaning. When we blend the two greatest theories of the twentieth century, quantum theory and general relativity, we have to conclude that time is a secondary concept, a derived concept. It has meaning only at a scale large compared with the Planck length and only well away from black holes, the Big Bang, or the Big Crunch. It is not a river that rolls inexorably forward. It is not a lake across which we glide. It is more to be compared with tempertature or with entropy, concepts that take their meaning only when large numbers of particles are involved. Time, we conclude, is of statistical origin, valid only when dimensions are large enough and when conditions are not too extreme." --page 350 of John A. Wheeler's 1998 GEONS, BLACK HOLES, AND QUANTUM FOAM

Moving Dimensions Theory, with its simple postulate of a fourth expanding dimension and equation: dx4/dt=ic agrees with this passage. Time is an emergent phenomenon, or, as Wheeler stipulates, "time is a secondary concept, a derived concept." Ergo time is not the fourth dimension, but it is a phenomenon that emerges because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c. Now as this expansion distributes locality, it is also the source of quantum mechanics' probability. It is why a photon, which travels by surfing the fourth expanding dimension, has an equal chance of being detected anywhere upon the surface of a spherically-symmetric wavefront which expands at the rate of c.

All of relativity, and its implications including E=mc^2, is derived from MDT in my paper, beginning with a 4D universe in which the fourth dimension is expanding at the rate of c: dx4/dt=ic. This invartiant expansion, underlying all motion and entropy, unfreezes time, and shows that time, as a "secondary concept, a derived concept" naturally emerges from a deeper physical reality--a fundamental invariance: dx4/dt=ic which is the deeper source of the velocity of light's invariance: c, and all the dualities--space/time, mass/enegry, wave/particle. And too it shows that nonlocality and quantum mechanics' probabilistic nature naturally emerges from this same deeper principle, as the fourth dimension inherits nonlocal properties via its expansion, which grants all particles nonlocal wave-like properties.

So it is that the EPR Paradox is resolved as we are liberated from Einstein's/Godel's block universe. MDT provides a fundamental framework for all of QM and relativity, while also granting us free will and explaining entanglement and length contraction with the exact same principle, from which time, and all its assymmetries, naturally emerges.

Well, thanks again for all the feedback! I have short excerpts from a couple dozen books and original papers that I am assembling, all of which support MDT. If you should come across anything, I would be grateful!

In addition to Einstein's 1912 Manuscript on Relativity, a book I would highly recommend, with a lot of the original papers, is:

Quantum Theory and Measurement (Princeton Series in Physics) (Paperback)

by John Archibald Wheeler (Author), Wojciech Hubert Zurek (Author)

Read Feynman, Eisntein, Bohr, Wheeler, and Godel! So many mysterious entities that inspired and exalted them almost seemed banned from today's common discourses on physics. Although they all "stood upon the shoulders of giants," back then physics was rooted more in simple truths, humble honety, and rugged individualism, all guided by an inspired sense of wonder.

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed." --Einstein

Yes--as we know so very little, it means that so very much remains mysterious to those who open their eyes, look, and ask, and thus opportunity abounds for "true art and all science!"

Best,

Dr. E :)

Awesome essay, cannot wait to see the *final* version!

I feel like your theory might integrate nicely with the here-and-now (see essay)?

Perhaps, the here-and-now is physically defined as the surface of the 'expanding fourth dimension sphere' (i.e., photons) which is *coincident* to our *subjective moments*.

CKM

Thanks for the words Clinton.

Yes--I have enjoyed your paper and am currently re-reading it. I love your thesis, "Third, the importance of experimental empirical information for an objective world-view is stressed with examples." Yes! Too many have forgotten that physics ought be about *physical* reality.

I also enjoy the words in your appendix on page 9 of your paper, ". . . measurement is performed by nature serving in the role of an observer in the retinal rod, more specifically the rhodopsin molecule, leading to a stochastic discontinuous nonlinear objective wave function collapse. This means that while neither the brain, mind or consciousness play any subjective role in the collapse of the wave function, they do play a role in analyzing and interpreting the information presented to them. . .We observe nothing, rather observed or collapsed information of an objective nature is presented to us in a sequential fashion by nature for our subjective analysis or interpretation. Our supposed role as an observer is just an illusion!"

Yes! When a photon blackens a grain on a photographic plate, or when it warms the pavement, it does so independent of any observer. There is a *physical* reality independent of observers! This is also what Einstein's relativity ultimately states, and he actually wanted to call the theory the theory of *invariance*.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/invariance.htm

"Albert Einstein was unhappy about the name "theory of relativity". He preferred "theory of invariance". The reason is that [one] cornerstone of his 1905 theory of relativity is that the measured velocity of light is the same (invariant) regardless of any relative motion between a laboratory and the source of light. What Einstein feared came to pass when the popular catchphrase of his theory became "everything is relative". It was snatched up by people not acquainted with the scientific context, who regarded the theory as evidence in support of their own social views. { Arthur Miller, from a letter in New Scientist }" --from http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/invariance.htm

Craig Rusbult goes on to write in Einstein's Theory of Invariance,

"In actual fact, the theory of relativity is anchored in absolutism -- in the concrete of Einstein's two postulates: The velocity of light is a universal constant, and the laws of physics are constant. He described these postulates as principles of invariance. An insightful textual analysis of the introductory sections of the 1905 paper would have recognized that the two "postulates" specify unchanging principles that serve as the foundations of the theory. In fact, Einstein called his creation an "Invariententheorie," a theory of invariance. The name "theory of relativity" was coined later in a review by German physicist Max Planck. Einstein resisted that name for years, although he reluctantly bowed to peer pressure. The relativistic features of time and space that led to the term "theory of relativity" are derived from the principles of invariance." --from http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/invariance.htm Einstein's Theory of Invariance

So it is that both quantum mechanics and relativity describe an invariatiant *physical* reality that exists independent of us! And Moving Dimensions Theory proposes a new, more fundamental invariance underlying both relativity and quantum mechanics--an invariance that also accounts for entropy and time's arrows and assymetries in all realms: the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions or dx4/dt = ic. MDT represents that kind of tehory that we have not seen for awhile--a simple postulate and equation reflecting a fundamental invariance underlying all change--a new postulate and equation exalting a novel feature of this universe that has hitherto remained unsung, and suddenly time is unfrozen and we are liberated from the block universe! Relativity, QM, and entropy are given a common foundational framework, and time in all realms is shown to be an emergent phenomenon.

Consider the photon. Measurement of its position relies on the collapse of a wavefunction--the irreversible localization of the photon's momenergy. When a photon is emitted, it is carried along by the fourth expanding dimension, which defines a nonlocal spherically-symmetric probabilistic wavefront expanding at the rate of c through the three spatial dimensions. The expanding fourth dimension is responsible for nonlocality--it "smears" locality throughout all of space, and hence the photon is ageless--it remains in the exact same place in the fourth dimension, no matter how far it travels, as it surfs the fourth expanding dimension. And hence entanglement--two initially-interacting photons remain fundamentally connected no matter how far apart they travel, as they yet inhabit a common locality that resulst because of the nonlocal expansion of the fourth dimension. And hence a photon's ageless (from relativity) and entanglement (from qm) derive from a common principle, which also presents a *physical* model for measurement, entropy, and time and its arrows in all realms.

So, so many physical entities and phenomena derive from the expansion of the fourth dimension, from qm's entanglement, nonlocality, and probabilistic nature, to time's arrows and assymetries in all realms, to entropy, to all of relativity which is derived from MDT in my paper.

So many cool things in your paper, Clintom, so thanks! I will be returing to it. And you're only twenty! Time is on your side, so seize the day--Carpe Diem! I remember John Wheeler spoke to all the freshmen physics majors at Princeton, and he told us that the time to start research is "now." And if we had questions, he suggested that we ask the grad students before we asked the professors, as the grad students were more likely to be on the cutting edge.

Well, honest curiosity is always on the cutting edge, so thanks for the paper and keep up the great work!

"Follow your bliss and don't be afraid, and doors will open where you didn't know they were going to be" -- Joseph Campbell

Best,

Dr. E :)

Thank you Dr. E!

I have to admit, however, that time is not on my side--my fluid intelligence will begin to decline over the next 10 years--this past year I realized that *now* is my opportunity to make something of my life. Since I arrived at college I began a journey into the depths of science, my lifelong passion. When confronted with that question "what do you want to be?" I began to re-discover my joy for learning--and the *wonder* it can arouse. Curiosity was the energy that drove me this past year to do all the research that led to my essay.

Learning is an emotional activity. This is why its so hard to remember what the molecular mass of seaborgium is--who cares! We have books, videos, and the internet for that. Two Einstein quotes come to mind,

"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein

"Never memorize what you can look up in books." - Albert Einstein

These statements are at odds with my current situation, college. I want to *give* something to *us*. I do not want to *get* good grades for *me*.

"It is high time the ideal of success should be replaced with the ideal of service... Only a life lived [in the here-and-now] for others [past, present, and future] is a life worthwhile." - Albert Einstein

CKM

P.S.

"When a photon blackens a grain on a photographic plate, or when it warms the pavement, it does so independent of any observer. There is a *physical* reality independent of observers!"

I agree with this idea apart from the word independent. That word incurs an assumption (i.e., objective reality). But the word *coincident* does not.

Thanks Clinton!

Great Einstein quotes! Hang in there & seek out professors who encourage creativity and independent thought--I was quite lucky to find John Wheeler and then a dissertation advisor who stated, "you can do anything, but you gotta do something," which led to the artificial retina project.

Yes--you would enjoy Joseph Campbell's writings too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces

They just came out with a new edition!

We need a return to the classic, heroic, mythological spirit in science!

In the book Campbell talks about the Knights of the Round Table who all had to begin their "hero's journeys" by finding their own way through the forest. It was dishonorable to walk in someone else's path. And once in the forest, they would happen upon a white rabbit (Neo follows one in The Matrix), or an amulet, or a goddess (Luke Skywalker sees princess Leah after following R2D2--a modern white rabbit), who would "call them to adventure."

In so many ways the advancement of science follows the classic hero's journey.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero%27s_journey

2 The Seventeen Stages of the Monomyth

2.1 Departure (or Separation)

Getting to college/leaving home. Or being fired from a job, or forced to work outside academia as a patent clerk. Joseph Campbell chose the woods of Woodstock, and the Great Books, over graduate school.

2.1.1 The Call to Adventure

Curiosity--Einstein wondering what it would be like to catch up with a light beam. & his happiest thought.

2.1.2 Refusal of the Call

People railing against relativity and QM, as well as Boltzman's s=klogw which is on his tombstone. The mob burning Bruno and the Inquisition forcing Galileo to recant his theory. Sometimes we internalize this mob mentality, and we fear to speak truth to power, and so we refuse the call, as did Jonah.

2.1.3 Supernatural Aid

Meeting a mentor. Feynman meeting Wheeler. Einstein meeting Planck/Minkowski. Wheeler calling upon you to begin research right "now."

2.1.4 The Crossing of the First Threshold

The courage to go beyond the mentor, with the mentor's guidance, or sometimes even against the mentor's beliefs, even though the mentor will eventually come back to help you out, as our parents so often do, and as Minkowski did for Einstein.

2.1.5 Belly of The Whale

Years of darkness, frustration, and exhaustion. Dead ends. Wrong turns. Exile--Dante penned the Inferno in Exile, and Einstein revolutionized physics while exiled from academia. Do not fear the darkness, for in the darkness one can better see one's own light.

2.2 Initiation

Finally finding the right path--getting underway. Einstein's two postulates & the principle of relativity. The quantum nature of light.

2.2.1 The Road of Trials

Meeting collaborators, overcoming obstacles, trusting in one's instincts. The exhausting work of calculations, research, and writing.

2.2.2 Mother as Goddess

Mother earth--the physical, empirical nature of the world which ultimately rules all physics.

2.2.3 Woman as Temptress

Following the wrong path by "beauty" or narcisism alone, like String Theorists and LQG. Narcissus staring at his reflection until he falls in.

2.2.4 Atonement with the Father

Einstein and Minkowski making peace, as Minkowski, Einstein's math teacher, provided the ultimate framework for relativity, even though Einsetin did not appreciate it at first, and Minkowski called Einstein a "lazy dog" when Einstein was Minkowski's student.

2.2.5 Apotheosis

Reaching one's full potential. Often comes after a "death," after an exile or firing, for one's ideals are immortal, as is E=mc^2.

2.2.6 The Ultimate Boon

Einstein's GR&SR. Boltzman's thermodynamics. Bruno's/copernicus's/Galileo's views.

2.3 Return

Coming on back with newfound knoweldge--Einstein's GR&SR. Boltzman's thermodynamics. Feynman's many paths. Moses coming down from the mountain with the Ten Commandments.

2.3.1 Refusal of the Return

Einstein refusing to accept quantum mechanics in his later years.

2.3.2 The Magic Flight

Somehow, even all of his wrong turns and mistakes seemed to lead towards triumph for Einstein in his "magic flight," as if his physical intuition transcended even the genius's physical grasp on reality.

2.3.3 Rescue from Without

Suddenly the cosmological constant is needed again, by a universe whose acceleration seems to be increasing.

2.3.4 The Crossing of the Return Threshold

It seems that only those physicists/artists/writers who part ways with the establishment ever return to exalt the establishment. It is a tragic irony that they are opposed at every step.

2.3.5 Master of Two Worlds

Einstein as a master of both Newtonian gravity and his superior forumlation found in GR.

2.3.6 Freedom to Live

Knowledge is augmented for all, and I would argue that freedom herself derives from the honest pursuit of Truth!

And so it is that we must return to teaching the Classic Mythologies, as well as the classic texts on physics, while encouraging students to hold ingenuity, curiosity, creativity, honor, and truth over political consensus-building.

And then, just as MDT liberates us from frozen time and a block universe, theoretical physics may be liberated from its frozen state.

Well, I think the hero's journey would be a fun structure/platform/metaphor for a book studying the lives of the epic scientists.

Best,

Dr. E

Dr. E,

I had another thought about your MDT.

In my paper Nature is *coincident* to our *subjective moments* through the here-and-now. If the here-and-now is physically defined as the photons impinging upon our sense modalities (i.e., the surface of the expanding fourth dimension), we can then infer that between the here-and-now and the cosmic background radiation (the limit of Nature) we have the radius of *physical* reality. Perhaps this radius can then be used to implement the so-called holographic principle...

As per Paul Davies, in his paper (Davies, P. C. W. (2007) "The Implications Of A Cosmological Information Bound For Complexity, Quantum Information And The Nature Of Physical Law," Fluctuation and Noise Letters, 7, L391.), this information bound could then be used to constrain Nature (the laws of physics).

" . . . linking the present with the past via quantum measurement is part and parcel of standard quantum mechanics, and can even be demonstrated experimentally, although so far only over very short time scales. This backwards-in-time effect cannot be used to send information into the past, or to change the past, but it does constrain the past to conform to the present.

So can the 'retro-causation' aspect of quantum physics explain why the laws of physics are fine-tuned for life? Not in the usual formulation, no. Although quantum mechanics requires the presence of many alternative pasts, every allowed history develops over time in conformity with the same laws of physics. The differences come about purely from inherent quantum uncertainty, not from any variations in the laws of physics as such. What we would like to explain is why the laws themselves are bio-friendly, thus permitting at least some quantum histories containing observers.

To do so, we would need to find some way of applying the general principle linking future to past through quantum observations to the laws of physics themselves. Until now, such an application would have been meaningless, because the laws were regarded as fixed and infinitely precise. But treating the laws as cosmic software, with an inherent flexibility, neatly lends itself to the task.

Observations made throughout the entire duration of the universe can contribute to fashioning the form of the laws [at the cosmic background radiation] . . . when they were still significantly malleable. Thus the potential for future life acts like an attractor, drawing the emerging laws towards a bio-friendly region of the available parameter space. In this way, life, mind and cosmos form a self-consistent explanatory loop.

For four hundred years, science has been based on the implicit belief that the laws of nature are themselves supernatural, and thus off limits to scientific inquiry. The time has come to challenge this fundamental assumption and seek a natural physical mechanism [the physical definition of the here-and-now] that enables the universe to generate its own bio-friendly laws.

In the eternal quest to explain life, the universe and everything, it could be that life explains the universe even as the universe explains life. Which pretty much covers everything."

- Paul Davies (http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1479)

CKM

Thanks for this CKM.

A great book you must get your hands on is: http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Physics/dp/0691083169

Quantum Theory and Measurement (Princeton Series in Physics) (Paperback)

by John Archibald Wheeler

This book was in my freshman dorm at Princeton--the only physics book in the little library/study room. And so I picked it up! Then, a few days later, I heard Wheeler speak, and I saw the book again and realized it was that same Wheeler!

In the book you will find the origins of many of the ideas you speak of above, although those ideas have perhaps been taken a bit far, and are a bit speculative. A similar thing happened with relativity, which people have used to speculate about time travel into the past and wormholes, which are safe from experimental tests. Had they only noticed that Einstein never stated that time is the fourth dimension, but rather that he wrote x4=ict, inspired by Minkowski in his 1912 paper. As t advances, the fourth dimension expands at the rate of ic, distributing locality and fathering time and quantum phenonema, as well as relativity and entropy. And as photons, by which we measure time and distance, are but matter trapped in the expanding dimension, time inherits properties of the fourth dimension in relativity's mathematics, but time is not the fourth dimension.

Einstein stated, "I like to think that the moon is there even if I am not looking at it," and I agree!

Tautological, anthropic, circular arguments are hard to lose, but too, they are hard to win. The universe is the way it is because it has to be the way it is to support us might or might not confuse cause and effect, and thus I don't often get involved in such debates. Also, the universe is the way it is because we measure it, and our meausurements affect the actual laws might be giving us a bit too much credit. Also, how can we test it? What are the physical postulates and equations that this line of thinking leads to?

Read http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Physics/dp/0691083169 and Einstein's, Bohr's, Schrodenger's, Pauli's, Newton's, Dirac's, Maxwell's, Feynman's original papers/works/books, and you will see they did not quite think this way.

It seems that the higher forms of physics have ever been advanced by a quest for Truth with a capital T, that Timeless, objective, eternal Truth.

"Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity." Albert Einstein

That would be the same eternity Dante, Shakespeare, and William Blake wrote for:

To see a World in a Grain of Sand

And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,

Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand

And Eternity in an hour.

MDT longs for that heroic age of physics, whence simple postulates and equations strove to expose, discover, define, and express deeper aspects of our reality. The proposition that the fourth dimension is moving and expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions is no small proposition. In many ways MDT is bold, but yet, if the purpose of physics is to make everything as simple as possible but not moreso, if the purpose of physics is to unify disparate *physical* phenomena with a common *physical* model, if the purpose of physics is to present simple postualtes and equations representing a fundamental *physical* reality, then Moving Dimensions Theory is far more humble than String Theory, LQG, and speculative philosophies concerning our influence on the laws of nature, as MDT humbles itself before QM, entropy, free will, and relativity--it humbles itself before our empirical reality which presents us with quantum entanglement, nonlocality, relativity, entropy, and time and all its arrows and assymetries. MDT humbles itself before Einstein's 1912 Manuscipt on Relativity, Godel's problems with time in relativity, and the EPR Paradox. From MDT's simple postulate and equation, all of relativity can be derived, and all the dualities (time/space, energy/matter, wave/particle) can be acocunted for with a common model. And too, MDT liberates us from the block universe and grants us free will, by simply stating that Einstein and Minkowski had it right--away back when they wrote x4 = ict, implying that the fourth dimension must be moving relative to the three spatial dimensions and dx4/dt = ic.

Imagine an undergraudate program in which one read all the original papers! Or at least where the original papers were regularly brought in! Imagine textbooks that regularly included excerpts form the original papers! This is surely something to work towards! We can perhaps begin with a website or two--hey--perhaps this is what an MDT website could accomplish.

One of the things I enjoyed about your paper, CKM, is your wide, solid range of references! And how you wove them all together in something new. You have a scholar's soul, so keep it up!

You will love this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Physics/dp/0691083169

Best,

Dr. E :)

Dr. E,

Thank you for your comments, they are greatly appreciated.

I hold my position, however.

"Einstein stated, "I like to think that the moon is there even if I am not looking at it," and I agree!"

By all means I implore you to think as you wish, but, that fact of the matter is by agreeing with that statement you are only voicing your opinion--a product of your *imagination*--not the invariant structure of reality.

Only the here-and-now or "present moment" can exist.

"Also, the universe is the way it is because we measure it, and our meausurements affect the actual laws might be giving us a bit too much credit. Also, how can we test it? What are the physical postulates and equations that this line of thinking leads to?"

We do not measure the universe. Nature preforms measurement in our sense modalities. All measurement can be traced back to this *real* measurement. And we do not need to test it--we need only to live it--reality is what it is.

"Nature uses only the longest threads [ageless photons] to weave her patterns, so that each small piece of her fabric reveals the organization of the entire tapestry." - Richard Feynman

------

I absolutely love the William Blake poem. (One of my favorites.) However, I think the eternity he speaks of is subjective. I have experienced this before.

------

"MDT longs for that heroic age of physics, whence simple postulates and equations strove to expose, discover, define, and express deeper aspects of our reality."

"We are very lucky to be living in an age in which we are still making discoveries... The age in which we live is the age in which we are discovering the fundamental laws of nature, and that day will never come again. It is very exciting, it is marvelous, but this excitement will have to go."

- Richard Feynman, in *The Character of Physical Law*, 1965

CKM

Hello CKM,

I agree with what you write, "We do not measure the universe. Nature preforms measurement in our sense modalities. All measurement can be traced back to this *real* measurement. And we do not need to test it--we need only to live it--reality is what it is."

Yes--Feynman was fairly prophetic in predicting the era dominated by String Theory and LQG and other "ironic" forms of physics: "We are very lucky to be living in an age in which we are still making discoveries... The age in which we live is the age in which we are discovering the fundamental laws of nature, and that day will never come again. It is very exciting, it is marvelous, but this excitement will have to go." - Richard Feynman, in *The Character of Physical Law*, 1965

Yes, it seems that some of the excietment has dimmed over the last thirty years, culminating in this episode of Big Bang Theory:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOwS0N3sX_M

And that is why we need to return to the "heroic spirit," as suggested by Achilles in The Iliad: "As I detest the doorways of Death, I detest that man who hides one thing. in the depths of his heart and speaks forth another."

All too often these days it seems people speak forth one thing while hiding in their hearts another, in an attempt to fool the lay public and sometimes even themselves and their peers, who may actually be easier to fool than the layman. But I would argue that the advancement of physics relies upon a rigorous honesty and a holding of physical truth over politics, grants, and team sports.

And while Feynman has been right over the last thirty or so years, perhaps science is not yet over--perhaps there are yet simple aspects of this universe that have remained unsung--simple physical characteristics which unify diverse phenomena in physical postulates and equations, such as the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt = ic. Perhaps string theorists and LQGers have not been asking the right questions.

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it." - Albert Einstein

Einstein stated that curiosity is more important than knowledge, but all too often modern physicists forget to ask fundamental questions. Below is a list of foundational questions asked and answered by a simple theory that answers each and every question with: "Because the Fourth Dimension is Expanding Relative to the Three Spatial Dimensions: dx4/dt=ic"

1. Why is light's velocity a constant c?

2. Why is light's velocity c independent of its source?

3. Why is it that nothing can travel faster than c?

4. Why does a photon, which travels at c, not age?

5. Why does a photon's spherically symmetric path define simultaneity--a locality in the fourth dimension?

5. Why are energy and mass equivalent? Why E=mc^2?

6. Why do all of time's arrows point in the same direction--towards dissipation, decoherence, and entropy?

7. Why do so many physicists say time is the fourth dimension, when Einstein never said x4 is time, but instead said x4 = ict?

8. Why can matter can appear as energy or mass?

9. Why is it that when matter appears as pure energy, it propagates at c through space?

10. Why does all matter have particle--local--and wave--nonlocal--properties?

11. Why does all energy have particle--local--and wave--nonlocal--properties?

12. Why is it that when matter appears as stationary mass it propagates at c through the fourth dimension?

13. Why is it that when matter appears as energy, it propagates at c through the three spatial dimensions?

14. Why is it that to move at c through space is to stand still in the fourth dimension?

15. Why is it that to move at c through the fourth dimension is to stand still in space?

16. Why is it that all objects move at but one speed through space-time--c?

17. Why is the universe expanding?

18. Why does radiation expand outwards, but not inwards?

19. Why do we see retarded waves, but not advanced?

19. Why is it that entropy imitates the general motion of all radiation and the universe's expansion--a spherically-symmetric expanding wave?

20. Why is it that Huygens' Principle, which underlies all reality ranging from QED to Feynman's many-paths, to classical physics, state that every point of a spherically-expanding wavefront is in turn a spherically-expanding wavefront?

21. Why are all photons described by a spherically-expanding wavefront propagating at c?

22. Why is it that two initially-interacting photons remain entangled, no matter how far they travel apart?

23. Why is it that two initially-interacting photons remain the exact same age, no matter how far they travel apart?

24. Why is it that Young's double-slit experiments show that mass and energy have nonlocal wave properties?

25. Why is it that the collapse of the wave function is immediate in the photoelectric effect?

26. Why is there no way for an object to gain velocity without being reduced in length via relativistic length contraction?

27. Why does a photon trace out a null vector through space-time?

28. Why does time's arrow point in a definitive direction?

29. Why does entropy increase?

30. Why do Moving clocks run slow?

31. Why is time travel into the past impossible?

32. Why does free will exist?

33. Why is it that time is not frozen---how come the block universe does not exist? Why do we have free will?

34. Why does a photon's probabilistic wavefront travel at c?

45. Why is the velocity of quantum entanglement c? Why is it that only initially interacting particles can yet be entangled? Why is it that they must first share a common locality or origin, in order to share an entangled nonlocality when tehy are separated?

36. Why is it that in Schroedinger's equation, the first derivative with respect to the fourth dimension is proportional to the second derivative with the respect to the three spatial dimensions? Any change in position in the fourth expanding dimension is an acceleration in the three spatial dimensions.

37. Why is it that a photon emitted from the sun is redshifted as it travels away? It's wavelength appears longer as it is measured against space that is less-stretched. A photon inherits the local geometry of the spacetime where it was emitted.

38. Why do clocks in gravitational fields run slow?

39. Why are photons redshifted as they move away from massive objects, and blueshifted as they move towards them?

40. Why the conservation laws? Why does an object maintain its rotation in space time, unless acted upon by an exterior force?

41. Why is the velocity of every object through space-time c?

42. Why is it that the only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions?

43. Why is it that the only way to remain stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c relative to the fourth dimension?

44. Why does a photon have zero rest mass, and how does zero rest mass imply the velocity of light? None of the object's matter exists in the three spatial dimensions, but only in the fourth expanding dimension.

45. Why time's arrows?

46. Why time's assymetries?

47. Why entropy?

Firstoff, imagine a universe where one was allowed to ask such questions; instead of having to engage in groupthink mathematics and snarky politics for tenure; while bringing the advancement of theoretical physics to a halt for the last thirty years or so. And then imagine if there was one simple principle underlying and unifying all these questions and clues with a fundamental physical model. That would be MDT: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.

dx4/dt = ic

The fourth dimension expands at the rate of c.

The fourth dimension is nonlocal via its expansion.

Entropy results as the local becomes nonlocal--as a point, or compactified sphere, of the fourth expanding dimension expands in a spherically-symmetric manner, dragging all of entirety along with it.

Quantum Mechanics' nonlocality and entropy are inextricably linked, as the fourth dimension expands at c, and carries photons and particles apart.

Photons surf the fourth expanding dimension.

Energy is but matter trapped on the fourth expanding dimension. Hence E=mc^2.

All matter has vast potential for energy, if only it is rotated into the fourth expanding dimension.

General Relativity freezes the fourth dimension, whereas quantum mechanics is built upon its flux--hence the differential operators.

Entropy and Huygens' principle rest upon the fourth expanding dimension, as do all photons which surf its expanding wavefront.

Nonlocality arises because the fourth dimension is nonlocal as it expands.

Simultaneity is relative because our measurement of time is relative to our propagation with respect to the fourth expanding dimension.

Time, as measured in our watches and perceived in the stored order of our memories, is not the fourth dimension, but a phenomenon that emerges because a fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, caryring the photons in our time-measuring instruments and clocks.

The block universe does not exist, as the past is but a memory of a state that is long since gone.

Wave interference arises because of probability interference, and probability is defined by the expansion of the fourth dimension, which distributes the locality of a dimension upon an spherically-symmetric wavefront, where all points yet are one point in that dimension; until the wave is measured, and the particle is localized in the three spatial dimensions.

All motion requires that an object have a component in the source of all motion--the fourth expanding dimension. Hence all moving objects are foreshortened, and the faster they move, the more they are foreshortened in the three spatial dimensions, as they are rotated into the fourth expanding dimension.

And the great thing about MDT is that in addition to providing a *physical* model for entropy, nonlocality, and time's arrows and assymetries in all relams, all of relativity may be derived from its simple postulate and equation:

Consider a 4D universe: x1, x2, x3, x4, where x4 is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c described with dx4/dt = ic. Ergo relativity.

Dr. E,

Assuming your theory is testable and vindicated, it seems to me that we have *the* 'fundamental *physical* invariant'--the *physical* definition of the here-and-now (i.e., photons)?

That being the case, what is left for *fundamental* physics...?

Perhaps it is time not for a "heroic age of physics" but for a 'heroic age of humanity'...

I do not think that science is "done". I think it is time for science to be brought to the people.

"Is no one inspired by our present picture of the universe? This value of science remains unsung by singers, you are reduced to hearing not a song or poem, but an evening lecture about it. This is not yet a scientific age." - Richard Feynman

------

I wrote a letter at the end this past summer, where I worked in a solid-state physics lab at UC Berkeley (attached).

In principle one could ignite awe with theoretical 'parallel universes,' but, I now realize that, *in practice*, it is our mission as scientists to unveil the shroud of ignorance that envelops the human condition--with *objective truth*.

This idea is echoed in the words left on Richard Feynman's board at his time of death.

"What I cannot create, I do not understand." - Richard Feynman

We *create* our *physical* theories (e.g., space-time), whereas we *discover* the order of Nature through *real* experiments (e.g., the quantum of light or photon).

CKMAttachment #1: Final_Letter.pdf