Wrinkles in Spacetime

Correct. Infinity is not durational.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Newton and Einstein failed to notice that all objects have a complete surface and all observable surface travels at the same constant speed. Light does not have a surface, therefore, light is the only stationary spirit in the real Universe.

Joe Fisher, Realist

"One one hand, time in quantum mechanics is a Newtonian time, i.e., an absolute time. In fact, the two main methods of quantization, namely, canonical quantization method due to Dirac and Feynman's path integral method are based on classical constraints which become operators annihilating the physical states, and on the sum over all possible classical trajectories, respectively. Therefore, both quantization methods rely on the Newton global and absolute time. (...) The transition to (special) relativistic quantum field theories can be realized by replacing the unique absolute Newtonian time by a set of timelike parameters associated to the naturally distinguished family of relativistic inertial frames."

The two concepts of time are not both true and cannot be reconciled, so either quantum mechanics or special relativity will have to be discarded. In my view, both special and general relativity will be abandoned soon:

"Rethinking Einstein: The end of space-time (...) The stumbling block lies with their conflicting views of space and time. As seen by quantum theory, space and time are a static backdrop against which particles move. In Einstein's theories, by contrast, not only are space and time inextricably linked, but the resulting space-time is moulded by the bodies within it. (...) Something has to give in this tussle between general relativity and quantum mechanics, and the smart money says that it's relativity that will be the loser."

Pentcho Valev

The socond POSTULATE of thermo and heat tells us that the time is irreversible on the entropical Arrow of time.It is a postulate.The special relativity also,it is a postulate.It is proved you know.It is not because we have these postulates that we cannot analyse the gravitation differently.Special and general relativity are two Tools very important for the classment of our evolution.The mass curves our space time and c is correct.

I have my book near me ."Heat and themodynamics" by Mark W. Zemanski,PhD.

All the équations and works in this book are deterministic and rational.And the second law of thermo is well utilised.If the second law was not a reality, how could you analyses the engineerings correlated with heat, themro, work.....Ask to Stirling about the machine or to an engineer in refrigerators in a thermonuclear industry ???? Mr Valev, you must really rething your foundmentals but it is just a suggestion of course.

Time is not an object. Time is a property of an object. Just like mass, time is just another property. However, time is axiomatic, just like matter. That is, we simply must believe in time and matter and there is no way to prove a belief. However, time and matter make up a very nice axioms for understanding action in the universe.

Perhaps you are asking me to prove that time is an axiom. All I can do is derive a universe from the axioms of matter and time and predict the futures of objects. Thus time and matter make very convenient axioms in which one simply must believe.

Hi ,

It becomes relevant.I agree that time is a property.Now if we analyse the rotating sphères, quant and cosm.And if we correlate with the stable series encoding and producing for cosmol sphères.So we can perhaps correlate all with these rotations and gravitation and tim.If time is a property.If mass also , so there are causes.Perhaps that time is just a pure property of rotations of sphères.Like a clock of evolution gravitational.Gravitation and time can unify indeed all the forces.The axiomatisations must insert in logic the spherical volumes and proportions.It permits to class and to see really the properties and their proportions.We see our past, we analyse our present and indeed we can predict our future if and only if the good paramters are inserted with the biggest determinism.Time and mass are irreversible even with a recursivity, mathematical giving a reversibility.Several philosophical and mathematical exrapolations have been made by thinkers.We have a problem of mass and time considering the reversibility.In fact it is simple, the mass is a result of evolution correlated with time.And the age is of 13,7 billions years.So the reversibility will take the same time to take off the encodings.It is general and harmonious reality about mass and time.Carnot d say that after all we must accept our physical limits simply.

Regards

and if it was this central cosm.BH,the biggest sphere ,this main coded singularity,the real secret of all.Time seems correlated with its rotation implying the universal clock of evolution.The gravitation and time are created there in fact due to its weak rotation.This sphere is connected by the gravitational aether with all quantuml central sphères, the quantum coded singularities.The time is a property indeed.They turn so they are, they turn so they create space and time ,a gravitational evolution.Mass curves our spacetime, the spherisation is natural like is the gravitation.

"In quantum mechanics, time is absolute. The parameter occurring in the Schrödinger equation has been directly inherited from Newtonian mechanics and is not turned into an operator. In quantum field theory, time by itself is no longer absolute, but the four-dimensional spacetime is; it constitutes the fixed background structure on which the dynamical fields act. GR is of a very different nature. According to the Einstein equations (2), spacetime is dynamical, acting in a complicated manner with energy momentum of matter and with itself. The concepts of time (spacetime) in quantum theory and GR are thus drastically different and cannot both be fundamentally true."

So general relativity is doomed but why should quantum mechanics and spacetime coexist? Many Einsteinians suggest that spacetime, the "immediate consequence" of Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate, should be abandoned too:

"Baumgarte began by discussing special relativity, which Einstein developed, 10 years earlier, in 1905, while he was employed as a patent officer in Bern, Switzerland. Special relativity is based on the observation that the speed of light is always the same, independently of who measures it, or how fast the source of the light is moving with respect to the observer. Einstein demonstrated that as an immediate consequence, space and time can no longer be independent, but should rather be considered a new joint entity called "spacetime."

What scientific idea is ready for retirement? Steve Giddings: "Spacetime. Physics has always been regarded as playing out on an underlying stage of space and time. Special relativity joined these into spacetime... (...) The apparent need to retire classical spacetime as a fundamental concept is profound..."

Nima Arkani-Hamed (06:11): "Almost all of us believe that space-time doesn't really exist, space-time is doomed and has to be replaced by some more primitive building blocks."

"Einstein introduced a new notion of time, more radical than even he at first realized. In fact, the view of time that Einstein adopted was first articulated by his onetime math teacher in a famous lecture delivered one century ago. That lecture, by the German mathematician Hermann Minkowski, established a new arena for the presentation of physics, a new vision of the nature of reality redefining the mathematics of existence. The lecture was titled Space and Time, and it introduced to the world the marriage of the two, now known as spacetime. It was a good marriage, but lately physicists passion for spacetime has begun to diminish. And some are starting to whisper about possible grounds for divorce. (...) Einstein's famous insistence that the velocity of light is a cosmic speed limit made sense, Minkowski saw, only if space and time were intertwined. (...) Physicists of the 21st century therefore face the task of finding the true reality obscured by the spacetime mirage. (...) Andreas Albrecht, a cosmologist at the University of California, Davis, has thought deeply about choosing clocks, leading him to some troubling realizations. (...) "It seems to me like it's a time in the development of physics," says Albrecht, "where it's time to look at how we think about space and time very differently."

Pentcho Valev

The real unique observable Universe consists of infinite surface. It is observable because it is illuminated by an infinite light that does not have any surface. All objects have a complete surface. All solid, liquid and vaporous surface is physically connected. You are all wrong about invisible finite atoms and invisible finite particles and invisible finite gravity waves and finite duration.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Steve Agnew,

"Time is not an object. ..."

Agreed. Objects are known to exist because they change their velocities. Time has not been shown to undergo changes of velocity.

"...Time is a property of an object. ..."

I think again that there is no empirical support for this claim.

"...Just like mass, time is just another property. ..."

Time is a 'given' empirical property as is space. Both exist without any explanation. They are indefinable properties. All other properties are inferred to exist from measures of duration and length. We have no ability to measure either time or space. Duration and length are our substitutes. Both duration and length are explained by physics as aspects of object activity. Mass is inferred to exist from patterns of changes of velocities which are measured in units of duration and length.

...

"Perhaps you are asking me to prove that time is an axiom. All I can do is derive a universe from the axioms of matter and time and predict the futures of objects. Thus time and matter make very convenient axioms in which one simply must believe."

Emphasizing "... However, time and matter make up a very nice axioms for understanding action in the universe."

I presume that this claim refers to the use of time and properties attributed to matter in equations that quite successfully predict the futures of objects. The properties attributed to matter are not being addressed yet by me. It is accepted that they are inferred to exist from physics empirical evidence which consists of measures of duration and length. With regard to the property of time, it has never appeared directly in physics equations. It has always been substituted for by aspects of object activity. The unit of second, which is customarily referred to as the unit of time, is not a unit of time. It is a unit of object activity.

James Putnam

Perimeter Institute: "Quantum mechanics has one thing, time, which is absolute. But general relativity tells us that space and time are both dynamical so there is a big contradiction there. So the question is, can quantum gravity be formulated in a context where quantum mechanics still has absolute time?"

This is an incredible question. Obviously people who work on quantum gravity don't have a clue about what they are doing.

Pentcho Valev

Dear Mr. Dufourny,

The real Universe was not created from finite invisible scientific precepts, or by an invisible God's command.. You have a real observable complete skin surface. Every object, be it solid, liquid or vaporous has a real observable surface. Obviously, surface must be infinite. Obviously, infinity cannot contain any finite features. Please stop wasting your time with codswallop supposedly finite physics conjecture.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Dear Mr. Valev,

The real observable Universe is simply an infinite surface illuminated by an infinite amount of non-surface light. Visible infinity cannot contain finite invisible particles, or have a finite duration.

Joe Fisher, Realist

a phenomen ,apparently you don't want to develop .I have tried to have explainations but you don't want.

[link:www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730370-600-why-do-we-move-forwards-in-time/]"[George] Ellis is up against[/link] one of the most successful theories in physics: special relativity. It revealed that there's no such thing as objective simultaneity. Although you might have seen three things happen in a particular order - 
A, then B, then C - someone moving 
at a different velocity could have seen 
it a different way - C, then B, then A. 
In other words, without simultaneity there is no way of specifying what things happened "now". And if not "now", what is moving through time? Rescuing an objective "now" is a daunting task."

Yes, safely leaving the sinking ship is a daunting task indeed.

Pentcho Valev

Dear Mr. Dufourney,

Reality is not phenomenal. Reality is infinite surface illuminated by infinite non-surface light. Infinity cannot be developed. Only ignorant ideas about invisible phenomena such as invisible black holes, or invisible particles, or invisible gravity waves can be developed, and they can only be developed by ignorant fabulists.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Dear Mr. Valev,

Nobody has ever seen a real finite event happen. No matter in which direction you look, you will only ever see a plethora of seamlessly enmeshed partial flat surfaces. The reason for this is because only an infinite surface exists and the reason you see it is because surface is lit by infinite non-surface light. Einstein was wrong about the constant speed of light through a vacuum tube. It is surface that travels at the same constant speed. Light is stationary because light does not have a surface.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Mr Fisher,

We are thanking you all for these wonderful explainations.We understand all now the infinity now.We have all understand the light, the surface and the infinity.I don't know what say.Thanks for this development about light, infinity and surface.But we have understood, so it is not necessary to post still.Please it is not Facebook.

Regards