Dear Paul Butler:

You choose my essay as the best you read till now, this show me that at least mine is readable, clear and understandable for you. I thank you for your opinion.

My essay is radical because left aside the prehistoric and unfunded "belief" of "time" physic existence, which has no scientific prove, in favor of search around of the only thing man knew about "time", it's measuring. Definition and empiric meaning are scientifically proved since centuries ago. It's origin in my essay is just the most probable way of how the "time" born. The only people, among all sciences who need this is theoretical physicists. I don't need this knowledge for nothing at all, I can't construct anything with it because I'm not a physicist, they need it, but I hope for the best of science than most physicists are not in the position you think that possibly they are. I hope to find the right person to convince others of the essay value. You say "currently accepted scientific beliefs are based on the erroneous concepts of a time dimension and the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics, etc. that causes those who have held these positions for a long time to tend to automatically deny the validity of any concept that would say those beliefs are in error and need to be corrected to allow man to develop further. In addition to that, some may see the validity of the argument, but their income and the prestige they have in their position in the scientific structure might be threatened because they depend on the continuation of current beliefs. Don't be discouraged by such things. It only takes one person to see the value of your arguments, who is in a position to convince others or to do an experiment that proves them to be right and things could change for the better".

I hope your best whishes come true

Héctor

    • [deleted]

    • Post #7

    Dear Gupta:

    First several times Einstein refer to the forth dimension as "the imaginary dimension". Second: As I said the experimental meaning of "the so called time" is "movement" as such it would be represented as any "event" are, with the 3 spatial dimensions and the fourth dimension, it would be represented by an special kind of movement, "constant and uniform" movement, or just clock movement. He also said "The key step forward in developing relativity, is time reconceptualization".

    Thank you for reading my essay

    Héctor

    Dear Gupta:

    First several times Einstein refer to the forth dimension as "the imaginary dimension". Second: As I said the experimental meaning of "the so called time" is "movement" as such it would be represented as any "event" are, with the 3 spatial dimensions and the fourth dimension, it would be represented by an special kind of movement, "constant and uniform" movement, or just clock movement. He also said "The key step forward in developing relativity, is time reconceptualization".

    Thank you for reading my essay

    Héctor

    Dear John C Hodge:

    Sure animals have a sense of time, that's why lions anticipate their hunt position in it's running for their life.

    You said "Place one of 2 identical clocks aboard a airplane and go around the Earth. The 2 clocks will disagree about the duration(number of ticks) elapsed"

    The atomic clock in the plain will slow it's functioning respect the one on land, because airplane speed inertia, and will function faster than the witness clock, (with no ticks) as higher it is flying because of less gravity. The difference between inertia and gravity forces causes, would tell us the difference between the two clocks functioning.

    You said "We don't know the workings of radioactive decay. So rather than assuming time dilation, it could be the mechanical acceleration change the rate"

    I don't know the muon decay process either, also I didn't say the muon decay is slowing because "time dilation". But it's decay process slow because muon cosmic ray speed. Speed inertia slows any kind of movement, and the decay process must have movement, because without movement there are not change or transformation.

    Thank you for reading my essay

    Héctor

    Dear Hector,

    It is not that I find that your paper is the most readable, clear, and understandable that caused me to commend your paper because in some ways it is not. It was that you have a better understanding of time than most current scientists have. We live in a motion continuum. Matter, energy photon, and the sub-energy particles that make up field structures are all composed or made up of simple motions or combinations of them. If all of the motions in the world were to suddenly stop, the world would cease to exist. We always live in the current conditions of all of those motions that are continuously changing their positions in space. The past is the conditions that these motions were in, but they have now moved from those positions to where they are now. We cannot go back to the past because those past motion conditions no longer exist, since all of the motions have moved on and changed their positions from those positions to their present conditions. A point in the future is the motion conditions that will exist when all of the motions have moved from where they are now to the new locations in space that they will then be in. We cannot go into some distant point in the future because the motion conditions that will exist then do not yet exist until the motions move from their current positions in space to those new positions. Then those new motion conditions will be the present and if we are still alive we will then be there, but it won't then be in the future, but will be our present. Man's current belief in a space time continuum leads to all kinds of nonsensical concepts. In order for there to be a past and future that one could go to, a complete copy of the universe would have to be made every time any motion in the universe changed its position, so that you could go back or forward to that point in time and be able to experience it completely as it was. Each time a copy was generated due to some motion in the universe changing its position all of the motions in the universe would have to be duplicated, which would require a tremendous amount of new motion that would have to come from somewhere. This would essentially mean continually recreating the complete universe every time any motion changed its position in space. I have never seen anyone logically explain how all of this extra motion would be generated. In addition to this, if you could go into the future, it would mean that all of the copies of the universe from the beginning to the end of the universe would all have to exist simultaneously so that you could leave any one of them and go to any other one of them. This would mean that there would be a copy of you in each one of these copies of the universe that occurred during your life time. How then is it that you seem to be traveling forward from one copy to the next as time goes by only being conscious of the one copy that you consider the present? Why would you not be conscious of all of your copies since they all have to exist simultaneously? What would lock your consciousness into only the specific flow from one copy to the next one that you experience? As you can see the space time continuum concept does not make sense when closely analyzed. Many current scientists believe in this concept of time, however, and that is why your understanding is noteworthy because you have not gotten caught up in that belief.

    Theoretical Physicists don't need the time dimension concept either. They just think that they do. It actually causes them many unnecessary problems and interferes with scientific advancement. It may be that many physicists may not be that far off base, but the system that they exist in often requires them to act as if they are in order to get the money that they need to live and do any research that they want to do. In a way this contest is an example. The theme of the contest presupposes that math laws and the processes that generate them in the world are mindless and that they somehow caused conscious living beings to come into existence. It is obvious that those who submit papers are being asked to give a natural explanation of these things, which would usually include some form of evolution advancement from the simple structure of the world to advanced living creatures. Anyone who submits a paper and wants to win or needs to win to get needed money will almost certainly submit a paper along those lines because they understand that their papers will be judged on how closely they meet that expected criteria. The positive difference between FQXI and many other places where papers can be submitted is that papers such as yours and mine that question existing established beliefs would not even be accepted into the system at many of those places. FQXI's policy allows those who don't care if they win or not, but just want to get new information out, to at least get it somewhat out into the public domain where it is possible that it can be seen by someone who can recognize its value.

    The problem for those who try to follow the guidelines for the paper is that the world that we live in is really a very complex intelligently designed multilevel hierarchically built structure. The built in structural laws by which it operates, which men model with mathematics, show the intelligence that is behind their creation. In addition to that, it is obvious that the world is a temporary structure that is designed to have an end. It is also made so that it is clear that the first living creature could not have been made by the natural processes of the world. The world would tend to break down such complex machinery as the protein machines that are in the cells of every living creature instead of actually building them, as an example. This means that any attempt to explain life creation by natural processes has to in some way try to portray the world structure to be something different than it actually is or that it operates in some way different than it actually does. Often the concept of quantum uncertainty is used to justify an argument. The problem there is that quantum uncertainty doesn't actually exist either. All of the uncertainty is due to man's current lack of knowledge of the internal motion structure of matter particles and energy photons and the complete lack of knowledge of the existence of sub-energy particles that make up fields and how they function internally and interact with each other. Because of this most of the papers that I have read in this contest are built on or at least contain false concepts. That is one reason that your paper stands out from the crowd. Keep up the good work.

    Sincerely,

    Paul

    16 days later

    • [deleted]

    • Post #11

    Great Essay, a I give you a ten.

    You surely showed how the thinking about time is intrinsically entwined to our attempts to set objective parameters to have a real sense of the world. Given our intrinsic biological limitations, we inevitably end up thinking about time as some sort of continuous motion. Now, a question came up to me. Is it intrinsic to humans the tendency of imagine time as some sort of continuous motion or is it intrinsic to any type of intelligence to imagine that? So, while time is a created concept, perhaps the concept of a a thing continuous motion is not. What do you think?

    Dear Mr. Gianni,

    You have expressed the time in many different ways. The most important way you forgot. It is through a well-known formula h*ni=mc^2. The formula shows that: to any mass we can attribute frequency or time t=h/mc^2=lambdacompton/c. The importance of this time you can see in my essay FQXi for 2015.

    Regards

    Branko

    Dear Héctor,

    Thank you for the invitation to your essey,

    I liked your essay, especially the phrase

    «I can easily explain that "time dilation" is a physically inexistent phenomenon, because is just inertia or gravity "clocks slowing" and also can show in detail that twin paradox».

    I congratulate you with interesting thoughts and wish you every success in the contest.

    Kind regards,

    Vladimir

      Hi Hector,

      It was interesting for me to read your ideas about time. I would like to suggest this essay that was in another FQXi competition, 'Rethinking a key assumption about time' by J.C. N. Smith, 2012. I agree with him that foundational time is the configuration of the substantial /material universe. He presents a good argument for that.

      Beyond that there is also emergent time. We do not sense the material universe itself but process received sensory information into the perceived present (an Image reality). That sensory information takes different lengths of time to arrive (having traveled different distances) so is temporally non-homogenous. Thus the present that is experienced is a model that is in appearance temporally different from the source reality which is uni-temporal. Because of the very fast speed of light this is not particularly relevant to everyday life but becomes significant at very large distances, and at high speeds. Relativity is dealing with this emergent reality from information processing. Though it seems that the emergent space-time has been mistakenly regarded as the external reality. I have spent some time on the FQXi blog discussion pages pointing out the category error of not differentiating between material source objects and nonequivalent fabricated images. The different location and relative motion of observers affects which EM sensory information is received and amalgamated into the perceived reality.

      You make some interesting well set out points but I do not see that your essay has anything to do with the topic of the essay competition.

      Dear Héctor,

      Thanks for the invite to comment. I agree with your straightforward approach to time and your idea that time is dependent on movement. Although time seems nothing more than what you measure with a clock, there is something intriguing about it which has physicists searching to attach a greater meaning.

      You said "the decay process must have movement" in an earlier post and in my opinion you brought up a very interesting point about time. I think that particles have an extended structure and are not just points. In the case of the muon - a particle which decays - there are a set number of internal movements before it decays. As the particle increases its velocity, these movements must slow or the velocity of light will be exceeded when its motion through space and internal motions are combined. This is why it takes a longer time to decay.

      Regards,

      Peter

      Dear Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov:

      Thank you for reading my essay, I am glad that you liked that phrase in especial. ¡Certainly, you must know why!

      My best whishes

      Héctor

      • [deleted]

      • Post #17

      Dear Georgina Woodward:

      You are right my essay has nothing to do with the topic of this essay competition.1)I don't care for the competition at all.2)I'm just care to give to physicists Time Definition and empiric meaning that they needed so bad since mor than 50 years ago, if they don't take it certainly they will wait for another 2 or 3 thousand years more to know it.I don´t need it.

      Thank you for reading my essay

      Héctor

      Dear Georgina Woodward:

      You are right my essay has nothing to do with the topic of this essay competition.1)I don't care for the competition at all.2)I'm just care to give to physicists Time Definition and empiric meaning that they needed so bad since mor than 50 years ago, if they don't take it certainly they will wait for another 2 or 3 thousand years more to know it.I don´t need it.

      Thank you for reading my essay

      Héctor

      Dear Peter Bauch:

      You said "Although time seems nothing more than what you measure with a clock, there is something intriguing about it which has physicists searching to attach a greater meaning" This happen because they base themselves on their believes and not on the scientific proves that I offer in my essay. Science always should prevail over believes. Thank you for reading my essay

      My best whishes

      Héctor

      Dear Héctor,

      I like this phrase:

      "Time" does not act, or form part of any change or transformation;

      "movement" does. "Time" is the system we use to measure the duration of

      those. I don't have the necessary space, but knowing that "time" is

      movement I can easily explain that "time dilation" is a physically inexistent phenomenon, because is just inertia or gravity "clocks slowing" and also can show in detail that twin paradox is not a paradox, but could be a real biological thing.

      The foundation of reality should start from simple mechanical motion. and so, I think that at the foundation of the natural structure (Foundations of Hierarchy), there might not be any energy dissipation, while being perfect.

      My email: ch.bayarsaikhan@yahoo.com

      I would like to keep in touch with you, if I know your email.

      Ch.Bayarsaikhan

      Dear Héctor,

      In my opinion, time is expressed in physics as if a time line is a real number line displaying a list of changes in chronological order in a reference phenomenon, as whose each point corresponds an each change in the reference phenomenon within a closed dynamical system.

      The sun's motion is the reference phenomenon to measure a change in other phenomenon while comparing with it.

      There are too many phenomena in the world, therefore people can find a reference phenomenon to measure a change in other phenomenon while making an approach (theory) that is closer to the reality.

      Here, mean thing is human conciseness that is able to measure changes in phenomena.

      Human conciseness is a phenomenon of high-level hierarchical system.

      The reality of this high-level hierarchical system is hard to understand for human beings themselves.

      Instead, the foundation at lower- level hierarchical system such as sub atomic particles and space-time is quite possible to perceive.

      Ch.bayarsaikhan

      Dear Héctor Daniel Gianni,

      Thank you for visiting my essay forum. I have downloaded your essay and will be reading it next week. Good luck to you.

      James Putnam

      Dear Ch. Bayarsaikhan:

      You as all physicist have the right to express their opinions as yours that "time is expressed in physics as if a time line is a real number line" before physicists can do that properly, first you all should know what's time, if not I can ask what's a "time line", if you don´t know what's time? what are you going to answer? I should give an example. How physicists should express fuf-fuf in physics?. Certainly they wouldn't be able to do it? Why?, because they don't know what fuf-fuf is. They had many ingenious ways to "pass over" "time definition and empiric meaning", that's why physics become a science, but none of them in the case of "time" are proper enough.

      Einstein treat "time" as if he new what it was. He new that "time" hasn't physic existence and that it was a man creation, but he did not know what he was measuring with the clock. ¡ but just defining it, as "time" is what we measure with the clock??????

      All this ways and many others that you should know, are desperate efforts of physicists to replace some way, one of the most basic and important quality or properties of nature, movement because this is part of all changes and transformations in the universe, physicists can't give one step without it. Every theory must include directly or indirectly "time" to have sense. Einstein said "time" reconceptualization is the key step forward in developing relativity". So the "pass over" time definition and empiric meaning made possible that each physicist that make a theory, invent their own definition and empiric meaning like on "the loop quantum gravity theory" or "the string theory" The first

      "Time flows not like a river but like the ticking of a clock, with "ticks" that are about as long as the Plank time 10-43 second. Or more precisely, time in our universe flows by the ticking of innumerable clocks". Or the second that just "use "time" as an absolute Newton term". Physicist Stephen Hawking said referring to "time definition and empiric meaning" "when the answer is found, it'll sound as obvious as the fact that the earth goes around the sun." like movement I say.

      Finally, just around 50 or 60 years ago passing over "time definition and empiric meaning" wasn't enough, we can be find the conscious need to know "time meaning" just to find the absent "time variable", when physicists try to merge the theory of general relativity with quantum mechanics, into a theory of quantum gravity, using the procedure called canonical quantization. which produces an equation without a "time" variable, literally would mean a frozen universe. Professor Christopher Isham from the London Imperial College in one of the possibilities he offer to explain such disappearance he said, "It is possible that time it is not truly lost but merely hidden among the canonical variables that are constrained by the theorema egregium".

      said "To obtain a sensible quantum theory of gravity may require identifying such an internal time prior to quantization".

      Knowing that "time" is movement, I would say that is not lost or hidden either. I think is there but not recognized as such, because (the time variable) in fact is a "movement variable", this is the lost variable that it would be described by the 3 spatial dimensions that also describe the "event", plus a "time forth dimension" (called imaginary by Einstein) consistent too with a movement, but a "Constant and Uniform" movement, the clock.

      Not knowing what "time" is became a big problem for physics. If I were a physicist I would take this as an opportunity.

      My very best whishes

      Héctor

      Dear Héctor

      I agree with you, the time is very deep conception. I appreciate your insightful content for "Time". So, I have to think about it more while taking it into consideration.

      If you have other papers, I would like to read them.

      I like your words that

      ...desperate efforts of physicists to replace some way, one of the most basic and important quality or properties of nature, movement because this is part of all changes and transformations in the universe, physicists can't give one step without it...

      and also ...

      Knowing that "time" is movement, I would say that is not lost or hidden either. I think is there but not recognized as such, because (the time variable) in fact is a "movement variable", this is the lost variable that it would be described by the 3 spatial dimensions that also describe the "event", plus a "time forth dimension" (called imaginary by Einstein) consistent too with a movement, but a "Constant and Uniform" movement, the clock.

      I believe that all of your thoughts are correct ...

      one of the most basic and important quality or properties of nature, movement because this is part of all changes and transformations in the universe, physicists can't give one step without it.

      Ch.Bayarsaikhan

      Dear Ch. Bayarsaikhan:

      "Time" conception It's so deep, that probably 20 or 30 thousand years ago, our observation capability as men, which is very deep buried in physicists minds, seeming to them too old too primitive thoughts that do not deserve research.

      Well I think that "the so called time" which we can prove now is the measuring of "constant and uniform" movement is a simple conclusion that primitive man find through nature observation and realize the equal length period between sunrises, which made a day period length of (day and night) a natural unit of measurement, which in those days man concluded that it was shining as the only thing he knew with equal repetition and as usually he didn't loose the opportunity to count on "days" the duration of trips and many other things he needed to survive. Maybe époque when the duration concept was created, and men used the "day" as a unit of a system which allowed measuring the duration of changes and transformations they needed to know.

      Taking this as possible, much later they create the divisions of the "day" unit into parts to increase the precision of the measuring system. Certainly they didn't have the necessary knowledge till now days, to know what in fact they were measuring.

      Since at least a couple centuries ago we have the necessary knowledge to know that "time" was the name they gave to the system with which we measure "Constant and uniform movement".

      As you ask before I will send you the original work of 23 pages from which I was forced to select 9 for this contest. Forgive me for giving you this advise : Words can express at least as much as physics formulas can, but should be read slow and with imagination, I mean making images in our mind of what we are reading, as much as possible.

      With my best whishes

      Héctor