within one universe: there is a duality of virtual and physical reality such as Wave or Particle duality. The issue at our current theory is that the multi-worlds/states under one universal topology are collapsed into an observable state, which results in our morden thoery is also collapsed into the physical existence only.
Why Time Might Not Be an Illusion
Lorraine, if you haven't read it, I recommend Number and Time by Marie-Louise von Franz. Very Jungian. If you have read it, I would like to discuss, since I find myself going back to pages I have marked..
Dear Wei Xu,
Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before you chose to write: "It becomes cristal (sic) clear that there are two (finite abstract invisible) domains of the (finite abstract invisible) scope: (finite abstract) physical and (abstract invisible) virtual states or (finite abstract invisible) worlds."
It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.
The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.
Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated
Dear Joe Fisher
It is critical to define Visible. Normally, as a human we have limitation to sense the existence even not by any tools we created. For example, the dark energy that holds up our earth is not visible as we have recently acknowledged the Gravity has far less forces to hold on our solar system or milkway. Before the energy forms up the mass, it is not visible. Human intrinsic emotions are not visible directly. Moreover, energy carries messages similar to DNA Code is not visible. It is only that a duality of the physical and virtual has the visible property such as the physical motions are visible.
In a similar fashion, it might be an important concept to apply to the study of time. In our current knowledge, we as human can't visit the true intrincis but only limited to its outcome property. This is the truth for anything in the virtual world. As a summary, our oneness world is constituted by a duality of virtual and physical existence. Most of the existence is beyond our visibility since only less than 5% is shown up as the odinally matter.
Dear Wei Xu,
You wrote: "It is critical to define Visible. Normally, as a human we have limitation to sense the existence even not by any tools we created." That am finite misinformation. There am no need to define Visible. If "normally" humans had any finite limitation of their sense of existence, it would logically follow that "abnormally" humans would have no limitation of their sense of existence. Visible reality am not sensible.
Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before you chose to write: "It becomes cristal (sic) clear that there are two (finite abstract invisible) domains of the (finite abstract invisible) scope: (finite abstract) physical and (abstract invisible) virtual states or (finite abstract invisible) worlds."
It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.
The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.
Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated
Dear Joe, Marcel, Wei Xu, and others,
I know there are lots of self-published articles claiming to solve physics' problem with time and nonlocality. Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of physics and then starts from clearly-stated postulates.
H.R.
Good paper, downloaded for study.
My claim was ....
"The rate of time slows down as we move toward the ground. This means longer seconds. In order for c (m/s) to remain constant, longer seconds means longer meters. In other words, an object is falling into larger space.
So, space is not contracting in a gravitational field; it is in fact
expanding. The apparent contraction is an illusion. Falling into larger space is dispersion, the hallmark of thermodynamics.... "
- Do you consider gravitational fall as a dispersive event (as above)? i.e thermodynamically spontaneously driven?
Marcel,
A free fall (no friction) is not a dispersive or dissipative event and there is no entropy production. Potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. Only at impact or with air resistance is there dissipation. With no entropy production, the event takes place within a single instant of irreversible time, within an interval of reversible time symmetry. I don't think scales are relevant in this case. This response will make sense after digesting the article.
H Marcel,
I went to your first post in this thread. What article were you referring to? I did not see an entry from you in the recent contest. (I only discovered it 2 days after it closed.)
Harrison
My updated article is here
[deleted]
Dear Harrison Crecraft,
Let us try it one more time.
Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before "lots of self-published articles claiming to solve (finite) physics' problem with (finite INVISIBLE) time and (finite INVISIBLE) nonlocality were ever published." Even before you wrote: "Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of (finite INVISIBLE) physics and then starts from (finite) clearly-stated postulates."
It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.
THE REAL UNIVERSE CONSISTS ONLY OF ONE SINGLE UNIFIED VISIBLE INFINITE SURFACE OCCURRING ETERNALLY IN ONE SINGLE INFINITE DIMENSION THAT AM ALWAYS ILLUMINATED MOSTLY BY FINITE NON-SURFACE LIGHT.
Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated
Dear Harrison Crecraft,
Let us try it one more time.
Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before "lots of self-published articles claiming to solve (finite) physics' problem with (finite INVISIBLE) time and (finite INVISIBLE) nonlocality were ever published." Even before you wrote: "Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of (finite INVISIBLE) physics and then starts from (finite) clearly-stated postulates."
It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.
THE REAL UNIVERSE CONSISTS ONLY OF ONE SINGLE UNIFIED VISIBLE INFINITE SURFACE OCCURRING ETERNALLY IN ONE SINGLE INFINITE DIMENSION THAT AM ALWAYS ILLUMINATED MOSTLY BY FINITE NON-SURFACE LIGHT.
Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated
Dear Harrison Crecraft,
Let us try it one more time.
Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before "lots of self-published articles claiming to solve (finite) physics' problem with (finite INVISIBLE) time and (finite INVISIBLE) nonlocality were ever published." Even before you wrote: "Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of (finite INVISIBLE) physics and then starts from (finite) clearly-stated postulates."
It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.
THE REAL UNIVERSE CONSISTS ONLY OF ONE SINGLE UNIFIED VISIBLE INFINITE SURFACE OCCURRING ETERNALLY IN ONE SINGLE INFINITE DIMENSION THAT AM ALWAYS ILLUMINATED MOSTLY BY FINITE NON-SURFACE LIGHT.
Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated
Hi Marcel,
Physics describes a system within an instant of irreversible time, and your question is definitely relevant. I need to ponder a bit.
Joe,
I don't think I disagree with anything here. The article expresses an objective realism without need for observers--if that is what you are trying to say.
Harrison,
My entry is at https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2977 .
Thanks for the update. Will get back to you on this
Thanks,
Marcel,
Dear Harrison Crecraft,
I am not trying to "say" anything. Your misinterpretation that my sublime post was somehow a (finite) "article expresses an (finite)) objective realism without (finite) need for (finite) observers--if that is what you are trying to say.
Let us try it one more time.
Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before "lots of self-published articles claiming to solve (finite) physics' problem with (finite INVISIBLE) time and (finite INVISIBLE) nonlocality were ever published." Even before you wrote: "Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of (finite INVISIBLE) physics and then starts from (finite) clearly-stated postulates."
It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.
THE REAL UNIVERSE CONSISTS ONLY OF ONE SINGLE UNIFIED VISIBLE INFINITE SURFACE OCCURRING ETERNALLY IN ONE SINGLE INFINITE DIMENSION THAT AM ALWAYS ILLUMINATED MOSTLY BY FINITE NON-SURFACE LIGHT.
If you agree with me, why are you misconstruing what I actually wrote?
Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated
Dear Harrison Crecraft,
Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before you wrote that: (finite) Physics describes a (finite) system within an (finite) instant of (finite INVISIBLE) irreversible time
It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.
The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.
Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated
Dear Marcel-Marie LeBel,
Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before Harrison Crecraft wrote that: (finite) Physics describes a (finite) system within an (finite) instant of (finite INVISIBLE) irreversible time
It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.
The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.
Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated
[deleted]
I'll not defend the Minkowski block universe other than to recognize it as a step in the process of development of Relativistic measurement. It firstly assumes, and that assumption has been trivialized as a matter of expediency, that the scale of a span of length in space is identical to the scale of a span of duration in time. Realistically we must then assume that such a one to one correspondence of scale must exist only as a special case, perhaps for example as localized to a quantum state of equilibrium at the core of a material particle. Globally however, it removes the relationship of time, and that of space, from the Relativity in physical processes.
I think that what causes much perplexion for many in addressing Relativistic discourse is that our human experience preconditions us to think of both time and space as simply 'being there', that processes happen in that background. But what the simple geometry of SR actually reveals is that both time and space interact with physical processes. Not even time acts instantaneously in its effect on a process, there is not only the rate of a span of duration, but also a rate at which the effect of that span interacts with space in the process. jrc