Yes because once distance is involved the duration from signal emission to signal receipt and processing needs to be taken into account. That duration is how 'out of current', i.e. slow, the time shown by the observation product.

a year later

Could you please share your ideas on the paradox:

if the past is realized, why it is not real.

When we say that the truth is that it was so and so then:

1) If truth means something real, then the past is real.

2) But, the past is already in the past, so it is unreal.

How can we solve these issues in a way, probably,

you must know.

    Hi, the past is the past and it does not exist anymore in fact, it is just the past , we can just analyse the present and we are limited at all scales, and the future can be predicted but with limitations also , only the present is real, the past does not exist anymore and the future does not exist still and also we have an irreversible entropical Arrow of tinme ,

    regards

    9 days later

    Steve,

    Can we specify the temporal extent of "the present"? No. Common sense logic grasps better that notions like this morning, today, this year, etc. are fuzzy and may refer to parts of the past, the future, or both. Shannon's and Popper's criterion for the distinction between the unchangeable past and the future that is open to influences does merely contradict to believers like Einstein and their abstruse theories. In reality, the past cannot be predicted, while the future cannot be analyzed.

    So called present state does strictly speaking not exist. It is just pragmatic to calculate as if it did so and ignore logic and causality.

    Eckard Blumschein

    Incidentally, do you agree with Klingman?

    Hi Dear Eckard,

    Thanks for shaing your ideas , it is very interesting, I don t know well Popper works, I will learn more about his works. I know a Little bit better Shannon ideas about the entropy, the informations and this time.

    I am not a specialist of this time, but for me I see it like a pure universal duration correlated with a pure entropical irreversible Arrow of time. I beleive strongly that it is like an universal general Clock of evolution. I don t beleive that we can check it really , we cannot for me travel in time because respecting the evolution and encodings of informations, we could have a problem os mass equivalence if we travel in the past or the future. But we know that with the relativity we can decrease our internal Clocks in travelling at c, so we can go in a kind of future but the problem is that we cannot return at our present. An other thing about this time respecting this general relativity is that we see our past more we observe far in the space, for example we see our sun 8M20sec in late, it is a good tool to observe the universe and its evolution, we can better understand the evolution of this universe. But I consider it purely irreversible and it cannot be checked for me, but of course it is just my opinion.

    For Edwin Eugene Klingman, I liked a lot his essay and I respect his ideas and works, I see a Little bit differently about this consciousness for example but I like how he Thinks and extrapolates, he is general.

    Friendly

    This is a very solid point about the time in general. In our work we look at the time from the point of set theory. It is interesting to find some correlations here in your work the the set interpretation.

    Thank you for your professional approach and work been done.

    Best Regards,

    Pavel Poluyan and Dmitry Lichargin,

    polyan2002@mail.ru

      Hello,

      could you tell us more about your works with this time and the set theory?

      regards

      Klingman explains why SR is on one hand overwhelmingly supported by confirmed predictions but nonetheless based on logical flaws. He revealed a key mistake: While Lorentz gamma does correctly describe effects on mass, and we may therefore calculate as if SR was correct, we should be careful, retain c and modify the definition of particle velocity instead of time and space.

      Eckard Blumschein

      That can be relevant indeed to analyse deeper this key mistake if his reasoning is correct. Maybe we must consider this GR like just a piece of puzzle due to photons and about observations but we have a deeper logic superimposed tat we don t know well still. For me this GR is correct but it considers only these photons like the primordial essence of our universe and so it considers just a relativistic photonic spacetime, and so that this mass curves this spacetime for our observations but if we superimpose a deeper logic for the space and this Dark matter also, we have so new roads of analysis. This GR is a kind of prison for me for the majority of thinkers, we need to analyse deeper the universal logic.I doubt that this universe has only created photons and that they oscillate with these strings to create our physicality. Interesting in all case the fact to retain c and modify the definition of particle velocity instead of time and space.

      Is presentism the intuitive or common sense view of time? No. While it is in so far appealing as it is subjective, it ignores a most fundamental insight: causality, the distinction between what cannot be influenced anymore and what maybe influenced in principle. Zeno style constructed paradoxes do not hinder animals to do what is reasonable.

      Instead of getting unnecessarily worried by notions like existence, creation, etc., we should check whether or not Klingman's compelling argument is correct an important, I claim the same unbiased attitude towards my revelation that Fourier transform is redundant and also towards Kadin's prediction.

      Eckard Blumschein

      This time seems to be perceived in function of our observations and Tools utilised, if we consider our observations in our limited Environment at our velocities , it is like a simple Clock of duration and evolution. If we consider this GR , so we utilise this time at high velocities and it is a tool to rank the evolution, we see our past more we go far in space simply due to this SR and GR. The same can be probably made with a dark matter spacetime at different velocities, probably less quick due to this cold DM. The predictions seem relevant indeed and Fourier transforms but it is Always in function of our domains of studies I beleive, is it really important to focus on time? maybe, is it better than to focus about our foundamental objects and the origin philosophical of our universe, I don t Think, it is a choice after all simply, wesearch answers to our unknowns. What is really these causalities at all scales , why we have this time , these matters, these fields, this evolution, this consciousness appearing, the real questions are there and this time is just this time, the block universe and the past and present tell us many things ontologically speaking and about this consciousness, generally an important point is this evolution and the fact that this consciousness generally evolves too.

      maybe it is important to consider this general principle about the motions, positionsand time.

      Heisenberg would tell us that indeterminacies and uncertainties are like limitations due to our lack of fundamental knowledge on several scales involving non-computability, undecidability and unpredictability, Hilbert would agree on the subject of quantum movements and their positions. Although Borh and Einstein discussed it with a deep philosophical analysis, it is obvious that these limitations are to be taken into account in general.

      The most important thing is to see why there is no operator commutativity, the geometric Lie algebras are relevant like the exceptional group E8 but the problem is that many consider the tensors and operators purely linked with a field or string origin or geometrodynamics with points, the coded particles seem the solution and the particle wave duality is also respected, the fundamental problem is really philosophical about mainly the origin of this universe creating topologies, geometries, materials and fields and fundamental objects.

      Observations, operators, commutativity and time, energy, matter? the goal is to find the real harmonic universal partition, and the logical redundancies.

      Regards

      • [deleted]

      • Post #153

      The block universe does not eliminate time at all; it simply sets the imaginary axis with measures in spatial units. This axis iCt of the four-dimensional space-time pseudo-Euclidean continuum is measured in spatial measures, and the speed of light serves as a coefficient for converting time measures into space measures. On this axis, the clock is marked, in accordance with the onset of future moments. Even if we consider future time to be already given in the structure of Minkowski space-time, we will not see there the future universe as such. Real events occur, happen, occur, are generated - and take their place on the axis of moments. On the infinite axis that goes into the future of the block universe, it's empty, but the universe in its genesis gradually fills the empty iCt axis with upcoming events moment by moment.

      Best Regards,

      Pavel Poluyan and Dmitry Lichargin

      Siberian Federal University

        Yes but we know this about the Block universe, A sure thing, we have this past indeed and we better understand this present but with limitations, and the future we cannot predict all, why this time is so important for you ? furthermore must we consider only this GR like the only one piece of puzzle ?

        Well, what about the presentism and eternalism for you and the reall philosophical meaning of this time, what do you consider like main origin of this universe , why we have finite series inside the physicality, the different infinities and what is the link with a real infinity , is it beyond the physicality or inside ? And what about the real eternity also. So what I ask is how you see this physicality, why we exist, form whatr ? an acceident mathematical from an energy, and what is this energy also ? and how all this is coded and creates our geonetries, topologies and toime evolution with matters, fields and properties ? without this general analysis, I beleive tghat we cannot really understand the real meaning of this time and why it exists inside this physicality...

        Well, what about the presentism and eternalism for you and the real philosophical meaning of this time, what do you consider like main origin of this universe , why we have finite series inside the physicality, the different infinities and what is the link with a real infinity , is it beyond the physicality or inside ? And what about the real eternity also. So what I ask is how you see this physicality, why we exist, from what ? an acceident mathematical from an energy, and what is this energy also ? and how all this is coded and creates our geonetries, topologies and time evolution with matters, fields and properties ? without this general analysis, I beleive that we cannot really understand the real meaning of this time and why it exists inside this physicality...

        All this is in fact philosophical, we can utilise this time in many philosophical ways, so tell us your general philosophy about all this, it will be easier to go deeper .

        5 days later

        Steve Dufourny,

        When I was in position to use an oscilloscope with Gigasample resolution, I was able to find out whether one very short event happened before or after another one, which one was the cause, which one the effect. Accordingly, I reject presentism.

        Your worries about a putative origin of universe etc. did and will definitely not guide me to anything, not even back to religious belief. I go on trusting in the reasonability of conjecturing reality and in the possibility to make progress by means of critical reasoning, trial and error. Perhaps the most important revelation of my life is the insight that Fourier was wrong when claiming that complex FT is as extended as is reality. Actually, FT introduces unjustified and misleading redundancy in terms of an arbitrarily chosen phase. The mistake is already hidden in the otherwise clever choice of an arbitrarily chosen reference t=0 to any time scale. Consequently the abstracted from reality time can be shifted at will. The border between past and future cannot be shifted. It naturally provides the unique reference point for past as well as future time.

        Eckard Blumschein

        Dear Eckard, you confound the philosophy and intuitive interpretations about the universe and its origin, with the religions and the esoterims. You must open your mind and be less persuaded about how you interpret this universe, I repeat but nobody can prove the real universal origin, youcannot disprove a kind of God of spinoza like Einstein said, you don t understand better this time, this presentims, this eternalism, this irriversible entropical Arrow of time than the others, you just like all have your own persuaded interpretation. For me I repeat we have a physicality created by something that we cannot define and this thing creates codes and a system in evolution, and inside this physicality we have not an eternity nor a real infinty, these things are beyond the physicality. And inside we have just a time Clock of evolution irreversible for me, and the GR is not for me the only one piece of puzzle, you can utilise all the Beautiful Words that you want, that will not change the reality and this time like a pure Clock if evolution irreversible, my philosiophy like your philosophy are limited and nob ody know better this universe and its origin. Personally I don t understand why you focus like that on Fourier, it is just a tool his mathematical series permiting to utilise them for a better understanding of our physicality and its series. Nothing of odd. And nothing of odd also with thhe past and the future, they are just the past and the future,one is the past and we cannot understand all this past due to our limitations and this future cannot predict all at all scales, and the present is just the åpresent , a thing permiting to live in this present and be conscious. The time =0 has no interest for me even if I take this hypothetical BB and its inflation, even philosophically speaking, we are limited.

        Furthermore, I don t want to guide nobody to nothing, we discuss about physics, maths and philosophy, we share ideas, we are not here to change the philosophies abd interpretations of peopkle, I know that this theoretical sciences Community is probably the most vanitious Community on Earth and I know that all we are persuaded, you are free to Think like you want but never be persuaded about assumptions or limitations, we cannot affirm our philosophies like our foundamental objects, we must accept this simply , we can just accept the proved laws, axioms, equations, it is only simple than this, and all the Beautiful Words shall not change this reality. Nobody knows better this origin, this eternity, this infinity, or others than the others.We search answers and we are still very far of truths, we are Youngs at this universal scale.

        You know Eckard , a thing that I hjave remarked in all humility is that a very few number even here are general and able to speak about a kind of link between the philosophy, the maths and physics, they are maybe good in some details but they cannot go deeper, and the most impressing is that they Think that they can. A general works or general extrapolations need to see this generality of sciences and philosophies and this generality arrives when you study aa lot in many centers of interest. General intuitive ideas never fall down from the sky, there are Always a lot of studies and reserchs beyond. And this Vanity is not the problem even if my Words irritate several persons, it is not a problem, I am frank and I tell it in transparence, so I repeat a few number can really unite all this puzzle and be tolerant in accepting these general extrapolations, I repeat still, nobody can affirm and a few number can discuss about this and a few number are really tolerant and humble in discussing about these things.