Dear Eric,

Very good essay about Time and conundrums around it.

All problems arise from the fact that time is considered as some independent substance that flows (passes), in which you can move forward or backward. In reality Time itself does not exist. There are only motions. Motion is used as the time standard. The time is handy way to compare motions. Universal time (expansion rate of Universe) is irreversible. Local movements can be reversible, i.e., the local time can be reversible. More in: About Arrow of Time. http://viXra.org/abs/1902.0495.

According to the principle of symmetry, the antimatter must have a negative mass which repels ordinary matter. Therefore local time of antiparticles in comparison with Universal time is negative, i.e., direction from Future to Past.

Best regards

Ilgaitis

Hi Eric, it's great to see an entry from you in the contest! This is actually something I have thought about for many years. I'll have to send you some of the things I've considered. I'm of the opinion that, at least from a pseudo-operationalist standpoint, time-reversal symmetry doesn't make any real sense and only CPT-reversal actually accomplishes what we expect. But CPT as an operation is necessarily anti-unitary which seemingly creates a problem.

    Eric:

    Confusion about the nature of time insures questions about physical reality will continue.聽 And puzzles about physical reality promise puzzling opinions will continue with "time."聽 Examining the nature of what is called time is an excellent way to solve a multitude of聽 physical mysteries.

      I find your essay confusing, but doubly so because you commit the heinous sin of casting your argument in the language of flowing or passing time, conflating the passage of time with time asymmetry. Right at the outset you write: 'If you proceed with time moving

      forward again, what do you see?' Time moving? Time cannot and does not move. Time simply is. (How fast does your time move? One second per second?) The flow of time is a psychological illusion; time asymmetry is a property of matter, not time.

        Hi Flavio,

        Thank you for your remarks. I only briefly looked through your Essay. It was very well written and I am planning to go through it in much more detail. When I do I will comment on your page. Thanks again.

        Eric

        P.S. I believe from first glances you and I would have much to discuss regarding the overlaps.

        Harrison,

        Thank you for your remarks. There is so much to say in regards to determinism and time. I am very lucky to be exploring these ideas. I will absolutely look at your essay!

        Eric

        SNP Gupta,

        Thank you so much for your kinds remarks it is indeed very confusing. The discussion regarding time symmetries is a very slippery slope. One must be very careful about grammar and definition or we end up accomplishing nothing. Thanks again

        Eric

        Hi Alan,

        Leaving Entropy out was intentional. The essay was not designed to accommodate such an immense region. Time and temperature have a very close relationship in many body particle physics. While this does extrapolate to entropy, it is still undetermined if this is a mathematical artifact or rooted in deeper physical phenomena. Thank you for your comments.

        Timothy,

        Wow, thank you for such kind remarks. I am very novice at writing and hope to continually improve. Skill requires significant work.

        Thanks again,

        Eric

        Ian!

        Thank you for reading my essay and for your comments. It's always nice to hear others thinking about these things. I've had many of these thoughts since before I went back to school. Growth was certainly necessary, but I have still hold to many of my ideas.

        CPT is so strangely necessary for particle physics, yet strongly in disagreement with intuitive notions of time. My advisor has the same view as you hold regarding the importance of T-symmetry but recognizes that others (I can't remember the names he dropped) have disagreed among each other about the two assertions I made in my essay. Thanks and I'd love to hear any ideas when you have time. Hope you are well,

        Eric

        Sherman,

        I couldn't agree more. Thank you for reading my essay and for your thoughts!

        Eric

        Professor Davies,

        Thank you for your comments. I read your fantastic book "About Time" before I decided to go back to academia. Furthermore, the conversation at the World Science Festival between you and professors Callender, Maudlin, and Tegmark, was very influential to me as an aspiring physicist. I have very much enjoyed reading your works as well as hearing your discussions.

        However, I have and continue to disagree with you about your interpretation of time. The "psychological illusion" argument while convenient, does not lead to any new or less paradoxical understanding of time as it exists mathematically in cosmology and particle physics. As I mentioned in the conclusion, the arguments I made in the essay were not novel, friends and colleagues of yours continue to debate the nature of these ideas endlessly.

        I am still quite the novice at writing and I appreciate the cautions you are giving me about the language I use.

        Thanks for your comments,

        Eric

        Dear Eric,

        I believe the 'flow of time' is a most important concept in physics. Not to be confused with Prof. Davies human subjective flow, which he mentioned above.

        Einstein's relativity has taught us that the flow of time varies across space according to the energy embodied in that space. In this way we can conceptualise the flow of time as a sort of time dilation map of the universe which will generally accord with a gravitational map, but with a twist if you entertain the idea of an aether, as the energy of motion will also be integrated into the time-flow map.

        Check out my essay which has a section on time reversal, as well as a new slant on presentism.

        Best Regards

        Lockie Cresswell

        Erik,

        Interesting and original approach. Nicely written. Do you consider reversing a reversible physical process to return a state to it's previous condition, has any parallel with time reversal? e.g.

        Take a polarising interaction; absorption/re-emission where the polariser electron has some polarity and changes the state interacting with it, which is what's found (i.e. Zeilinger ref in my essay, where it has 'no memory of it's previous state'). An inverse electron polarity, at the photomultiplier for instance, could then return it to it's original state (or the same one repeated just 'square' the new amplitude).

        Sorry that got a bit complicated! But do you think states can revert (or keep being changed) while time just ticks on in no particular 'direction'?

        I've suggested it can and show in my essay that seems to bring exceptional resolving power!

        Nicely done for yours.

        Very best

        Peter

        Hi Eric,

        I will try to remember to e-mail you some stuff. If I forget, just pester me.

        Ian

        2 years later
        Write a Reply...