Essay Abstract

In the spirit of ancient atomism, the quantum of light was renamed the photon, the fundamental element of everything. Since the photon carries energy on its period of time, a flux of photons embodies a flow of time. The flows of quanta naturally select optimal paths, i.e., geodesics, to level off energy differences in the least time. While the flow equation can be written, it cannot be solved because the flows affect their driving forces, which in turn affect the flows, and so on. Since the forces, i.e., causes, and motions, i.e., consequences, cannot be separated, the future remains unpredictable. Similarly, when a computation affects its own course, it remains uncomputable. And a problem remains undecidable when time does not advance, as the flows of quanta, instead of finishing up, get caught up in circulating.

Author Bio

A former professor of biophysics at the University of Helsinki

Download Essay PDF File

"... we cannot present any evidence of a parallel reality." I suggest that there are now 2 evidential indications for alternate universes, specifically, string theory with the finite nature hypothesis in the form of a 72-dimensional, holographic, digital computer. Consider 2 hypotheses: (1) dark-matter-compensation-constant = (3.9±.5) * 10^-5 and (2) the Riofrio-Sanejouand cosmological model is approximately correct (except for the Koide cutoff and the Lestone cutoff). Am I wrong? Consider Milgrom's MOND, the flyby anomaly, and the problem of precisely measuring Newton's big G. Also consider the following article by Pipino:

Pipino, Giuseppe. "Evidences for Varying Speed of Light with Time." Journal of High Energy Physics, Gravitation and Cosmology 5, no. 2 (2019): 395-411.

Is Pipino wrong? Is it possible that during each Planck time interval, precisely one unit of Fredkin-Wolfram energy is transferred from the boundary of the multiverse into the interior of the multiverse (except for Wolfram's Reset)?

Dear Arto Annila,

already the sine function sin(wt)=sin(phi) becomes trivial or tautological - whichever you prefer - after phi exceeds 2pi. Could it be that PHASE (constellation) is 'real' and TIME illusionary?

Heinz

Respected Prof Arto Annila,

Thank you for wonderful essay on time... Your words......

Why does time move forward?

The preconceived idea that ever-increasing disorder is what directs the arrow of time is deeply rooted in contemporary physics. Our own experience is that also ordering takes time. For exam-ple, we see that order increases when water freezes, and we see that disorder increases when the ice melts.......

In Dynamic Universe Model, time flows in one direction only. Regarding other ethical and scientific principles of this model I hope you will have CRITICAL examination of my essay... "A properly deciding, Computing and Predicting new theory's Philosophy".....

Best Regards

=snp ,

Dear Professor Annila,

A most interesting and enjoyable essay on time!

It is definitely one of my favourite topics.

Early on you state: "We readily use notions of time: just in time; time flies; only time will tell. Yet we have a devil of a time to define time itself. We use time to relate events to one another, but we are not quite able to relate the concept itself to anything. Why is time instinctively felt on the one hand, but beyond our ken on the other? I have managed to produce a non self-referential definition of time using the Planck-Einstein equation and a better understanding of what is meant by a 'clock'. The definition then removes all time paradoxes and makes the understanding of the flow of time easy to grasp.

However the arrow of time is a much more difficult concept, which I discuss briefly in my essay "Wandering towards a 'Theory of Everything' and how I was stopped from achieving my goal by Nature", where when I look at Loschmidt's paradox, and the philosophy of presentism.

My TOE brings up the notion of absolute time as the iteration of a computational TOE, and I eventually get to a position where I dispense with time altogether from my ontological framework, although it (time) is quite handy when dealing with mathematical algorithms.

In your conclusion you say: "Time occupied the minds of both Newton and Einstein. Now the issue is neither about absolute nor relative time but about tangible time - the quantum is the matter of time." I agree with this entirely, based on what I perceive the 'quantum' to be. In my case the quantum is the energy embodied in a defined volume of space.

Best wishes on your interesting essay.

Lockie Cresswell

    Dear Arto,

    In your essay you raise the hard question about something rather than nothing which has been asked many times but no answer whatsoever been in sight. I got an idea how to tackle this by the TOE based on uncomputability and sketched some answer in my essay.

    Yståvällisin Terveisin,

    Irek

    19 days later

    Arto:

    A new era dawns.聽 Old questions become quaint and historical.聽 Is the whole community ready?聽 Or is physical reality too dangerous for our collective understanding at this time?聽

    Dear Arto,

    Very good essay of Time.

    I have some remarks about Time.

    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.

    More over, time have 3 dimensions. One in direction Past - Future, and two dimensions of Present. Second dimension of Present is actual only in cosmic distances. More in: Pioneer anomaly and Dimensions of Time. http://viXra.org/abs/1806.0192.

    Best regards

    Ilgaitis

    In middle ages latin language the word spacium had akso a meaning of time.

    So, the photones fill the space representing the connection of time and distance as speed imfluencing the relativistic proportions of measuring mass and the speed of the time itself.

    Well, this is the continuation of the story with a sort of new turn for us to cinsider.

    Thank you for your interesting apprach being explained.

    P. Poluian and

    D. Lichargin

    Write a Reply...