Editor's Choice: The Illusion of the Expanding Universe

John Planck instance is the NOW in which change run, in which clocks run.

Quanta of space changes electrical charge from positive to negative in a Planck time. This is a basic vibration of quantum space. All other change run in this fundamental physical reality of quantum space.

See more about that on

vixra - mind science

my article Consciousness is a Basiv Frequency of Quantum Space.

yours amrit

I have inherited directly from my father John Logie Baird who invented Television a deep interest in the Universe and the role that man plays.

Here are some ideas on our universe.

The Expansion or non-expansion of our universe.

I have in my past notes kept referring to the fact that nothing explodes at an even rate. If this was possible the design of the motorcar engine could be greatly remodelled to a far better fuel efficiency.

We have learnt to live with many things in our world that are most irregular, yet as soon as we view the stars we expect perfect balance and symmetry.

The big bang would cause a trail of smaller explosion and we can today see these happening, with our technology. These smaller explosions can cause us to read that the universe is expanding or shrinking depending on our viewpoint.

If we look to measure the rate of expansion of the universe, with a cooling star in the picture the Universe will seem t be shrinking while if measured near a new explosion it will seem to be expanding. Have we taken into account the utter turmoil that black matter seems to be in?

All the explosions and suction of black holes must cause the answer to this question to be reflected by the position of readings taken.

Einstein Proved Wrong!!

A fact is that directly going against Einstein's laws, light is not the fastest thing in the Universe. A Black Hole sucks matter in so fast that no light escapes! Therefore the suction of a black hole is faster than light.

I wonder how many theories this up sets.

If light cannot escape a black hole because of the speed of the suction, the matter of the suns and planets increases so fast that we cannot see the light, can this be a form of invisibility. We do need light to see with our eyes but there are other ways to see including inferred. Viewing the black hole thought the spectrum may provide some very interesting observations. Can the speed of the electrons that spin around a nebula be increased so much that they can make the object invisible? Or is this how Gravity is formed and the object becomes lighter?

Once we know that light has a speed that is not the fastest in the Universe it opens a door to find out the speed of things faster, like Black Hole matter. I wonder what speed the matter exits the Black Hole? I wonder how far it exits before it slows down enough for us to see it? I guess the speed of light?

Posted on Gordon's of London over a year ago!!

Gordon Mays Baird

Hi Gordon

In black hole matter transforms in quanta of space, in centre of galaxies AGN space is formed in elementary perticles. Transformation of energy "mass-space-mass" is permanent, universe is eternal, non-created sistem.

yours amrit

Today I had discussion with one of the members here. He is convinced that "time dilatation" as slower velocity of clocks is a result of 4th coordinate of space-time shrinking.

Even if space-time would exists as a physical reality would not be possible to explainj how shrinking of space is related with slower speed of clocks.

It is quite amazing how we are attached to some fix ideas in physics that have no correspondence to physical reality.

yours amrit

Shoe on head?

Consciousness in head !

Very few understand that the most important property of time is its

SPONTANEITY. We know we can`t rush time and this is why we use spontaneous

processes to measure it. The sand falling in the hourglass, the mechanical

relaxation of the quartz crystal, the spontaneous electronic transition etc. Need I say more?

The local RATE of time is a measure of the local rate of spontaneous processes,

the clock being the standard example. The time DURATION is just a convention and does not really exist. Such a DURATION is our integration of the rate of time.

The only true time DURATION is the period of an EMW, because at the speed of light time stops; the period is therefore a stable lenght of time.

The local differential in the RATE of time determines where and how fast things are moving spontaneously. Gravitation is an example.

The word TIME has many meanings and descriptions ... Not choosing one is suggesting all and meaning none...

Marcel,

Time IS motion. Without motion, no time!

I can't stop thinking about how 560 seconds is not at all the same thing as seven minutes.

Hello,

I just wanted to confirm the concept that time does not exist, and the universe is not expanding.

The error of Newton was to relate motion to the motion of matter particles in an absolute space and time.

Instead it should be the wave motion of space that causes matter and time.

This is logical and the most simple way of describing physical reality.

See;

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Most-Simple-Scientific-Theory-Reality.htm

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/metaphysics.htm

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/mathematical-physics/logic-truth-reality.htm

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Physics-Time.htm

"Motion must always have been in existence, and the same can be said for time itself, since it is not even possible for there to be an earlier and a later if time does not exist. Movement, then, is also continuous in the way in which time is - indeed time is either identical to movement or is some affection of it." (Aristotle)

Sincerely,

Geoff Haselhurst

Please see

http://bandtechnology.com/PolySigned/index.html

which yields a unidrectional arithmetic capable of algebra but lacking in geometry, very much consistent with the views of Barbour. The keywords

emergent spacetime

are a consequential step beyond the time puzzle, for physics does not answer the question

Why Spacetiem?

- Tim

Barbour is right saying that universe is timeless, and wrong saying that there is no physical time.

Physical time is run of clocks in timeless universe.

yours amritAttachment #1: 1_In_what_way_are_related_psychological_time_and_physical_time__sorli_2010.pdf

I have been thinking about the gravity problem. Does it exist? I say no. I suggest, rather a spatial displacement caused by all matter. This displacement thereby creates a pressure zone which pushes matter towards the center of the displacement zone. Perhaps: energy=matter=displacement=pressure=order; also mass=matter x accelleration. If I am reasoning this out correctly this should resolve the quantum gravity problem.

Stuff I wrote some years ago. May help in your exploration of time ..

Here are 12 properties associated with the nature of Time as may be deduced from known physics

1-Spontaneity: Time runs by itself. Nobody makes time run. Time is spontaneous. We know we can't rush time. This is why our time measuring instruments are based on spontaneous processes; sand falling in the hourglass, mechanical relaxation of quartz crystal, spontaneous electronic transition in atoms etc. In this, we trust that a spontaneous process does represent the nature of the passage of time. In that sense, the clock is actually driven by time. In theory, if time stopped, so would the clock! (Well, this can't happen because the clock would cease to exist as well. In the monistic approach, matter is just a conjugate set of time derivatives that exists only by replacing locally the passage of time. If time stopped, matter would cease to exist altogether.)

2-Universality: It is safe to assume that time runs everywhere in the universe. Its pace or rate may differ in different location and circumstances.

( see Necessity below)

3-Rate: Time passes at a certain pace or rate. The passage of time being a dynamic concept, it requires that it passes at a certain Rate.

4-Complexity: The passage of time passes at a certain rate, and this rate can vary in various location and/or circumstances as can be deduced from General

Relativity. For example, for a successively accelerated and decelerated body, this rate of passage of time is decreasing and then increasing. We may suspect the existence of other derivatives of variations in the rate of passage of time corresponding to a jerk, a Snap? A Crackle? A Pop? etc.

5-Relative: Relativity tells us that time is relative. This means that "measuring time" consists in making a relative comparison between the duration of two events; one is the observation, and the other is the clock. The meaning of Relative also suggests that there is no causal connection between the clock and the event i.e. one is not driving or causing the other. They are rather assumed as sharing the same local rate of passage of time, hence the use of one clock for two locations (comparison).

6-Locality: The logical conclusion of the relativity of the passage of time is its next property; locality. To a specific location corresponds a specific set of properties of time.

7-Size: Now, if the passage of time is local, how big is the size of the passage of time, locally? What is the size of a moment in time? In other word, what is the size of the natural set of joint locations that has no time between any of its parts? The concept of space-time tells us that a moment in time is infinitesimally small. Any distance in space corresponds to a distance in time as well.

8-Shape: What is the shape of the passage of time? In what shape does it evolve? If a moment in time is an infinitesimal point, and if time evolves from this point without preference or, in all directions without constraint, then, it behaves as a little explosion. Does it expand without end or does it stops and explodes again from its new projections? At a macroscopic scale, the passage of time can assume some pseudo-static structures. For example, since the rate of passage of time is lower in a gravitational field, this rate varies away from the source of gravitation. We therefore can deduce the existence of a gradient in the rate of passage of time, increasing away from the source. We could associate a different pseudo-static structure with the centre of mass of rotating bodies like the Earth and the Moon.

9-Fluidity: This gradient structure extends away from Earth and will be affected by the influence of one or more celestial bodies. The three body system of Earth, Moon and Sun must have an ever fluctuating complex gradient. In other words, these influences and the gradients resulting from them do not paint gravitation as a line of sight phenomenon. Over large distances, it resembles a weather system, one that is driven by masses, motion and distances. One could also see fluidity as an inescapable consequence of a speed limit c and resulting non-instantaneity.

10-Quantity: The dimensionality of time is still the hardest aspect of its study. For each property or aspect of the passage of time we may deduce, this property must be studied by experience, and experience requires units and quantities. Even the theoretical approach requires such units. The case is most likely that these units of quantities already exist in one form or another within the body of physics. Note that in theory, these quantities must be conservative in order to support a logically expected conservation law for the derivatives of the passage of time.(Time itself is not conserved as being continually generated in a spontaneous way; the derivatives are.)

11-Notation: For many, this is the main stumbling block on the road to accepting the passage of time as a real (but non-physical) entity. What would be the units of the rate of passage of time? Second per second s/s ? This seems to make no sense to them and therefore is a sufficient reason to discredit the existence of a rate for the passage time. It is not easy to integrate our physical notion of the passage of time with words and mathematics. Let me try to answer this. In physics, events are said to happen at a certain rate as "per second". In that respect, we could say that the rate of passage of time can be described as "per second" or 1/t. If the rate of passage of time decreases, then the denominator "t" should increase, relatively speaking. It so happens for particles whose half-life is increased in a measurable way at near light speeds, because the passage of time local to the particle is slower relative to an observer...

12-Necessity: Is time a requirement for this universe? Is it necessary for what exists and happens around us? Or can we do without time? The answer could be in the following questions. Can we say that something exists without understanding that it does so with a minimum (non virtual) persistence in time? Can we say something happens without doing so at a certain rate, hence, in a certain amount of time? No. The passage of time appears to be an intricate dimension of what exists and happens.

Marcel,

re-post from the Maths Durham forum. This is intended to help people make the difference between physics and metaphysics. A question about the Nature of something is a very specific Metaphysical question; it is not physics!

Science is empirical. What does it mean? It means that we recognize not knowing about the underlying reality. It means that we accept this ignorance because we have found about 300 years ago a pragmatic approach to this situation. We simply treat this universe as a black box. We ignore the content of the box and concentrate our study on our interaction or experience (empirical) with the box. By studying our experiences with the box we have come up with regularities and some possible image and idea of what the box contains. These are our laws of physics and the models that we can infer from them. But no matters how pointed our empirical method is, no matters how sharp and detailed our models are, they are still modeled and framed on the requirements of proof within the empirical system. In other words, the empirical method was meant to study our experience of the box, never to find its content, which must be addressed in a metaphysical approach. No matter how wonderful our science may appear, it is just child's play. Without knowing the content of the box, we do not have any idea of what we are really doing. This is the limit of physics. We don't do or understand as much as we could and should. The content of the box is about the two following metaphysical questions; what is the universe made of and what makes it evolve by itself? The two pillars of metaphysics: substance and cause.

Somehow on the way, we forgot half of the question. We feel today the price of this ignorance/oversight.... and we are very late ..

Marcel,

Here is another way to explain the previous post: Physics vs Metaphysics

Since the early Greek philosophers, we have understood the distinction between two important concepts: the underlying reality and our perceptual experience. Over the centuries, we have always mixed the two concepts at the same time and amounted to nothing. Around the time of Newton, Descartes and others, the empirical method was born. We would forget for now/for now about the underlying reality and would consider the universe as a black box. We would concentrate our study on our experience of the black box, i.e. the empirical concept and approach and find the laws that best described our experiences. But no matter how successful the empirical concept is in this year 2010, the other concept (underlying reality) is still sitting on the back burner where we left it 300 years ago. Because we do not know what the universe is made of (what is the substance) and what makes it work by itself (the cause), all of our best science remains an educated guess on outcomes. And, that is the limit of physics.

Marcel,

if the universe is not expanding then the big bang never happened. if this is true the universe needs a cycle to keep itself in being. a mechanism would have to exist for hydrogen to be burnt in stars then the matter produced turned back into hydrogen. if the universe does this then it could be true perpetual motion. i find it very hard to see how anything can be created from nothing as the big bang implies or that matter or energy can be made into nothing as in black holes. if light slows down as it moves through space producing more red shift the further travels it would explain why the local galaxies are not expanding

clocks measure the rotation of the planet. calenders measure how many rotations it takes to orbit the sun.this is not anything to do with time or the measureing of time.there is only one time and that is the present which lasts for all eternity.energy matter and space move but time must by its nature stay still.

their seems two main sides when studying the universe. those that believe it was created by god, big bangs or some other method. the other side believe it has always existed. is it really possible to create something from nothing or to annihilate matter into nothing. i was always told making things appear from nothing is called magic and not science.