Is the Past Infinite?

Hello Georgina. I agree with your sentiment, though as I speak I don't know if I would concur with your detail. But meanwhile can I offer this:

You don't need time to have motion. You need motion to have time. IMHO the 13.7 billion years since the beginning of the universe is a measure of how much motion has occurred. It's 13.7 billion light years worth, compounded by the expansion of the universe. That's not to say the Big Bang was the absolute beginning. For all I know it might be a local phenomenom. It is otherwise for me a puzzle, because I don't know how to get something from nothing.

John,

Yes we agree, you don't need time to have change in position in space, that is objective reality. You do need motion to have time as experienced in subjective reality.

If there is no time in objective reality the structure giving rise to the universe is eternal.

In my opinion there are two possible beginnings for the universe, either a big bang when the universe has contracted to a critical mass, which re inflates the universe for a new cycle or there is a process of continuous recycling. That would release the energy of the universe gradually back to the exterior of the hypersphere rather than all in one big bang.

If this is mathematically possible, matter would reach the centre of the hypersphere and continue on to arrive back at the outside of the hypersphere having been disintegrated. The centre of the hypersphere would be akin to the singularity and the arrival back at the exterior of the hypersphere the elusive rapid inflation of the universe. From there it would be another cycle of coming together due to motion along the 4th dimension, as seen in the manifestation of gravity, development into matter and structure of greater complexity.Increasing order not entropy.

All energy is change of position in space. Therefore the distances observed reflect the energy of the universe at the time the light was emitted rather than directly reflecting age.

Also it is an electromagnetic image of the universe that is observed not the objective material universe itself, which can not be observed. That image is prone to distortion of various kinds. The age of the universe is based on the big bang cosmology model and dating of stars from observed luminosity. If either is an incorrect model or if distortion of the electromagnetic image gives incorrectly interpreted data, then it will effect the estimated age of the universe.The age of the universe is therefore a calculation informed by currently accepted models, which may or may not be correct.

It seems nature, by it's very nature, cannot be 'finite' as we understand it. I've been developing a 'triple helix' analysis and model development technique from morphology and other sources, and working on interlinked models with interesting results. They mainly rely on no 4th vectors or higher dimensions.

If space is expanding the more time light spends within it the greater it must be red shifted. Reason McLucas wrote above of the logic that increased red shift with distance did NOT demonstrate acceleration. Even without the 'greater time spent' element simple geometry proves it. Acceleration is purportedly over time. The light we see from a galaxy 10bn light yrs away left it just as light from one 12bn yrs away was coming past it. It therefore takes 2bn yrs longer to reach us from it's source. Let's say it's twice as red shifted as the light from the closer galaxy. This means that 2bn years AFTER the first light was emitted the rate of expansion as indicated by the 2nd galaxy is actually much LESS.

Assuming the expansion rate is even and geometry finite, like the expanding balloon, the expansion rate will increase with distance. Using our two galaxies we can then calculate the 'gradient' of increased expansion with relative distance. This in no way demonstrates 'acceleration' any more than it does with the inflating balloon.

If the dark energy field of space itself is also expanding, and the speed of light remains constant, the additional red shift element due to this must be added. Again, the longer light travels through the field the greater the red shift. It's nothing to do with 'tired light' as I propose energy wave information can only logically be propogated at a constant rate over that time/space using energy from the the medium itself.

This has a good number of other implications which it seems could address some of our remaining key paradoxes. Or, to paraphrase Einstein, perhaps I'm going mad. Is it me or them?

Pressed the button too early. Forget the 'twice as red shifted' bit! Just'more red shifted' will do fine.

And some among you will recognise the similarities with the luminiferous ether. Much more to follow, if anyone's the slightest bit interested!

PJ

I see inflation as a process of transformation of space energy into energy of matter. In the universe energy cannot be created and not destroyed; universe is a system in a permanent dynamic equilibrium.

http://www.chronos.msu.ru/discussions/sorli_dynamic.html

yours amrit

William Orem said "An infinite past just seems wrong, but is it?"

Yes.

What is changing is energy and position of matter in the 4 dimensional spatio-energetic continuum.Potential energy is being changed into mass energy and kinetic energy. Matter is coming together as it moves along the 4th spatio-energetic dimension.Structures are forming. Potential energy is continually being transformed, giving a direction of change that has been called the "arrow of time".

Time is not a parameter of the universe itself. The universe exists without time, not eternally. There is an origin in 4D space and end state in 4D space. Not a beginning and end in time.The end state of the universe is the origin of its successor.The mind demands that time is applied to the concept of universe because that is how the mind processes information to build its subjective reality.

There is no past as a physical reality. Only space. There can be no time travel, so there is no paradox there.The energy changes that happened when the matter of our universe was at a particular 4th dimensional position in the spatio-energetic continuum have no continued existence, as the position of the matter of the universe moves afore wards towards the centre of the hypersphere.

William, I think the Perimeter Institute would actually like more academic hoop jumpers to sit in an armchair and think for them. I hear that concerts and pleasant non academic environment is provided to aid inspiration.

Yes Georgina, universe has no past and no beginning. Universe is a system in a permanent dynamic equilbrium. Change of density of quantum space generates expansion and contraction of the universe.

You can read more on my article on file attached.

yours amritAttachment #1: Timeless_Quantum_Universe_in_Dynamic_Equiilibrium_FQXI.pdf

I speculate that the universe is analogous to one of the virtual particle pairs thought to appear in empty space (the quantum froth); where particle pairs appear (an alpha point), then mutually annihilate (an omega point). At a larger scale, perhaps our (and other) universe(s) are simply members of virtual particle pairs (at a far vaster scale). A universe appears as a quantum fluctuation along with its "anti" universe: both evolve (perhaps by accelerated expansion) until they mutually coalesce and annihilate retuning the vacuum to the zero state from which it began.

I envision a sort of fractal existence in which the quantum froth of our universe mirrors identical "froths" at vastly different scales perhaps extending in both "directions" of which we are aware of only the microscopic (quantum) and (for one pair member) the universal. Time then is a property reflecting the evolution of each "particle universe" independently. It may be interesting to investigate to what extent the quantum physics of virtual pair production could be applied on a universal scale.

As an aside, could the dark sector be related to the "anti" member of our "particle universe pair"?

Dear Sai,

It is wonderful that you have a passion for physics and that you like to speculate about it. I would strongly encourage you to keep learning physics and math. I do not want to discourage you by criticizing your speculation, but as you learn more and more, your speculations will become better and better; the key is to never forget to speculate and dream big. However, speculation alone is never enough. Hard work is required in learning what other people did before you.

Good luck in learning physics.

thanks sir/madam for your valuable advice.but i request you to tell me what was wrong in my speculation so that in future i may take care of my mistakes. also do check one of my other speculation in the topic DR. EDT'S THEORY given in the major topic HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS which is about the speed of light. do send your replies again .

M.SAI VARUN REDDY

Can anyone speculate when the pendulum started and when it will stop?

For an answer the "physical laws" of a super-universe is needed.

In other words, NO answer is possible whithin our universe.

Dear Sirs,

From the nothing, nothing can emerge or arise. So, it's not intelligent thinking that from a past time where supposedly nothing existed, anything like our universe has come to light.

So, the idea of a starting of matter existence is a fake idea, without any basement. There are no reason to think that the intrinsic and perpetual nature of the cosmic fabric is not exactly what is shown.

Simple like that: The nature of the cosmos is what you see: energized matter. There has never been any past time when the "nothing" existed, so the past is really infinite.

THE ILLUSION OF TIME

In an essay in Scientific American (Sci.Am. 302,6; p 59-65; 2010) Craig Callender reports that some theoretical physicists suggest that time does not exist. Their conclusion comes from quantum mechanical considerations. I am presenting some observations of our macroscopic world that lead to the same suggestion.

The three domains of time are future, present and past. The future contains all events that do not yet exist, the present contains the events that exist, and the past the ones that do not exist anymore.

It seems obvious that as I am writing these words I am in the present. However, this moment will be in the past and not exist anymore, when you will read what I am writing now.

When we shake hands we feel our hands touch. The moment, we feel each others hand, the touching is already in the past. Our sensory receptors need time to react, our nerves need time to send a signal to our brains. Our brains need time to process the information, and time is needed to informing the seats of our self-awareness that a touching is happening. Well, our system is slow. However, if we could register an event within a fraction of a picosecond, even then this event would be in the past when we witness its existence. That means everything we do, feel, see, or hear is already in the past and has ceased to exist.

As all events that we can witness are already in the past when we become aware of them, the time that we experience is in the past also. Thus, time is a dimension of the imagined world of the past. It is an illusion.

Time measures the distance that separates a past event from the present. In our imagination, we can go back to the time of ancient Rome, and than we can move forward again to the discovery of the Americas. We can let time run forward or backward, and we can define an arrow of time in our virtual world of the past.

We do not know if there is some equivalent in the present to what we call time. If there is, it cannot have duration.

Events are real only as long as they are anchored in the present. As soon as the connection to the present is lost an event ceases to exist. Time comes into its virtual existence the moment an event becomes detached from the present.

As long as we live, we are connected to the present. However, everything we experience is already in the past.

When we die we stop to exist. We lose our connection to the present. Our body may exist a little longer while connected to the present, however, eventually, it also will cease to exist until in the end there are only atoms and finally sub-atomic particles as traces of our former existence.

Everything that changes moves from the reality of the present into the illusion of the past. The changed state remains in the present and the old state, which does not exist anymore, is in the past.

The future is what we think might happen or what we predict to become reality. Our predictions are based on our experience and knowledge of our world of the past. As the past, the future is not real. We are imagining the future as a mirror image of our world of the past.

To become real a future event must become part of the present first. That is the reason why we cannot "remember" the future. We can only remember events that once had been real. In other words we only can remember what had been in the present.

As the time we experience does not exist in the present, we cannot assume time to be running continuously from the past into the future. It rather seems as if the present generates time as the fourth dimension of our virtual world of the past.

TIME

I am as one would rightly have deduced after reading this post...just a voice in the wilderness.

My theory........

Time is the effect of a movement that spins back on itself while still moving in the same original direction.

The backward spin on a ball thrown forward, has a ball thrown with the same energy as one without a spin, yet the ball takes longer to get to its destination. The spin slows time and in the case of a googly cricket bowl...distorts distance/ time.

There is also a case for the shape of 'time' and the universe. The effect of movement dictates the shape of the Universe and all the laws within it.

Analogy........

The smoke ring a cigarette smoker can blow. The forward movement of the smoke ring is countered by the backward spin of the ring across its width (which is composed of the same forward movement) yet the smoke ring still moves forward because it is all the same force. I propose the ring and its contents are 3 dimensional time and space and the original forward movement one dimensional time, while everything else is a void. The forward motion gives rise to the expanding universe, because as the forward motion continues, the circumference of the ring gets larger. The ring has to accommodate the matter/mass so its width shrinks, until finally all movement stops and the mass/matter disappears.

These opposing movements within the same movement generate a continuum.

I often think that when a bullet is fired, time folds back on its future self to allow the bullet to hit its future target.

I hope this is not too much of a nonsense.

Thank you for your time.Attachment #1: time_mcdonald_28.8.jpg

If we admit the idea that duration in time and motion (mass-energy) in space do not interact with duration and motion being simply concurrent realities, then the idea of an infinite past and future time would be easy.

Stephen Hawking has recently forwarded the idea of "spontaneous creation" owing to the existence of gravity. The idea of "spontaneous creation because of gravity" essentially proposes that gravitational masses always existed because otherwise gravity will not be an occurrence and then spontaneous creation will not occur at all. This by extension poses the idea of an infinite past and future time.

The idea of "creation because of gravity" in Hawking's latest makes me wonder if he or his peers read my paper of a few years ago.

Sometime ago I've also emailed A. Aguirre and M. Tegmark an ecopy of Kinematic Relativity and Continuous Mass-Formation in an Accelerating Universe, although I gathered from Anthony's response that he has not read it and did not intend to read it.

"An infinite past just seems wrong -- literally inconceivable -- like words being put together in a meaningless way. But is it?"

I've been working on an idea of gravitation from the viewpoint of "kinematic relativity" that suggests that gavity and all other forces (kinematic tendencies) would not be possible without an infinitely hierarchical cosmos.

But the work is on hold for lack of funding and hence time - I need to use my time to work for a living. I tried to get an FQXi grant, but although FQXi is really generous, my proposal just couldn't cut it.

I'm posting here because I am hoping somebody else is working on the same ideas that I am working on. I'm trying to discover who does.

It would be great if you people could answer with some relevant comments.

Regarding the idea of entropy discussed above by Anthony...

The assumption is of course that the second law of thermodynamics is valid application for the universe. The idea predicts an entropic death of the universe. But there is an opposed idea to the second law - the idea of gravitation.

It is clear that the underlying idea of the second law is radiation (i.e., attenuation). On the other hand, the underlying idea of gravity is gravitation/condensation/concentration (i.e., densification).

So, which of the two is the correct idea as regards the universe?

Hawking is saying now - "spontaneous creation" because of gravity.

I've been saying for many years now - "cosmic continuous mass formation" because of the gravitational 'tensor' acceleration. I have the genesis formula presented at my website.

The idea of "a universe heading toward an entropic demise" is no longer valid.

Only a universe with the continuous cosmic mass formation process owing to gravity, with the created masses undergoing cosmic fission processes (such as super novae, etc.), can explain the "large structures." The large structures now observed by astronomers could not have formed in the time span forwarded in the big bang theory.

Time exist - time is numerical order of material change trat run in space. We measure them with clocks....see more on file attached.

yours amritAttachment #1: 2_BLOCK_UNIVERSE.pdf

Not only is the past not infinite, the past does not and cannot exist at all. The only condition that can exist is the here and now. Our individual grasp of reality is strictly rationed. We cannot know everything there is to know. Whether or not we can actually know anything for sure is debatable. Each of us obviously is constrained only to know what our senses transmit to us at any particular moment. Well if verifiable reality can only consist of the pragmatic instantaneous sensations perceived by our senses, any supposition, or speculation or theory including scientific theory or deeply ingrained religious belief has to be unrealistic. We can only see what we see at the time that we see it. We can only hear what we hear at the time that we hear it. We can only taste what we taste at the time that we taste it. We can only smell what we smell at the time that we smell it. We can only feel what we feel at the time that we feel it. All of this activity can only take place in the here and now. The only freedom of will each one of us has is the ability to pretend to be someone other than the person we are. An ant can only ever be an ant consigned its whole life to really only ever being an ant reliably always performing ant actions. Although a man can only really know what his senses tell him from moment to moment, he can behave as if he is a special kind of man. As he goes through life, he can acquire reassuring labels, licenses, and diplomas that pay no attention to the limitations of anyone's unfortunate individual reality, but are prized documents dedicated to the invaluable individual procuring of common unreal abstraction that floats in the mists of the there and then.

However, both man and ant eventually end. Both man and ant are somehow absorbed into other life forms for all of life is immortal, it just undergoes constant change.