Lawrence,

Time is not "something" that we measure with clocks.

With clocks we measure numerical order of material change.

Time as "something" in ontological sense is a mind model into which you experience numeric order of material change.

amrit

    Amrit,

    Ultimately you are burying the concept in time in the notion of change. Change v. [Chanj] To become different, to alter or vary. Then how does something vary? It does so according to this thing called time.

    This trend of regarding time as nonexistent is silly. I will not say with certainty time is ontic quite in the same way that a hard particle is. However, quantum events determine eigenvalued outcomes which occur in a sequence ordered temporally. I can't prove that time exists, but science is not about proving things exist, science is only about making measurements and determining whether things measured satisfy certain relationships. Those relationships are what we call theories.

    Calling time something we simply perceive mentally as objects moving in space is really just a word game. You have in the end just come up with another definition of time.

    Cheers LC

    Yes, I replace concept of time with numerical order. With clocks we measure numerical order of material change that run in the universe. We experience change in a perspective "past-present-future" that is a mind construct (psychological time).

    PS

    Time is not information. We all see that information moves in space:

    -post DHL moves in space

    -telephone information run on wires

    - mobile and internet information run on electromagnetic waves

    No one ever has seen information moving in time as time does not exist.

    Concept of time is not corresponding to the physical reality. Concept of numerical order is corresponding perfectly to the physical reality.

    The case is that we experience information motion in space through time that is of the mind.

    Yours Amrit

      A version of this work by Diao could be used to describe the path integral in the sense that Goyal does in his elementary logic of quantum physics.

      I think is associated with fundamental quantum events, which form a scaffold for spacetime. In that sense I could say that time exists. Time in the continuous meaing of the word exists "well enough" as I see it.

      Cheers LC

      Again you are replacing time with verbs, such as run. Information does move in time. If I send a light signal pulse from x and y with a distance d it moves in a time t = d/c.

      Back in the early 1990's there was a silly pundit-news program called "The McLaughlin Report." The sound bites you give remind me of that program.

      Cheers LC

        Lawrence, nice observation. It supports empirical extension of the quantum domain to the cosmic, and thus adds nonzero time to quantum event analysis n the classical scale. Throw in scale invariance and n-dimension continuity of the time unit, and you've got my theory of physical time and gravity dissipation over n-dimension kissing spheres.

        Tom

        You use spheres now , it's well that ,you are on the good road.

        They want my grants ahahahah let's laugh they copy , ahahaha

        SPHERES SPHERES AND SPHERES IN THE SPHERE ? THE SPHERIZATION AND ITS EVOLUTION IN 3 DIMENSIONS ....SPHERES IN THE SPHERE ....ONLY 3 DIMENSIONS AND A TIME CONSTANT .

        If not return at school , humbly and respectfully ......don't confound the imaginaries and the realism please for all ther sciences community....

        TO ALL STUDENTS .....3 DIMENSIONS , IT'S FOUNDAMENTAL ....forget these stupidities about our physicality and its dimensions, constants, invariances, irreversibilities, localities, globality...it seems what many people confound the generality and the details which are pue imaginaries extrapolations without limits in the pure serie inside the pure topological reality.

        The cause of the mass is these rotating quantum spheres.. specifics for the number and their comportments of rotations....the proportionalities in the line time are essentials and the rotations more the density, the volumes, the sense becomes very relevant for a correct building, these polarisations.And the time is necessary like the 3D .......let's take the H ..C...N....O....CH4....NH3...H2O...THE TIME ALWAYS AND THE PURE THERMODYNAMICS MORE THE EVOLUTION OF MASS POLARIZATION GRAVITY/LIGHT.....and the particules continue and increase their complexification....thus the density increases due to the light and the evoltion....I continue the.....more energy these particules in time continue....amino acids...adn....first cells....animals vegetals...about 4.5 and 3.6...2.5 billions years ago.....and after fishs...reptils.....and us the humans....you are laughing all no I hope .....all that are proofs and we see the 3D all these creations are mass in evolution, products of the evolution and the polarisation.all are in 3D ....it's time to stop all the stupidities about our real 3D UNIVERSAL SPHERE.......all was predicted in these intrinsics main central codes in the main centrals spheres.....you can thus see the center of our Univers where all turns around.and all these centers inside the quantum centers the main sphere....the rotations thus are linked too with the informations.........

        I class all since several years .

        ......and all is in 3D all ....a bacteria, or a flower, or a water drop, or a tree, or a star or ....all, I am inside a 3D SPHERE ....ON A SPHERE....I SEE WITH SPHERES....I turn around spheres....in 3D ,the rotations of the spheres explain all and are probably universaly linked , all spheres are correlated and linked , quantics or cosmologics.

        Best Regards

        Steve

        Amrit,

        I recall a Buddhist story, in which a monk explains a flag waving in the wind, "The flag is not waving. The wind is not waving. Your mind is waving."

        Even a waving mind transmits information through nerve synapses.

        Tom

        Dear Tom, Steve and Amrit,

        Tom - I didn't realize that you are also playing with kissing spheres in multiple dimensions. I worked on that some last year, see

        http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/520

        You should recognize my conserved quantum numbers and symmetries as arising from products of kissing spheres.

        This year I'm working on more fundamental questions, such as "WHY are there N dimensions?" And "Why do we only observe 3 or 4 dimensions?"

        Dear Steve,

        I told you from the beginning that "spheres" lead to kissing spheres lead to lattices lead to "string" interactions. So there is a sphere/ string dual nature to reality.

        I agree that mass and spin are related - there is a reason that the theorized Higgs boson has intrinsic spin of 0, but it imparts mass to other particles with non-zero intrinsic spin. Nonetheless, your rotating spheres imply more degrees of freedom/ hidden variables/ dimensions. Maybe you aren't comfortable calling this another dimension. I want to wake you up out of your comfort zone.

        Dear Steve and Amrit,

        Steve has extra degrees of freedom in his rotations. Amrit has extra degrees of freedom in the numerical ordering of his block. I once had a Professor who said (something like this - I hope I'm not completely misquoting him) "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then there is a 99 and 44/100'ths percent chance that it is a duck".

        Have Fun!

        Hello dr Cosmic Ray,

        Hihihihi like that, all people will say , he is crazzy the belgian ahahaha

        I search the number, under the sky and its spheres, the number and its brothers and sisters, the number and the numbers on the spheres and under the sphere....we search the number ........finite for the uniqueness of the entanglement ....the same for the universe .

        Gauss the prince of maths seems with us hihihi what are the algebras dear Ray if they are not correlated with the pure physicality....the groups need limits really.

        The polygonisation and the polyhedrisation .....why invent these things about x or y or z dimensions....the polyhedrisation.......like the circle ...the sphere ...that's all.it's essential for a correct global harmonious evolution........ , already we have difficulties to encircle the 3D and its dynamic of evolution.

        We can fractalize the 3D and to have many systems, but that rests in 3D always.......the difficulty is to accept this reality and study it in fact simply....all our sciences , methods, techics, technologies.....are in 3D and in correlation with our foundamental laws and equations.

        The incompleteness is inside this 3D and due to our young age at the universal scale.The maths must be reals and rationals and even proportionals when the serie whants to be explained rationally .

        Just a thought

        Regards

        Steve

        Dear Steve,

        How is my crazy Belgian friend? Did you enjoy your Birthday last week? I sent my Birthday greetings via Facebook.

        OK - You talk about simplicity and fundamentals. What if I could derive everything from the Golden Ratio? I think I found El Naschie's most critical flaw. He wasn't that far off. "Professional researchers" need to stop being so critical of people who don't have proper credentials. As a PhD Particle Physicist myself, I can honestly make that observation.

        Have Fun!

        Have Fun!

        A block time argument does not eliminate time. It only places time in the same role within a static 4-d spacetime. Yet what we observe is the evolution of a spatial surface and its data in that block time.

        The block universe and other ideas are sort of interpretations of relativity theory. They are similar in some ways to interpretations in quantum mechanics. In other words they are superfluous.

        Cheers LC