Personal Theory Of Time Options

right heres a diagram of time. Time=Motion



0) no time( past,no present, but future)

(-1) past------------------^----------------- present (+1) (future=possibilty for anything)

This is a personal theory or diagram which relates to reality. A camera takes a picture at about hundreth of a second. in this moment
no motion occurs. past and present act on each other with no magnitude. so this diagram or theory relates to reality but could there a dimension in which this applys for eternity.
any thoughts comments.

This post has been edited by gift22: Oct 15 2007, 12:06 PM

I think this is where current (or recent) modern theorists agree with your idea. These theories are trying to work out aspects from results captured in particle accelerators. Having partials collide with a target at speeds approaching the speed of light. They then only see the aftermath of the collision, as currently we can not see the partials usually spoken of.

So imagine something is shot through a cannon, and then another cannon, then another cannon each time so it is perfectly timed not to slow down. This item then collides with (depending what information is trying to be captured) a film of some material.

The scientist are able to observe the effects on the film, but not the particle.

The reasons for the need to change time to more then one dimension is because it had been noted that particles maneuvered through items at some point, giving thought to some level of intelligence. It was later observed with more testing that in reality the particles went through all the possible options (as opposed to maneuvering) before traversing the traps. Yet there was no slow down or energy expended…yet there where collisions in the trap.

So the theory of multiple dimensions of time came into being with some proof. String theory and now M-theory, are theories that try and combine Newtonian physics (the physics of billiard balls and cannons or medium stuff) with relativity (the physics of colossal astral bodies) , with quantum physics (the physics of really tiny stuff).

It is not that they are taking parts of each theory and mixing it together, they are creating new paths.

The difficult thing to get past is the politics of current theory, but it makes sense. Lets say you and about 5 thousand people around the world who study cutting edge physics jump onto one theory. This is represented by the professor you study under. If that theory is the working theory for the next 50 years, you have a very cool job, doing what you love, and getting the respect of others as you advance this theory into applied science.

If however a theory comes around just as you leave grad school, and gains steam about 5~10 years later. You go from being cream of the crop scientist to overpaid has been within 15 years out of grad school. So the Vetting of scientific theory has gotten much more cut throat. So much so that the co-creator of one theory was ridiculed for 10 years, until the working theory of the time proved not to work, and thus added to it the core of the ridiculed theory (in essence becoming the ridiculed theory).

The thing now is it is perfectly plausible for a workable theory (something that can be used in applied science, or make a product using those principles) to be dead in 10~20 years. So the use of temporary theories has gone from 50-100 years from publication, to 5-30. This means that as physicist on the cutting edge, if you catch a theorist professor just as he/she becomes known, you probably have a job in that field for only 0-18 years. And that is if you jumped on a good band wagon.

It is much better to jump into applied science (the not so cutting edge) and use the knowledge out there to solve real world issues, but then you are not the rockstar, or even the roadie. You are just the guy who adds songs to the playlists at the radio station.

But back to the point. You are contemplating some very cool ground, and I think you are pretty much on it. At least from the armchair scientific journal reader point of view.