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

Light has motion (recorded at about 983,571,056 feet-per-second) and for the brief 100ths of a second, the matter of the film would be affected by a collision with the light. If a photograph was taken in a perfect balance of past and future, you'd have unexposed film.
Of course, if you had some sort of device that didn't require light to take a picture, it might be different, but there'd still have to be some sort of medium that involved some motion.

"...each observer has his own set of 'nows,' and none of these various systems of layers can claim the prerogative of representing the objective lapse of time." - Kurt Gödel

I think time doesn't exist outside of a concept.
Even when astral traveling to the "past" you could just be visiting your own concept applied to the world. Or maybe a world created from memory.

i dont really understand. Are you saying that there isnt an external world in which time exists?

This post has been edited by gift22: Oct 16 2007, 08:30 AM

Time is irrelevant. Its a man made creation meant to understand the motion of greater bodies in our solar system and help us measure changes. Time is motion but different forms of matter move at different speeds. The more heat applied to a given substance the faster the atomic particals move. Less temp produces the opposite affect. Almost like each element has its own "time zone". Water is the easiest to consider - cold enough its ice, a solid. Warm it to just the right temp its liquid. Heat it to boiling it starts to become a gas. If you had enough water and enough heat (I think like 5000 K) you could produce water as a plasma, or (nearly) pure energy.

All elements decay as well. So they are not simply in motion but they are aging. Now the confusing part - aging isn't about the passage of time, or the reverse affect. Aging is the changing of one element into another. Elements decay by loosing protons and electrons - thus gradually becoming different substances. But time still only measures the amount of change within a given period. In one billionth of a second, a nano-second there is change. Very small, unperceptible change, but it happens.

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

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

If I understand your model correctly time can never reach 0. There is no static point in time. Perhaps there is a time in frame in which all matter that we know of would not move say a giga-second or 10x10^100th of one second. An alagory to consider is Pi, commonly just rounded 3.14 if you actually solve Pi you find that it is a never ending number.

Time travel is really the idea of seeing matter the way it was before a given time period. IN other words letterally reverting the molecular structure of a given chunk of matter to the way it was in the past. Unless one were to some how find a way to enter an alternate universe that allowed them to travel reallity, all of it not just a chunk of it, its impossible to litterally go back in time, except on a small scale. For example a version of feesible time travel would be to revert the matter of a mummy to see what they really looked like. Theoretically even reviving them so that they could give us an inisght into history. So time travel really = matter conversion. And that takes energy. If you had the power of the sun, even on a small scale then you could begin to revert matter to prior conditions.

But back to the topic at hand I don't know what you know about linear mathematics but think of a graph. Unless an equation of a line corresponds to 0 (as in Y or X = 0) the line can never reach it. The same is true for time and finding the exact moment at which all matter is static. It is actually an interesting notion and again it is theoretically possible that there is some time frame in which all matter is static and the universe is for an extremely small amount of time totally still. But it would only be a very small amount of time.

Are you saying that there isnt an external world in which time exists?

Hooooo, if I knew that, I'd be researching cryogenics or buying lottery tickets. I think we're all too blinded by our beliefs of what is and what isn't , that it's nearly impossible to tell what the underlying reality is.

This post has been edited by SeekerVI: Oct 16 2007, 05:59 PM

i still dont understand whats your opinion on this thoery do you think that this thoery is still relevant, If you scrap
it applying it too scientific evidence

ok so time is irrelevant, it helps in modern society but its a man made idea. We live in a world
in which thing move alterntley with different speeds all the time. We have no real perception of time beyond what we know
but we all can percieve what we want if it cant be dragged down by evidence. I have scraped it being a theory to back up things in reality.
it is a thoery which rests on opinion it is a start of a spider diagram for anyone to contrubte. i am saying that i think outcome of past
and present at an equal would come to this opinionated outcome. I am extremley intreseted in other theoretical points of view.

well one of the main idea about time that it has no ending . but does it have a begining ?

in theoretecal math the time line has a begining which is a spescefic point of an event to infinety.

if it has no begining and no ending it means it is controled by a higher pawer .

1_to make us remember and look back in time and learn from our mistakes .

2_also to make us grow old and to limit our control in life. and shift the control to the second ganeration.(i mean the fate of earth)

I am not sure I understand the theory. Is it that on perfect balance there is no time? Or only that time = motion, with no motion there is no time?

Currently there is the concept of 3 dimensional time or 6 time space dimensions. This is beyond my capability to fully grasp, but here is how I understand it.

3 spatial dimensions (height, width, depth) + time = the forth dimension = motion = as we normally perceive the world.

In the second time space dimension adds that everything attempts all its possibilities.

The third space-time dimension is the playing out of those possibilities.

I truly do not totally get this because it is not that everything tries everything, just that it tries everything that it was doing.

For example, I throw a pie. And we capture a point in time that the pie is going through the air.

Now, there are many possibilities for what can happen to the pie, it can break up, it can hit something, it can stop moving…

Now each of those concepts are then played out, but we only perceive the pie going through the air in it most “pie going through the air-ness” meaning whatever concept is most apt at the next point in time and so on and so on.

Peter Carroll describes this in a different way in psybermagick…{I just thought to go to his website, as this is why he has moved out of magickal theory for a while, he recently just returned in half a way. But his website is beyond me at this time, or my paxxness can not understand it at this particular point in time}

Anyway based on my understanding “this” is the point where magick or our force of will can affect things. We can force the suchness of something to choose a different path to express its suchness.

Thus with the pie crossing the room, if I had sufficient will and focus, I force it to explode by making “pie going through the air-ness” = “pie exploding-ness”.

The second matrix movie played this out incredibly well in the scene with the architect. The monitors showed Neo in all the possible Neo-nesses. That was truly a great series (taken as a whole I like the second one best, individually the first is the most fun).

Not sure if I added anything, but I did not understand it, so I went off on a rant (IMG:style_emoticons/default/oops.gif)

yeah sorry its not that clear, i havent really studied well in the area. Thank you for the post because becuz it gave me more in an area
i am extremely intrested in. Yes In my diagram time=motion and at a a point where past and present are equal it cuts of into a different set of laws and state. Which i think
is no motion with no past or present (as our minds wouldnt be functioning). but a future. But im not really sure if its impossible to get an equal balance i dont really know.
Can anybody recommend give me any good reads for this kind of thing?

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.

its impossible to litterally go back in time, except on a small scale.

"The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, / Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit / Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, / Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it."