# Thread: time theory

1. Originally Posted by INTP
making theories better about that is kinda impossible because there is so basicly no info about it. are you sure your not an istp?
why do you ask that like it's an insult to me? like ISTPs can't do physics?

Don't you (or we, cuz i dont care) ISTPs ever get pissed off about seeing this kind of question? It baffles me.... ... better yet, maybe you're trying to insult ISTPs by calling me one of them?

why do people ask these kinds of questions?

Are you an ESTJ because you want turn the tables to get private, personal and debate the non relevant issues? :P You certainly seemed to get as defensive as one! or wait, maybe I'm getting defensive and that makes me ESTJ!?? Because that kind of thing is VERY important with your theory of time, right?

I really need to stop trying to help people on this board like you, it's like trying to share with fucking children. have fun with your "basicly no info" theories better, because it's not like an adequate understanding of what time is as an abstract concept is relevant, or anything

2. Originally Posted by bananatrombones
The measuring stick is fixed; the fixedness is the problem

The best insult I ever heard:

"He's so dense, light bends around him".

An interesting case in point: usually the language is to blame.
Yes. The language is to blame. The measure is like a boxing match

Light bends around dense things. When I lived in the Black Forest I often wondered how dark the forest is.
It is because it is dense. It is therefore it is called the Black Forest.

3. I am by no means an expert on this, but there is a "Many Worlds" interpretation of Quantum Mechanics that is similar to what you are thinking.

I believe what the interpretation is as follows:

Whenever a "measurement" is made, every possible eigenvalue of the measurement actually occurs in new "branches" of reality. The proportions of the branches that have a particular eigenvalues are determined by the probabilities of getting those eigenvalues.

The reason that we only experience one particular reality is because, we are ourselves part of the quantum mechanical system, and therefore must experience only the eigenvalues of the whole system, which is a perception of one reality.

You can google "Many Worlds Interpretation" and see what you get.

4. Originally Posted by ygolo
I am by no means an expert on this, but there is a "Many Worlds" interpretation of Quantum Mechanics that is similar to what you are thinking.

I believe what the interpretation is as follows:

Whenever a "measurement" is made, every possible eigenvalue of the measurement actually occurs in new "branches" of reality. The proportions of the branches that have a particular eigenvalues are determined by the probabilities of getting those eigenvalues.

The reason that we only experience one particular reality is because, we are ourselves part of the quantum mechanical system, and therefore must experience only the eigenvalues of the whole system, which is a perception of one reality.

You can google "Many Worlds Interpretation" and see what you get.
Whatever can happen, does happen.

It's an acceptable view, though may not quiet the minds of those who seek meaning in their existence. If you tell people they exist simply because it is a possible quantum state of the universe and thus, it occurs, how much safety and satisfaction can they take from that? This state merely seems special and unique because we cannot experience the other states outside of an equation.

5. Here,
BDMNQR Essays: Math & Science (space/time definitions)
BDMNQR Essays: Math & Science (third continuum)
I discuss my take on space and time, and add a third continuum called "chance" (I believe that things in threes is a fundamental quality of the universe).

I've recently been thinking more on this, and trying to come up with even more fundamental definitions.

I would say that strings are the fundamental fabric of space-time, and any given point in time is a collection of string-vibrations. Some strings are just empty space-time. Some are gravitational fields, some are matter, and some are energy. They are all arranged a particular way at any given time, measured by relative location in the medium called "space".

The entire "matrix" is a set of all possible arrangements of string patterns, yet only certain arrangements are "actualized". "Events" are changes in matter and energy (either changing form, or changing location in relative to other events). Space, time and chance are simply the continuums in which events are located relative to one another. This can be space, time or chance (which would be counterfactual events, or "alternate reality", which are simply the possible events not actualized).

The way to understand this, is to imagine the event of the beginning of the universe (supposedly expanded out from a single point). Now, the string pattern begins changing, and one pattern leads to another in a causative chain. First, matter is compact; then it has moved further apart. There are three coordinates in which it moves, and a different arrangement of strings can be found.
So there are actually four paths connecting to different string arrangements. One is causative, and you can only experience events in a chain once. The other three consist of all the displaced chains of causation, where matter and energy has taken other shapes in other events, yet these chains can be accessed from one another. I say chains and not events, because you cannot travel between simultaneous events, because that is faster than light, and even simulteaneity is relative! So instead, you can access another event that stems from the event you observed from a distance. Hence, a different "chain". So each piece of matter you look at in space is apart of another chain of events (its creation, changes made to it, things done with it, etc), displaced by whatever "distance' you measure, from the chain of events you are apart of.
Each collective pattern arrangement is actualized when all the chains of events leads to that particular pattern. (You scratch your head, as the object you are looking at reflects a flash of light from outside, and everything else occurring at that time).

So the continuum along which the chains progress becomes causative, and called "time", and the continuum (with its three coordinates) in which all the different chains are simultaneously displaced is called "space", and we have freedom to move in any direction. Chance would be the hypothetical continuum connecting to the un-actualized arrangements.
Like if I wear a red shirt, that is one pattern of strings actualized at the same time as every other event occurring in the universe. But a parallel timeline where I wore a blue shirt instead could be thought of as possible, and even "existing" in some hypothetical way, but it is simply not actualized. (Putting on a blue shirt after the red one doesn't count as actualizing, because then in that time frame, everything else in the universe has progressed (changed) from what it was at the time of the initial event, so it would be a yet different arrangement).

You can see this stuff in theoretical physics' books, but I have never seen any of them speak of this continuum in which parallel timelines exist, as a third continuum. It's not time, as there is no causal chain between parallel [counterfactual] events. It's not space (e.g. hyperspace), as space only contains actualized (tangible, visible) events that can be measured in distance relative to each other (even if not visible from lower spaces).

Time and space are frequently said to be interchangeable, and I would say chance is interchangeable with them. All they are is three different methods of arriving to different potential universal collections of states of matter and energy. One of them you have free movement in, another you are involuntarily "dragged" along, and the other you have no known access to at all.
It's said that if you move at the speed of light, then that direction of space then becomes like time. (I'm not sure if time then becomes like space, since when you move at the speed of light in any one direction, you are still in the others. Within a black hole, space and time are said to switch like that as well, with some sort of freer movement in time, but then you don't have much space or time left, as you are pulled into the singularity and torn apart by the tidal forces).

6. Originally Posted by INTP
i came up with theory like this about time:

new time dimension is born in every smallest movement possible(quantum or smaller what ever is possible). so next time dimension is allways everything the same, but with one single movement differently, this causes an illusion of time being continous because we cant measure small movements like this.
You mean something like this:

Note: That which is divided into infinitely small intervals, by definition, is continuous.

Kind of like the same reasoning behind 0.9999...9 = 1

measured radiation(light? eny? something unknown?) combines these different time dimensions into one current time(as in how current time seems to perceiver, that could be human sensing or machine measuring) by moving thru these time dimensions to perceiver. these time dimensions are invisible to perceiver because you cant measure these small time stops and what you can measure is only masses of these time dimensions and that mass of time dimensions is how you perceive time.
So energy is glue that makes (your infinitely small) time intervals cohesive? Is that what you're saying? Without time, there is no energy. How can energy glue time together? I'm really confused on this part.

when there is big mass of something, there is allso more gravitation and gravitation is effecting these time stops by effecting to light particles, therefore slowing down the perceived time by slowing down the measured radiation. it could be that the actual time is not slowing time, but only the perceived time is, this is why it seems that time slows down when observing something near big objects(for example sun).
Space is a mattress. We already had that one figured out. Points for realizing it on your own though!

Your theory sounds interesting on some levels, but I'm not quite sure that it's completely novel. Maybe explain the whole time/energy relationship a bit further? How does time manifest in a vacuum? I don't know an exceptional amount about this stuff myself; just a bit from reading Hawking and some wiki articles, so feel free to enlighten me wichyo theory

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•