I'm not totally convinced that quantum waves violate time symmetry. Time symmetry is not saying that a system when viewed in forward time is identical to that same system viewed with time in reverse. Time symmetry suggests that the mathematical laws that govern both systems is the same. The question is whether a quantum system when viewed backward in time obeys the same quantum mechanics. Not that it is identical to its forward time counterpart.
It really is as Spinoza says, that the rational man sees things not as then, now and future; instead, the free man sees things from the aspect of eternity. If only more people could meet Spinoza and his ideas, I believe the world would be a much better place. Rest in eternity Benedictus.
The issue is not time, it is the arrow of time. The direction of time's arrow is the breaking of the symmetry of the 'potential' of the boundary condition. Time reversal? Once information is created, no process is reversable.
@@johnjhonson-j3u Ooooh, that's an impressive notion.😮 It made my little mind twirl - as in, I got a little dizzy while pondering it. But what is the point of consideration, when we can never encounter, nor prove, such a concept, beyond the theoretical?
Which takes me to what I’ve kind of been leading up to this whole time. The one limiting factor in all of this is your consciousness. That is the reason there exists any mystery at all. There is no reason for you to be within your consciousness solely to experience mathematical functions playing out. You shouldn’t exist at all, those things should just happen. Our consciousness is not an illusion, our free will is not an illusion. We are, for whatever reason, being told a story by God. I’ll address this conclusion further later. You, your inner self beyond your worldly memory, your will, separate from God’s, it exists without the need of the universe we exist in. God is taking our blank slate consciousness, our soul, and dividing it up and giving it experience by dragging it through an incredibly complex 5+ dimensional continuum. They are choosing our angle through time, or rather how every wave collapses, not through intense computation and prediction of the future, but more like placing your pen down and solving a maze on paper, but letting you lead the way from within the labyrinth, so to speak. Their will takes priority but they don’t wish to intervene with our will. Each one of us bears the segregated will and consciousness of a sort of “child” of God, which interfaces through our brain top down and guides the neurons via the shrouded higher dimensional principles of reality that I will show further likely exists. But in a sense, you are me, I am my dog, we are all one. Everything alive with apparent consciousness is so because they evolved the mechanism to receive this consciousness from our cosmos, and they evolved such because God created this entire realm to be experienced by a consciousness.
I think the universe is both our medium for physicality and a tool to distribute consciousness within that medium, making the cosmos the source of the consciousness we are receiving or the interface of agency and experience, interconnected with itself in a way not limited by the speed of light through the fourth dimension by way of black holes, which don’t have to become paradoxical singularities, and dont have to paradoxically delete information as Hawking proposed. Energy can be conserved while exchanging information as information is not energy it is how the energy is arranged. Therefore like before the information that comes out is not random. So just like the photon, the black holes must open up into a higher dimension in order to make any sense. Remember, when we try to describe the behavior of a moment of our universe with a subjective axis of space transformed into time, that is, when we cut out a the dimension of time from our universe, without knowing the inception state the entire 3D moment we inevitably end up with general equations that predict some of parts of reality, and true unpredictability everywhere else. This is a macro transformation of a moment in a universe that operated over time in 3 spatial dimensions until just now, so the randomness wouldn’t be uniform, and the universe would have it on the macro scale or really make sense at all (though there would still certainly be patterns), but, on a fundamental transformation, starting from the beginning of time, all of the randomness would happen on only the smallest level. and the determinable patterns familiar to our dimensionality that emerged from that would start right above that incomprehensible layer, and become more and more concrete and understandable the higher they were abstracted.
@@ruffadamsthegreat.2662 I think the universe is both our medium for physicality and a tool to distribute consciousness within that medium, making the cosmos the source of the consciousness we are receiving or the interface of agency and experience, interconnected with itself in a way not limited by the speed of light through the fourth dimension by way of black holes, which don’t have to become paradoxical singularities, and dont have to paradoxically delete information as Hawking proposed. Energy can be conserved while exchanging information as information is not energy it is how the energy is arranged. Therefore like before the information that comes out is not random. So just like the photon, the black holes must open up into a higher dimension in order to make any sense. Remember, when we try to describe the behavior of a moment of our universe with a subjective axis of space transformed into time, that is, when we cut out a the dimension of time from our universe, without knowing the inception state the entire 3D moment we inevitably end up with general equations that predict some of parts of reality, and true unpredictability everywhere else. This is a macro transformation of a moment in a universe that operated over time in 3 spatial dimensions until just now, so the randomness wouldn’t be uniform, and the universe would have it on the macro scale and wouldn’t make much sense at all (though there would still certainly be patterns), but, on a fundamental transformation, starting from the beginning of time, all of the randomness would happen on only the smallest level. and the determinable patterns familiar to our dimensionality that emerged from that would start right above that incomprehensible layer, and become more and more concrete and understandable the higher they were abstracted. This is exactly what we see and exactly why we’ve been stuck for so long. It is at the very least a higher dimensional issue. String theorists understand this but they are quite dogmatic in their philosophy and in how they attempt to branch out of what they know, and so they end up with a theories as untestable as mine, yet that make utterly no sense. When science stops working you must go back to philosophy. It seems we’ve abandoned that.
The reason why within the universe, we have the arrow of time is because the universe temperature is hotter than the temperature outside the universe. The expansion rate is proportional to the difference between the inside temperature and outside temperature of the universe. This can be calculated. Once inside and outside reach same temperature, expansion rate stops and we are at thermal equilibrium. At thermal equilibrium, the arrow of time is ambiguous. Everywhere you look the movement are statistically the same.
There is no "outside the universe", and the exponential expansion of the universe is not related to thermodynamics, but rather "dark energy", aka "the cosmological constant". You are correct, however, in stating that the universe is cooling down, and that at some far-future stage it is expected to reach thermal equilibrium. You are also correct in that this process can be linked to the arrow of time, however, this is more correctly related to the rise of _entropy,_ which, whilst being closely correlated to equilibration, isn't quite the same thing. And finally, yes, it's unclear whether or not time would continue once there is no longer any change, or any relative observers (once every elementary particle has removed itself from being able to interact with any other particle) left in the universe.
@@simesaid the universe we all refer to is the observable universe. That's a finite. There is outside the observable universe which we can "see" by measuring gravitational waves. So there is an outside, and the temperature measured by understanding gravitational that is outside our observable aka using EM to see, we can determine temperature difference. It is one reason why when the inside is so hot, the expansion rate is so fast. Gravitational waves will allow us to measure outside temperature, beyond EM observation.
@ inside universe is defined by what we can observe using electromagnetic radiation or more specifically microwave. Outside can be observed using gravitational waves which go beyond EM. We can then figure out temperature difference between outside and inside universe. This will explain why when universe was so hot, expansion rate was so super fast because outside temperature was/is very cold.
6:30 When entropy has reversed when the juice becones warmer again. This either assumes its state was more chaotic before. Or it assumes gaining energy is the reverse of the second law of thermo dynamics. Because heat always descends into a neutral lower state. But both cannot be true at the same time. When a chaotic distribution of particles does not imply any temperature (cold does not predict the exact distribution: nor does it become more chaotic when getting warmer: only the temperature rises which also changed the distribution of particles), so the state the particles are in, does not predict what their entropy is. When it could either be just the temperature (los of energy), or the state of distribution they are in compared to each other. So, when their interaction itself leads to a higher temperature and also different distribution (what is chaotic? compared to what), then it does not necessarily mean this was only due to the average temperature of the environment, which was higher/ but also due to their own predicted interaction with each other, which would always lead to a higher average temperature. Which could have approached that of a higher temperature in the environment. But not exactly. So in the end neither the distribution is relevant for entropy (when an equilibrium means its normal state, this is not chaotic), nor does any temperature state predict in what state of entropy it is. Because the two (under different reversible conditions) have nothing to do with each other. Its equilibrium state could have a higher temperature than the original/ while it has not lost any order in the distribution. Because that was invariant. There would be more or less water between the orange particles. Is that order or chaos? One cannot tell. So there is no reversal in the entropy, when you mean temperature. Because its equilibrium state would always consist of a higher and not lower temperature. It did not lose anything/ nor has it become more chaotic. Because that is not the equilibrium state. It depends on what you want to compare with what. But one cannot depart from what is central logic. So the frase (property) entropy is used within willful random parameters, which do not necessarily compare within the same assumed order. The same actually goes for time.
I'm not sure I completely followed your argument, and the few-dozen typos certainly didn't help, but I think I agree with your central point. While temperature _is_ generally linked to entropy (as heat dissipates in the universe, entropy rises. Freezing water into ice lowers the entropy within that system etc.), a system's entropy does not necessarily follow from its change of temperature. For a simple example, entropy was at its maximum value just after the Big Bang, when the universe's temperature was also at its maximum value, and entropy will again reach its maximum value in the far future - once the universe reaches its lowest possible temperature.
Click on the link in the video. This will open a new tab (or a new window). Click on the black area that should display the video and it will start playing. This is how it works on Windows.
@@axle.student No, I am not a paying member. I'm not a member at all. The video above was offered to me by the AI. Why I can go further and you can't, I don't know. The AI knows that.
From a fixed point in space, such as Earth, there is no universal North or South. But, in space itself, there is. And if a cold glass of juice can aquire heat from the environment, then it can also aquire cold from the environment. Also, a lukewarm cup of coffee can also aquire heat from the environment and become hot. (I'm thinking the Sahara and Iceland, wherein beverages absolutely aquire heat and cold from those environments.) In an attempt to simplify his explanation for the layperson, such as myself, did he just mispeak? Also, I think that I read someplace that liquids exposed to the vacuum of space will boil - even the blood in our bodies will do so. I may be wrong in my recall of this point though.
I think something in the universe is acting against entropy or neither the universe or life would exist. Evolution contradicts entropy as do we, even just to make a pot of hot coffee. I note you think for yourself. keep doing that but try to get along with those who can't or wont. This is just my advice.
@WILLIAMMALO-kv5gz Do you know me?? Your counsel is tailor-made for me!😅 Thank you! My great-aunt just recently said to me, that I "need to learn to accept that, people don't think what you think, nor believe as you believe. And that it's okay." Again, Thank you. (I've taken a screenshot of your reply to show her.)
I think time is best described as causality. Einstein sensed causality as being more fundemental than he is known for. In fact C in e=mc2 never meant the ‘speed of light’ to him, it always meant causality. Furthermore there are phases to causality, Field Causality is how he interpreted Gravity. Ie wave like. Like the surface of pond. So to Einstein the 3 spatial dimensions had the additional 1 dimension, not temporal (of time) but Causal. This is what his differential field equations kept describing to him and why he became obsessed with causality. They showed the phase transformation. The arrow.
Yes, he was incorrect. It's not relative, it's cause and effect. An interaction occurs, and then another. The whole problem we have is that the entire system is interconnected, seemingly infinite causes simultaneously. One giant newtons cradle without borders. The experiments we used to verify time dilation only prove that alpha radiation release is not fundamental in its tick rate and can be altered by external variables. Atomic clocks are no good for space travel without the relativistic corrections. We asked the wrong questions. Saw the answers we were looking for and ignored the reality. We only play with probability and chance because we have attributed light and energy to particles we can't actually find. The use of inference over evidence has led to centuries' worth of unproven assumptions built upon one another. The foundations require rebuilding. Idealistic mathematical abstractions without grounding in reality have no place in serious physics. Gut the whole thing and restart. There are logical errors nestled in the foundations.
What about the arrow of time because of dissipative chaos als nobel-prize winning Chemist Ilya Prigogine explained it? I think this is a much deeper insight than the classical "thermodynamic arrow" .
I can show I have free will by offering a simple experiment of flipping a sound coin. I can always guess heads. Or always tails. I can always pick the last result, or the opposite of the last result. I can do 10 of heads followed by 10 of tails. I can use a random number generator to choose such that even I don't know what the next choice will be. And I can mix this up in any way possible. To suggest all the possible options are predetermined is silly. I clearly am choosing voluntarily, without an outside force choosing and then causing me to choose the same, which is the only valid meaning of having no free will.
How about time symmetry in a zero energy universe Energy conservation no doubt holds good if we begin with a zero energy universe Zero energy universe can lead to a multiverse
Regarding entropy, that nothing gets warmer or colder on uts own, what about life? Dont living things get warmer on their own? Ice cubes in refridgerators get colder because humans enabled that to happen. It seems to me that life is evidence that there is at least one example of entropy going in the opposite direction.
The gravitational lensing effect does not mean that light is bent by gravity. There are always atoms of gas in space. The density of gas atoms increases with the mass of the object and with the proximity to the object. The higher the density of gas atoms, the slower the speed of light. Light bends in the direction of slower speed. That is to say, if there is a difference in the density of atoms in a gas, light will bend in the direction of the higher density.
Professor Francis Yu - lecture "Einstein's General Theory Belong to the Realm of Science? By Francis TS Yu Narrated by Edward Yu". Plus "Dr. Ed Dowdye: Solar Gravitation and Solar Plasma Wave Propagation Interaction" and "Bending of Light Near a Star and Gravitational Red/Blue Shift: Alternative Explanation Based on Refraction of Light"
@@ZIGGZIGGY-ld3lj. That is called refraction/diffraction. I have been wondering too, how they are all willing to ignore the well understood refraction/diffraction, and start calling it, gravitational lensing, and becoming perplexed with it just because they've changed the name.
Great stuff. Im Not ready to explain but I can prove we have freedom of choice because the universe itself exhibits the same feature. I have other ideas but they are not ready to share.
Consider this idea. And please bear with me I'm taking a (for me) deep dive here. Rather than a Big Bang consider the universe as a resonance point within an infinite energy field. An energy field defined by random quantum potential. There is no such thing as Time to this field. Got that concept? Okay, then is it possible that the Planck length, an initial incremental aspect to energy we call light, represents an island of stability in this sea of infinite potential? In effect the big bang isn't so much a "Big Bang" explosion as it is an emergent point of resonance. A standing wave that arises from the random quantum collisions, a stabilized standing wave. An island of stability. Still with me? In that moment when the island emerges from that infinite quantum field the resonance goes scalar and from this Time emerges. All structure - scalar harmonic resonances - is built on a structural scaffold erected by unfolding Time. That scaffolding forms the basis of all we see. It forms the basis of existence. To go with a Hermetic phrase, it is the All. And the whole of it is resting on that island of stability - the initial resonance point in that infinite field. Follow me? To wax with a religious phrase let there be light, indeed. Resonance and harmonics. Here's where it gets, to me, really interesting. Topologically speaking. The recent Cosmological findings of a "Big Ring," a cosmically sized structure that's perplexing scientists, kind'a alters the way one thinks about everything we see, doesn't it? But the idea of resonance may be the key. Makes it more Hermetic in perspective. Intriguing discoveries like this one, the Big Ring, kind'a sort'a offers a proof, or at least possible credence, to the possibility that as above, so below and as below, so above. It's all a structure founded on resonance and harmonics. I don't have the math to formalize the concept but is this a nutty idea or not? To spring further off this presumption, The Big Ring’s shape, which scientists are saying on a cosmic scale appears to be cork-screw, could be a lower-dimensional projection of a higher-dimensional resonant wave. Imagine this 3D corkscrew form being just a “shadow” or manifestation of a 4D or 5D resonant structure. If the universe’s fabric allows for such resonant projections, these structures may appear to us as anomalous shapes, hinting at the presence of higher-dimensional oscillations. Such a projection could also mean that certain regions of the universe are more sensitive to these resonant effects, which in turn shapes matter distribution in ways that seem impossible under a standard 3D or isotropic model. This "big ring" could represent a resonant standing wave. It could be that resonant structures are indeed fundamental in shaping the universe. The Big Ring might be the first direct observation of a resonant structure on a cosmic scale that defies current explanations. From the above it comes to this. The Hermetic principle of as above, so below, reveals that yes, indeed, the Universe might just be a resonant point in an infinite field of potential energy. All that arises is a harmonic of that point. And all of our science, while valid in its Newtonian fashion, gets flipped on its head by the idea. Okay....it's official. I don't know what I'm talking about.
The time construct is a convenient and useful tool, but like all human constructs it is not real. Aside note: I was still in my mother's womb when Einstein died. Einstein a great man and a good man.
Can a living being who can perceive time actually survive a 2 planets/ journey where gravity is so different that they can experience the theoritical time travel if we r able to travel close to speed of light etc. I m not saying years of time difference but 20-25 day difference etc. On some planet time travels fast due to low gravity than earth and if Han travel there then will our lifespan be any different? Experience of it at least.
What is my Waters students? Students shared "i" Am will say, LORD flows 1 way! From thy Mouth shared "i" Am come forth! Shared thy Feet resting upon sustained! Given ABLE to distribute thy Living Waters throughout the BRANCHES! EVEN DEAD BRANCHES before to be trampled underfoot became a Living BRANCHES! Now shared "i" Am BRANCHES.
Not wrong. There is no telos in science, it's only the mathematical form of the efficient cause. Of course when you measure or observe something material, the observer gives it an end. It's what happens with the quantum cannon, the movement is not real until observed for that reason. The man that dies is also not real until you accept he is man with an end which is death. But in physics, you could only describe that man as something that grows older, you would not know when the end is until you observe it. It's probably why the guy went into philosophy, it's what deals with the telos and the more general forms that are not quantifiable or material.
I also think Einstein is wrong given how difficult it is to reconcile the two theories some 50 years later and the superior predictive power of quantum electrodynamics. I should clarify, I don't believe in the continuity of time as these curves, but do think of things like the quantization of it akin to loop quantum gravity . DIscrete math is underlying reality
Einstein got a lot of things wrong. Sure the maths part works but maths has its limitations. The speed of light cannot be a constant in an ever changing universe. The colour of distant objects changes depending upon whether they are moving toward or away from us thus proving that the speed of light is determined by its colour or wavelength. It is possible to travel faster than the speed of light. Light emitted from an object travels through the universe at twice the speed of light relative to the light emitted from the opposite side of the object. Even light can exceed the speed of light but in doing so it would change its colour or frequency and thus appear to be something else or simply vanish.
Time is a compact dimension, one single Planck second. This is WHY there are limits. Limit theorem. Limits of energy, Lambda and event horizon. The gradient from minima to maxima, Lambda to event horizon, is gravity. Geometric flows are real. Limit theorem also dictates that the closure is between the limits, that the limits connect. In at event horizon, out in deep void. Neutron decay cosmology. A homeostatic universe maintained by the reciprocal processes of electron capture at event horizons and free neutron decay in deep voids. Gravity gathers mass to event horizons. All matter is made neutrons at event horizons because of electron capture. The Infalling, at c , neutrons drop off their kinetic energy as mass for the event horizon. The neutron information/identity takes an EinsteinRosen bridge from highest energy pressure conditions (event horizon) to lowest energy density point of space where the quantum basement is lowest and easiest to penetrate (void) Free neutron out in a deep void soon decays into amorphous monatomic hydrogen, proton electron soup, Dark matter. The expansion from neutron 0.6fm³ to 1m³ of amorphous hydrogen gas (in a deep void) is a volume increase of around 10⁴⁵. Expansion. Dark energy. In time this amorphous hydrogen stabilizes and coalesces first into monatomic hydrogen, large clouds of which are found around galaxies, and then into H2 and everything else. Continually falling down the gravity hill towards an event horizon. Loop. Neutron decay cosmology. Inevitable because geometry requires it. 🖖✨️
Time does not exist. Motion exists. Time is not motion. The fourth dimension is not time..The fourth dimension is motion. And what would cause time if there was any? If there was any time it would be caused by motion as energy expression. Einstein was severely bipolar because though he claimed time is man made he made sure that time was a determinant in his math. He also claimed that the universe is mathematical while it is not. That indicates that Einstein perceived the universe as a clock.
Ditto with Quantum Gravity. Deterministic and Irreversible. A curvature of Space Time or a Force. Then the implications for Electro Magnetism. Shame this thought provoking lecture is so short obviously the Facebook video continuation is oversubscribed. Has stalled. Plz put on TH-cam with clearer images of the fiagram. 😊
Mercury's perihelion shift could not be predicted accurately in Newtonian mechanics because the object was treated as a point. However, the reason why the calculation results of Mercury's perihelion shift did not agree with Newtonian mechanics is that the Sun itself actually rotates on its own axis and also makes a small orbit. If we take into account the drag caused by these factors, we should be able to accurately calculate Mercury's perihelion shift even in Newtonian mechanics. Einstein, with his bogus theory of general relativity, matched the calculated result of Mercury's perihelion shift with the actual measured value, without considering the sun's own rotation and orbit.
I don't understand now Einstein "Predicted" with "Incredibly Accuracy" the known for century Mercury Precession? By primary school arithmetic, the sum of two Negative Figures must be negative as (-2) + (-2) = -4. How is possible the two slowing down effects predicted by Einstein - (Time slow down near strong gravity (of the Sun) and (For accelerated body (Mercury) the time must slow down). But... Precession is a positive figure!
Einstein said that time is a persistent illusion. It is. If this guy thinks that time is an essential feature of reality he is a clueless crackpot trying to make a name from bashing those whose shoulders he is unfit upon which to stand! ;) "The Laws of Nature are not rules controlling the metamorphosis of what is, into what will be (ie; Karma). They are descriptions of patterns that exist, all at once... " - Genius; the Life and Science of Richard Feynman All 'eternity' at once; Here! Now!!
Cleary there is no Top down or botton Up! Cause the Botton goes Benoit plank and the 🔝 🔝 goes infinite and repeat over eons that our silly telescopes can'T detect!
This should standard in science videos that those people who watch it should make sure that they watch stuff from a person with proper credibility or should they have enough knowledge beforehand to understand what they are listening to
Errors in special relativity: According to relativity, They say that an object shrinks in length as its velocity increases, Then, for example, if a disk of radius 1m is rotated at the limit speed at which it is not destroyed by centrifugal force, What is the circumference of the disk? What would Einstein say to the above question? In my opinion, in this situation, the special theory of relativity is broken. It is inconceivable that the disk would contract in the direction of rotation.
The best way of understanding time is not as a dimension but as a property of space. Space is expanding and the rate of expansion defines time which is a property of space. Light is a wave in the medium of space which is approximately constant because the tension in the medium is approximately constant. The speed of light defines time as a property of space. In Einstein’s lecture in 1920 to the University of Leiden titled Ether and relativity he showed that space must be a medium because of general relativity. With light as a wave in a medium, special relativity must be wrong. Also time reversibility is not possible.
@whiteeye3453 The important point to note is that the original aether theory was that the aether was a light carrying medium in space. What we now understand is that because space itself can be curved that space itself is the medium. To avoid this conflict of ideas I refer to the medium of space as the transmission medium for light.
Time is immaterial matter process indicator defined and reflected by formula t =s/v . Space is immaterial emptyness or void infinity continuum where our universe exists. How you guys do manage to bend or curve immaterial things ? lol
Existence if x + 0 = x. Time and space are not vectors in 2D. In 1D x = ct or x' = vt' ; v ancd c aare ruler (or mass) creation rates, t is ruler(or mass) creation times. Rulers can be separated in which case they do not interact. If they interact then Fermat's Last Theorm (Binomial expansion) applies. L = ct + vt' L^2 = ???? Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem (#^2 x^2 + x' ^2) for all x > 0, n > 1 for Village Idiots # = x + x' #^n = (x + x')^n = x^n + x'^n + f(x,x',n) (Binomial Expansion) #^n = x^n + x^n iff f(x,x',n) = 0 f(x,x',n) 0 For n = 2, set x = 4, x' = 3 and calculate Exercise for the student: Is 49 = 25 ? Much more to this analysis, but I don't have the spacetime to write it here. Ask and you shall be enlightened for beer and pizza.
Errors in general relativity: Gravity is stronger near the poles than near the equator. According to general relativity, time is slower where gravity is stronger than where it is weaker. So time near the poles moves slower than time near the equator. However, for example, the time at longitude 0 is the same from the North Pole to the South Pole and does not change no matter how much time passes. Therefore, it is obvious that general relativity is false.
Einstein was wrong because time is absolute and passes at the speed of light. Our measurement of time is relative (to the speed of light) and the rate of time measurement is defined by the local gravitational conditions. In short and from a human perspective - time is experienced at a varying rate and observed Consciously at the constant and absolute rate of the speed of light.
![กี่หมื่นฟ้า | Your Sky Series EP.1 [1/4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLGjxFL6U_I/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm not totally convinced that quantum waves violate time symmetry. Time symmetry is not saying that a system when viewed in forward time is identical to that same system viewed with time in reverse. Time symmetry suggests that the mathematical laws that govern both systems is the same. The question is whether a quantum system when viewed backward in time obeys the same quantum mechanics. Not that it is identical to its forward time counterpart.
Yes, I always thought that quantum mechanics was a time-symmetric theory.
If time seyry is real then Einstein was wrong
It really is as Spinoza says, that the rational man sees things not as then, now and future; instead, the free man sees things from the aspect of eternity.
If only more people could meet Spinoza and his ideas, I believe the world would be a much better place. Rest in eternity Benedictus.
Einstein said past, present, and future are happening at the same time. I believe it because I myself had thought the same thing independently.
We are free to do what we want, but we are not free to choose what drives and desires motivate us.
The issue is not time, it is the arrow of time.
The direction of time's arrow is the breaking of the symmetry of the 'potential' of the boundary condition.
Time reversal? Once information is created, no process is reversable.
Perhaps the universe split across a fourth axis of space and the anti-universe exists “inside-out” of ours
@@johnjhonson-j3u
Ooooh, that's an impressive notion.😮
It made my little mind twirl - as in, I got a little dizzy while pondering it.
But what is the point of consideration, when we can never encounter, nor prove, such a concept, beyond the theoretical?
Which takes me to what I’ve kind of been leading up to this whole time. The one limiting factor in all of this is your consciousness. That is the reason there exists any mystery at all. There is no reason for you to be within your consciousness solely to experience mathematical functions playing out. You shouldn’t exist at all, those things should just happen. Our consciousness is not an illusion, our free will is not an illusion. We are, for whatever reason, being told a story by God. I’ll address this conclusion further later. You, your inner self beyond your worldly memory, your will, separate from God’s, it exists without the need of the universe we exist in. God is taking our blank slate consciousness, our soul, and dividing it up and giving it experience by dragging it through an incredibly complex 5+ dimensional continuum. They are choosing our angle through time, or rather how every wave collapses, not through intense computation and prediction of the future, but more like placing your pen down and solving a maze on paper, but letting you lead the way from within the labyrinth, so to speak. Their will takes priority but they don’t wish to intervene with our will.
Each one of us bears the segregated will and consciousness of a sort of “child” of God, which interfaces through our brain top down and guides the neurons via the shrouded higher dimensional principles of reality that I will show further likely exists. But in a sense, you are me, I am my dog, we are all one. Everything alive with apparent consciousness is so because they evolved the mechanism to receive this consciousness from our cosmos, and they evolved such because God created this entire realm to be experienced by a consciousness.
I think the universe is both our medium for physicality and a tool to distribute consciousness within that medium, making the cosmos the source of the consciousness we are receiving or the interface of agency and experience, interconnected with itself in a way not limited by the speed of light through the fourth dimension by way of black holes, which don’t have to become paradoxical singularities, and dont have to paradoxically delete information as Hawking proposed. Energy can be conserved while exchanging information as information is not energy it is how the energy is arranged. Therefore like before the information that comes out is not random. So just like the photon, the black holes must open up into a higher dimension in order to make any sense.
Remember, when we try to describe the behavior of a moment of our universe with a subjective axis of space transformed into time, that is, when we cut out a the dimension of time from our universe, without knowing the inception state the entire 3D moment we inevitably end up with general equations that predict some of parts of reality, and true unpredictability everywhere else. This is a macro transformation of a moment in a universe that operated over time in 3 spatial dimensions until just now, so the randomness wouldn’t be uniform, and the universe would have it on the macro scale or really make sense at all (though there would still certainly be patterns), but, on a fundamental transformation, starting from the beginning of time, all of the randomness would happen on only the smallest level. and the determinable patterns familiar to our dimensionality that emerged from that would start right above that incomprehensible layer, and become more and more concrete and understandable the higher they were abstracted.
@@ruffadamsthegreat.2662 I think the universe is both our medium for physicality and a tool to distribute consciousness within that medium, making the cosmos the source of the consciousness we are receiving or the interface of agency and experience, interconnected with itself in a way not limited by the speed of light through the fourth dimension by way of black holes, which don’t have to become paradoxical singularities, and dont have to paradoxically delete information as Hawking proposed. Energy can be conserved while exchanging information as information is not energy it is how the energy is arranged. Therefore like before the information that comes out is not random. So just like the photon, the black holes must open up into a higher dimension in order to make any sense.
Remember, when we try to describe the behavior of a moment of our universe with a subjective axis of space transformed into time, that is, when we cut out a the dimension of time from our universe, without knowing the inception state the entire 3D moment we inevitably end up with general equations that predict some of parts of reality, and true unpredictability everywhere else. This is a macro transformation of a moment in a universe that operated over time in 3 spatial dimensions until just now, so the randomness wouldn’t be uniform, and the universe would have it on the macro scale and wouldn’t make much sense at all (though there would still certainly be patterns), but, on a fundamental transformation, starting from the beginning of time, all of the randomness would happen on only the smallest level. and the determinable patterns familiar to our dimensionality that emerged from that would start right above that incomprehensible layer, and become more and more concrete and understandable the higher they were abstracted. This is exactly what we see and exactly why we’ve been stuck for so long. It is at the very least a higher dimensional issue. String theorists understand this but they are quite dogmatic in their philosophy and in how they attempt to branch out of what they know, and so they end up with a theories as untestable as mine, yet that make utterly no sense. When science stops working you must go back to philosophy. It seems we’ve abandoned that.
This is fascinating, I would like to understand more of it
Half stories. Maybe call it a preview instead of trying to trick people :/
They always trying to thick people. Just find the book - "Theory of Everything in Physics and The Universe"
@@valentinmalinov8424 I don't see what that has to do with hearing what Avshalom Elitzur had left to say in this interview :/
He says that it was Einstein who tricked people
@@whiteeye3453 What has Einstein got to do with my comment about a video preview?
@@axle.student if you watched video you would know
The reason why within the universe, we have the arrow of time is because the universe temperature is hotter than the temperature outside the universe. The expansion rate is proportional to the difference between the inside temperature and outside temperature of the universe. This can be calculated. Once inside and outside reach same temperature, expansion rate stops and we are at thermal equilibrium. At thermal equilibrium, the arrow of time is ambiguous. Everywhere you look the movement are statistically the same.
@@crazieeez where is this outside of the universe
There is no "outside the universe", and the exponential expansion of the universe is not related to thermodynamics, but rather "dark energy", aka "the cosmological constant". You are correct, however, in stating that the universe is cooling down, and that at some far-future stage it is expected to reach thermal equilibrium. You are also correct in that this process can be linked to the arrow of time, however, this is more correctly related to the rise of _entropy,_ which, whilst being closely correlated to equilibration, isn't quite the same thing. And finally, yes, it's unclear whether or not time would continue once there is no longer any change, or any relative observers (once every elementary particle has removed itself from being able to interact with any other particle) left in the universe.
Then Einstein was wrong
Since he didn't believe that time was all set everywere
@@simesaid the universe we all refer to is the observable universe. That's a finite. There is outside the observable universe which we can "see" by measuring gravitational waves. So there is an outside, and the temperature measured by understanding gravitational that is outside our observable aka using EM to see, we can determine temperature difference. It is one reason why when the inside is so hot, the expansion rate is so fast. Gravitational waves will allow us to measure outside temperature, beyond EM observation.
@ inside universe is defined by what we can observe using electromagnetic radiation or more specifically microwave. Outside can be observed using gravitational waves which go beyond EM. We can then figure out temperature difference between outside and inside universe. This will explain why when universe was so hot, expansion rate was so super fast because outside temperature was/is very cold.
6:30 When entropy has reversed when the juice becones warmer again. This either assumes its state was more chaotic before.
Or it assumes gaining energy is the reverse of the second law of thermo dynamics. Because heat always descends into a neutral lower state.
But both cannot be true at the same time.
When a chaotic distribution of particles does not imply any temperature (cold does not predict the exact distribution: nor does it become more chaotic when getting warmer: only the temperature rises which also changed the distribution of particles), so the state the particles are in, does not predict what their entropy is.
When it could either be just the temperature (los of energy), or the state of distribution they are in compared to each other.
So, when their interaction itself leads to a higher temperature and also different distribution (what is chaotic? compared to what), then it does not necessarily mean this was only due to the average temperature of the environment, which was higher/ but also due to their own predicted interaction with each other, which would always lead to a higher average temperature.
Which could have approached that of a higher temperature in the environment. But not exactly.
So in the end neither the distribution is relevant for entropy (when an equilibrium means its normal state, this is not chaotic), nor does any temperature state predict in what state of entropy it is.
Because the two (under different reversible conditions) have nothing to do with each other.
Its equilibrium state could have a higher temperature than the original/ while it has not lost any order in the distribution. Because that was invariant. There would be more or less water between the orange particles. Is that order or chaos? One cannot tell.
So there is no reversal in the entropy, when you mean temperature. Because its equilibrium state would always consist of a higher and not lower temperature.
It did not lose anything/ nor has it become more chaotic. Because that is not the equilibrium state.
It depends on what you want to compare with what. But one cannot depart from what is central logic.
So the frase (property) entropy is used within willful random parameters, which do not necessarily compare within the same assumed order.
The same actually goes for time.
I'm not sure I completely followed your argument, and the few-dozen typos certainly didn't help, but I think I agree with your central point. While temperature _is_ generally linked to entropy (as heat dissipates in the universe, entropy rises. Freezing water into ice lowers the entropy within that system etc.), a system's entropy does not necessarily follow from its change of temperature. For a simple example, entropy was at its maximum value just after the Big Bang, when the universe's temperature was also at its maximum value, and entropy will again reach its maximum value in the far future - once the universe reaches its lowest possible temperature.
Very interesting, but there is no link to the rest of video :(
It's behind a paywall anyway.
Click on the link in the video. This will open a new tab (or a new window). Click on the black area that should display the video and it will start playing. This is how it works on Windows.
@@musicandgallery-nature It's behind a pay wall. Fine if you are a paying member, other wise no video :)
@@axle.student No, I am not a paying member. I'm not a member at all. The video above was offered to me by the AI. Why I can go further and you can't, I don't know. The AI knows that.
@@axle.student It was AI, now it is AGI.
Thanks Avashalom Elitjur thanks
From a fixed point in space, such as Earth, there is no universal North or South.
But, in space itself, there is.
And if a cold glass of juice can aquire heat from the environment, then it can also aquire cold from the environment. Also, a lukewarm cup of coffee can also aquire heat from the environment and become hot.
(I'm thinking the Sahara and Iceland, wherein beverages absolutely aquire heat and cold from those environments.)
In an attempt to simplify his explanation for the layperson, such as myself, did he just mispeak?
Also, I think that I read someplace that liquids exposed to the vacuum of space will boil - even the blood in our bodies will do so.
I may be wrong in my recall of this point though.
I think something in the universe is acting against entropy or neither the universe or life would exist. Evolution contradicts entropy as do we, even just to make a pot of hot coffee. I note you think for yourself. keep doing that but try to get along with those who can't or wont. This is just my advice.
@WILLIAMMALO-kv5gz
Do you know me??
Your counsel is tailor-made for me!😅
Thank you!
My great-aunt just recently said to me, that I "need to learn to accept that, people don't think what you think, nor believe as you believe. And that it's okay."
Again, Thank you.
(I've taken a screenshot of your reply to show her.)
I think time is best described as causality. Einstein sensed causality as being more fundemental than he is known for. In fact C in e=mc2 never meant the ‘speed of light’ to him, it always meant causality. Furthermore there are phases to causality, Field Causality is how he interpreted Gravity. Ie wave like. Like the surface of pond. So to Einstein the 3 spatial dimensions had the additional 1 dimension, not temporal (of time) but Causal. This is what his differential field equations kept describing to him and why he became obsessed with causality. They showed the phase transformation. The arrow.
The causality is infinite
And not finite
I disagree
Great half lecture 👏
Yes, he was incorrect. It's not relative, it's cause and effect. An interaction occurs, and then another. The whole problem we have is that the entire system is interconnected, seemingly infinite causes simultaneously. One giant newtons cradle without borders. The experiments we used to verify time dilation only prove that alpha radiation release is not fundamental in its tick rate and can be altered by external variables. Atomic clocks are no good for space travel without the relativistic corrections. We asked the wrong questions. Saw the answers we were looking for and ignored the reality.
We only play with probability and chance because we have attributed light and energy to particles we can't actually find. The use of inference over evidence has led to centuries' worth of unproven assumptions built upon one another. The foundations require rebuilding. Idealistic mathematical abstractions without grounding in reality have no place in serious physics. Gut the whole thing and restart. There are logical errors nestled in the foundations.
So you saying that guy in video was right or what?
we are born, we live and, we die in the same time-invariant space
What about the arrow of time because of dissipative chaos als nobel-prize winning Chemist Ilya Prigogine explained it? I think this is a much deeper insight than the classical "thermodynamic arrow" .
I can show I have free will by offering a simple experiment of flipping a sound coin. I can always guess heads. Or always tails. I can always pick the last result, or the opposite of the last result. I can do 10 of heads followed by 10 of tails. I can use a random number generator to choose such that even I don't know what the next choice will be. And I can mix this up in any way possible. To suggest all the possible options are predetermined is silly. I clearly am choosing voluntarily, without an outside force choosing and then causing me to choose the same, which is the only valid meaning of having no free will.
How about time symmetry in a zero energy universe Energy conservation no doubt holds good if we begin with a zero energy universe Zero energy universe can lead to a multiverse
Regarding entropy, that nothing gets warmer or colder on uts own, what about life? Dont living things get warmer on their own?
Ice cubes in refridgerators get colder because humans enabled that to happen.
It seems to me that life is evidence that there is at least one example of entropy going in the opposite direction.
If you attempt to measure a piece of string of infinite length it must be measured from the middle.
YES, EINSTEIN WAS VERY CLOSE IN DISCOVERING THE MECHANICS OF TIMING,
THE FUNDAMENTAL MECHANICS OF TIME ~ TIMING ~~ TIMEISM.
The Master Arrow of Time is a Peroid of Thermodynamical Value. If it is Absolute it is Thermodynamics.
The gravitational lensing effect does not mean that light is bent by gravity.
There are always atoms of gas in space.
The density of gas atoms increases with the mass of the object and with the proximity to the object.
The higher the density of gas atoms, the slower the speed of light.
Light bends in the direction of slower speed. That is to say, if there is a difference in the density of atoms in a gas, light will bend in the direction of the higher density.
@@yojihagiya8183 I agree this seems a much more plausible theory I have thought this for a long time. Are there any links to this idea?
Professor Francis Yu - lecture "Einstein's General Theory Belong to the Realm of Science? By Francis TS Yu Narrated by Edward Yu".
Plus "Dr. Ed Dowdye: Solar Gravitation and Solar Plasma Wave Propagation Interaction"
and "Bending of Light Near a Star and Gravitational Red/Blue Shift: Alternative Explanation Based on Refraction of Light"
@@ZIGGZIGGY-ld3lj. That is called refraction/diffraction. I have been wondering too, how they are all willing to ignore the well understood refraction/diffraction, and start calling it, gravitational lensing, and becoming perplexed with it just because they've changed the name.
Great stuff. Im Not ready to explain but I can prove we have freedom of choice because the universe itself exhibits the same feature. I have other ideas but they are not ready to share.
That the fields are conscious.
Einstein is not wrong he is incomplete!
Consider this idea. And please bear with me I'm taking a (for me) deep dive here. Rather than a Big Bang consider the universe as a resonance point within an infinite energy field. An energy field defined by random quantum potential. There is no such thing as Time to this field. Got that concept?
Okay, then is it possible that the Planck length, an initial incremental aspect to energy we call light, represents an island of stability in this sea of infinite potential? In effect the big bang isn't so much a "Big Bang" explosion as it is an emergent point of resonance. A standing wave that arises from the random quantum collisions, a stabilized standing wave. An island of stability. Still with me?
In that moment when the island emerges from that infinite quantum field the resonance goes scalar and from this Time emerges. All structure - scalar harmonic resonances - is built on a structural scaffold erected by unfolding Time. That scaffolding forms the basis of all we see. It forms the basis of existence. To go with a Hermetic phrase, it is the All. And the whole of it is resting on that island of stability - the initial resonance point in that infinite field. Follow me? To wax with a religious phrase let there be light, indeed.
Resonance and harmonics. Here's where it gets, to me, really interesting. Topologically speaking. The recent Cosmological findings of a "Big Ring," a cosmically sized structure that's perplexing scientists, kind'a alters the way one thinks about everything we see, doesn't it? But the idea of resonance may be the key. Makes it more Hermetic in perspective. Intriguing discoveries like this one, the Big Ring, kind'a sort'a offers a proof, or at least possible credence, to the possibility that as above, so below and as below, so above. It's all a structure founded on resonance and harmonics. I don't have the math to formalize the concept but is this a nutty idea or not?
To spring further off this presumption, The Big Ring’s shape, which scientists are saying on a cosmic scale appears to be cork-screw, could be a lower-dimensional projection of a higher-dimensional resonant wave. Imagine this 3D corkscrew form being just a “shadow” or manifestation of a 4D or 5D resonant structure. If the universe’s fabric allows for such resonant projections, these structures may appear to us as anomalous shapes, hinting at the presence of higher-dimensional oscillations.
Such a projection could also mean that certain regions of the universe are more sensitive to these resonant effects, which in turn shapes matter distribution in ways that seem impossible under a standard 3D or isotropic model. This "big ring" could represent a resonant standing wave. It could be that resonant structures are indeed fundamental in shaping the universe. The Big Ring might be the first direct observation of a resonant structure on a cosmic scale that defies current explanations.
From the above it comes to this. The Hermetic principle of as above, so below, reveals that yes, indeed, the Universe might just be a resonant point in an infinite field of potential energy. All that arises is a harmonic of that point. And all of our science, while valid in its Newtonian fashion, gets flipped on its head by the idea. Okay....it's official. I don't know what I'm talking about.
The time construct is a convenient and useful tool, but like all human constructs it is not real.
Aside note: I was still in my mother's womb when Einstein died. Einstein a great man and a good man.
Can a living being who can perceive time actually survive a 2 planets/ journey where gravity is so different that they can experience the theoritical time travel if we r able to travel close to speed of light etc. I m not saying years of time difference but 20-25 day difference etc.
On some planet time travels fast due to low gravity than earth and if Han travel there then will our lifespan be any different? Experience of it at least.
Entropy. It tells us something. We have "freedom" inside the determinism. It is called "uncertainty".
What is my Waters students? Students shared "i" Am will say, LORD flows 1 way! From thy Mouth shared "i" Am come forth! Shared thy Feet resting upon sustained! Given ABLE to distribute thy Living Waters throughout the BRANCHES! EVEN DEAD BRANCHES before to be trampled underfoot became a Living BRANCHES! Now shared "i" Am BRANCHES.
Not wrong. There is no telos in science, it's only the mathematical form of the efficient cause. Of course when you measure or observe something material, the observer gives it an end. It's what happens with the quantum cannon, the movement is not real until observed for that reason. The man that dies is also not real until you accept he is man with an end which is death. But in physics, you could only describe that man as something that grows older, you would not know when the end is until you observe it. It's probably why the guy went into philosophy, it's what deals with the telos and the more general forms that are not quantifiable or material.
There is not enogh bandwidth on IAI website?
I also think Einstein is wrong given how difficult it is to reconcile the two theories some 50 years later and the superior predictive power of quantum electrodynamics. I should clarify, I don't believe in the continuity of time as these curves, but do think of things like the quantization of it akin to loop quantum gravity . DIscrete math is underlying reality
Einstein got a lot of things wrong. Sure the maths part works but maths has its limitations.
The speed of light cannot be a constant in an ever changing universe. The colour of distant objects changes depending upon whether they are moving toward or away from us thus proving that the speed of light is determined by its colour or wavelength.
It is possible to travel faster than the speed of light. Light emitted from an object travels through the universe at twice the speed of light relative to the light emitted from the opposite side of the object. Even light can exceed the speed of light but in doing so it would change its colour or frequency and thus appear to be something else or simply vanish.
I probably would subscribe to the IAI web site, if they didn't do this sort of thing: I mean, cutting off the talk and telling people to sign up.
Yes, I sigend up but can't find this nor can I view anything else. It is a horrible website.
Time is a compact dimension, one single Planck second.
This is WHY there are limits.
Limit theorem.
Limits of energy, Lambda and event horizon.
The gradient from minima to maxima, Lambda to event horizon, is gravity.
Geometric flows are real.
Limit theorem also dictates that the closure is between the limits, that the limits connect.
In at event horizon, out in deep void.
Neutron decay cosmology.
A homeostatic universe maintained by the reciprocal processes of electron capture at event horizons and free neutron decay in deep voids.
Gravity gathers mass to event horizons.
All matter is made neutrons at event horizons because of electron capture.
The Infalling, at c , neutrons drop off their kinetic energy as mass for the event horizon.
The neutron information/identity takes an EinsteinRosen bridge from highest energy pressure conditions (event horizon) to lowest energy density point of space where the quantum basement is lowest and easiest to penetrate (void)
Free neutron out in a deep void soon decays into amorphous monatomic hydrogen, proton electron soup, Dark matter.
The expansion from neutron 0.6fm³ to 1m³ of amorphous hydrogen gas (in a deep void) is a volume increase of around 10⁴⁵.
Expansion.
Dark energy.
In time this amorphous hydrogen stabilizes and coalesces first into monatomic hydrogen, large clouds of which are found around galaxies, and then into H2 and everything else. Continually falling down the gravity hill towards an event horizon.
Loop.
Neutron decay cosmology.
Inevitable because geometry requires it. 🖖✨️
Wow 👌👍👍
Yet another online physics schizophrenic shouting utterly meaningless dross
Einstein didn’t understand that Time moves in spirals not in circles…
Spirals?
Circles?
Spirals?
Spinoza God is Einstein but Spinoza happy with the tongue of Einstein
Time does not exist. Motion exists. Time is not motion. The fourth dimension is not time..The fourth dimension is motion. And what would cause time if there was any? If there was any time it would be caused by motion as energy expression. Einstein was severely bipolar because though he claimed time is man made he made sure that time was a determinant in his math. He also claimed that the universe is mathematical while it is not. That indicates that Einstein perceived the universe as a clock.
heh... how can motion, or anything else 'exist' if there is no time for it to do so? ;)
I half-watched this video.
There is no such thing as time it is a human construct for convenience best example you die your sense of time does to
Ditto with Quantum Gravity. Deterministic and Irreversible. A curvature of Space Time or a Force.
Then the implications for Electro Magnetism.
Shame this thought provoking lecture is so short obviously the Facebook video continuation is oversubscribed. Has stalled. Plz put on TH-cam with clearer images of the fiagram. 😊
Mercury's perihelion shift could not be predicted accurately in Newtonian mechanics because the object was treated as a point.
However, the reason why the calculation results of Mercury's perihelion shift did not agree with Newtonian mechanics is that the Sun itself actually rotates on its own axis and also makes a small orbit.
If we take into account the drag caused by these factors, we should be able to accurately calculate Mercury's perihelion shift even in Newtonian mechanics.
Einstein, with his bogus theory of general relativity, matched the calculated result of Mercury's perihelion shift with the actual measured value, without considering the sun's own rotation and orbit.
May be they will give you the Nobel prize for your insightful TH-cam comments.
I don't understand now Einstein "Predicted" with "Incredibly Accuracy" the known for century Mercury Precession? By primary school arithmetic, the sum of two Negative Figures must be negative as (-2) + (-2) = -4. How is possible the two slowing down effects predicted by Einstein - (Time slow down near strong gravity (of the Sun) and (For accelerated body (Mercury) the time must slow down). But... Precession is a positive figure!
Not only did he not take that into account, his GR gave wrong results for Mars and Venus.
The end of his math may be the beginning of his understanding. Peace ✌️ 😎.
I hate the iai website. I subscribed but I can't find anything. It is a horrible experience.
No you just didn't get the point...
If my shared "i" Am BRANCHES comes and will say, "WHO are you"?
Einstein said that time is a persistent illusion. It is.
If this guy thinks that time is an essential feature of reality he is a clueless crackpot trying to make a name from bashing those whose shoulders he is unfit upon which to stand! ;)
"The Laws of Nature are not rules controlling the metamorphosis of what is, into what will be (ie; Karma). They are descriptions of patterns that exist, all at once... " - Genius; the Life and Science of Richard Feynman
All 'eternity' at once; Here! Now!!
Cleary there is no Top down or botton Up! Cause the Botton goes Benoit plank and the 🔝 🔝 goes infinite and repeat over eons that our silly telescopes can'T detect!
Are you just now figuring that out? We have known for a hundred years. Ask Tesla.
This should standard in science videos that those people who watch it should make sure that they watch stuff from a person with proper credibility or should they have enough knowledge beforehand to understand what they are listening to
I don’t think he was all good. Although he didn’t want America to use the bomb he made an exception for German citizens.
We were in Jesus's universe then the devils then newton then einstine..... Now who's
Elitzur is silly. And not in a good way.
Because he use real logic and not Paradox like Einstein
I was forgot: THE abadon of his other son....
"I was forgot" 🤣
“Time does not exist - we invented it,” said Einstein, and put the non-existent into formulas. Something is wrong here.
Einstein was shromginden exept he didn't realize it
Errors in special relativity:
According to relativity,
They say that an object shrinks in length as its velocity increases,
Then, for example, if a disk of radius 1m is rotated at the limit speed at which it is not destroyed by centrifugal force,
What is the circumference of the disk?
What would Einstein say to the above question?
In my opinion, in this situation, the special theory of relativity is broken.
It is inconceivable that the disk would contract in the direction of rotation.
The special relativity only applies to galilean frames.
A rotating frame is not galilean.
The best way of understanding time is not as a dimension but as a property of space.
Space is expanding and the rate of expansion defines time which is a property of space.
Light is a wave in the medium of space which is approximately constant because the tension in the medium is approximately constant. The speed of light defines time as a property of space.
In Einstein’s lecture in 1920 to the University of Leiden titled Ether and relativity he showed that space must be a medium because of general relativity.
With light as a wave in a medium, special relativity must be wrong.
Also time reversibility is not possible.
So aether theory is legit
@whiteeye3453 The important point to note is that the original aether theory was that the aether was a light carrying medium in space.
What we now understand is that because space itself can be curved that space itself is the medium.
To avoid this conflict of ideas I refer to the medium of space as the transmission medium for light.
Time is immaterial matter process indicator defined and reflected by formula t =s/v . Space is immaterial emptyness or void infinity continuum where our universe exists. How you guys do manage to bend or curve immaterial things ? lol
Good and Evil are 2 sides of the same coin.
In my country, heads and tails are two sides of the same coin.
BRANCHES who am I alive yet dead come here in front and remind!
No distinction between time and temperature. Time could not exist without temperature.
13 more wasted minutes
You are the one who wasted the coment
Existence if x + 0 = x.
Time and space are not vectors in 2D. In 1D x = ct or x' = vt' ; v ancd c aare ruler (or mass) creation rates, t is ruler(or mass) creation times. Rulers can be separated in which case they do not interact. If they interact then Fermat's Last Theorm (Binomial expansion) applies.
L = ct + vt'
L^2 = ????
Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem (#^2 x^2 + x' ^2) for all x > 0, n > 1 for Village Idiots
# = x + x'
#^n = (x + x')^n = x^n + x'^n + f(x,x',n) (Binomial Expansion)
#^n = x^n + x^n iff f(x,x',n) = 0
f(x,x',n) 0
For n = 2, set x = 4, x' = 3 and calculate
Exercise for the student: Is 49 = 25 ?
Much more to this analysis, but I don't have the spacetime to write it here. Ask and you shall be enlightened for beer and pizza.
I've just spotted another these online nutters.
Errors in general relativity:
Gravity is stronger near the poles than near the equator.
According to general relativity, time is slower where gravity is stronger than where it is weaker.
So time near the poles moves slower than time near the equator.
However, for example, the time at longitude 0 is the same from the North Pole to the South Pole and does not change no matter how much time passes.
Therefore, it is obvious that general relativity is false.
Einstein was wrong because time is absolute and passes at the speed of light. Our measurement of time is relative (to the speed of light) and the rate of time measurement is defined by the local gravitational conditions. In short and from a human perspective - time is experienced at a varying rate and observed Consciously at the constant and absolute rate of the speed of light.
Utter piffle.
@Tinker1950 well articulated response, you must have thought about that significantly 👍🏻
On absolutely everything 😊...