Before the Big Bang
- Thread starter Irving
- Start date
Angleochoas
Quantum Scribe
Perception relative to the universe being in motion.
Combine others pov - harmonious/disharmonious synchronicity.
That's really a baiting statement since you didn't specify in a speficic context of application.
Combine others pov - harmonious/disharmonious synchronicity.
That's really a baiting statement since you didn't specify in a speficic context of application.
Tell me in a PM or an email?
My email is in my profile.
"Not now. Too many reading. Maybe later."
I honestly don't understand why it is important "when" you post it. After you post it
won't it always be there for everyone to read anyway?
uhhh that was not "did you pick it as your name" ..but "WHY did you". You need new glasses. lol
My email is in my profile.
"Not now. Too many reading. Maybe later."
I honestly don't understand why it is important "when" you post it. After you post it
won't it always be there for everyone to read anyway?
uhhh that was not "did you pick it as your name" ..but "WHY did you". You need new glasses. lol
Darby
Epochal Historian
Pamela,
How abouts he explains it to everyone instead of "in private"? The "private" responses request is where you get into trouble every time, my friend. I know, it's not my problem whether or not you get criticised for whatever it is that you do but I do, actually, care.
How abouts he explains it to everyone instead of "in private"? The "private" responses request is where you get into trouble every time, my friend. I know, it's not my problem whether or not you get criticised for whatever it is that you do but I do, actually, care.
Darby,
Well I started out with "please explain it to US..."
and then when he said "too many reading..."
I thought well ..maybe he will tell me in private.??
I figure better to get it in private than not to get it at all!
Or have to wait for a long, long, long time to hear it.
It was worth a try anyway. I am eager to hear what he has to say
I can't help it. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I know....this is what got me into trouble with John.
But then again ...I did like John AND he was fun to talk to!
Well I started out with "please explain it to US..."
and then when he said "too many reading..."
I thought well ..maybe he will tell me in private.??
I figure better to get it in private than not to get it at all!
Or have to wait for a long, long, long time to hear it.
It was worth a try anyway. I am eager to hear what he has to say
I can't help it. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I know....this is what got me into trouble with John.
But then again ...I did like John AND he was fun to talk to!
Kanigo2
Quantum Scribe
Not to interrupt,,
but to get back to the post,,
I am of the opinion, that any expansion..
has its own "time code"..
In effect,, there can be a 'wave theory' inside a larger system.
In fact, i would refer to it as a compression.
Of time.
this would be the simple,, an economic way, under the current "manifestation of time...as we understand it.."
-------------------------------->
There is simply no way , to collapse, the current, 'timeframe'
into a less cohesive structure.
Time will bend.. if everything---has less pressure.
Its the "flip side" to the coin.
But it cannot be done...without an absence of time.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE...that manufacturing one...out of thin air,, inside the current timeframe,, even using.. the current prescribed ideologies, or mathematics, will work.
without a complete absence of time..or pressure..
IN this universe... we will never see any form of time travel.
I don't know the hows or whys... but I have sat on this for a while...
and considered the mechanics of it.
no "opening of a dimensional wall will allow it."
Its not :just a distance thing"...and it where we fail.--I am of the opinion, that even using the scale..in this aspect...is a detriment.
Real, Honest time travel...and positional control? also?
Is way beyond anything,, that I have seen considered.
but I would welcome a link.
collaspsing time itself,, but not doing it, by sheer force.
but by, collapsing the energy in upon itself.
and manufacturing a technique to do that very thing...is almost beyond reason.
but to get back to the post,,
I am of the opinion, that any expansion..
has its own "time code"..
In effect,, there can be a 'wave theory' inside a larger system.
In fact, i would refer to it as a compression.
Of time.
this would be the simple,, an economic way, under the current "manifestation of time...as we understand it.."
-------------------------------->
There is simply no way , to collapse, the current, 'timeframe'
into a less cohesive structure.
Time will bend.. if everything---has less pressure.
Its the "flip side" to the coin.
But it cannot be done...without an absence of time.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE...that manufacturing one...out of thin air,, inside the current timeframe,, even using.. the current prescribed ideologies, or mathematics, will work.
without a complete absence of time..or pressure..
IN this universe... we will never see any form of time travel.
I don't know the hows or whys... but I have sat on this for a while...
and considered the mechanics of it.
no "opening of a dimensional wall will allow it."
Its not :just a distance thing"...and it where we fail.--I am of the opinion, that even using the scale..in this aspect...is a detriment.
Real, Honest time travel...and positional control? also?
Is way beyond anything,, that I have seen considered.
but I would welcome a link.
collaspsing time itself,, but not doing it, by sheer force.
but by, collapsing the energy in upon itself.
and manufacturing a technique to do that very thing...is almost beyond reason.
Darby
Epochal Historian
That's not a true statement. The water can be swirling, twisting and turning all over the map and the speed can still remain constant but the interval between the sticks would not remain a constant.
BTW: what's simple about the term "force"? Maybe you should first explain force, an action at a distance without actual water as the medium, in simple yet accurate terms before moving on to an explanation of the term time.
KerrTexas
Super Moderator
Interesting. Thank-you for taking the leap and sharing.
I feel that there are some details missing from your explaination, at least as I can undertand what you have presented so far. Not your fault, but mine.
""" The river represents time..."""
""" The sticks represent force..."""
I can understand the point-of-view of the river representing time.
The stick's representing force...in what way are they "a force" ?
The stick's as I see them would be subject to the behaviour of other forces of the water, and other potential "forces", but, don't see the sticks themselves acting and/or affecting anything themselves.
If I am understanding this correctly, and excuse me if I am not, your explaination seems to fit into what I have as an idea of "time"...that "time" is not really a force in itself, but a passive "effect" of other forces.
The river itself would be just such a force, not necessarily "time" itself, but a combination of forces that move the sticks along. The sticks themselves are merely "along for the ride" as it were.
""" Time's construct is that of a series of forces passed from one level of matter to another."""
Can you expand on the above statement...a series of "what" forces ?
""" The spacing and information is never diminished, only our perception thereof."""
So we would be considered stationary, and only percieve that the "spacing and information" ( the sticks ) are behaving in a manner different than which is actually taking place ?
And even if our perception of the spacing and information is diminished, but the actual information is not...how does this premise help us define "time" in a way that provides us with "an ability" with time ?
And: Welcome Back Kanigo2 ! Good to see you posting again. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I feel that there are some details missing from your explaination, at least as I can undertand what you have presented so far. Not your fault, but mine.
""" The river represents time..."""
""" The sticks represent force..."""
I can understand the point-of-view of the river representing time.
The stick's representing force...in what way are they "a force" ?
The stick's as I see them would be subject to the behaviour of other forces of the water, and other potential "forces", but, don't see the sticks themselves acting and/or affecting anything themselves.
If I am understanding this correctly, and excuse me if I am not, your explaination seems to fit into what I have as an idea of "time"...that "time" is not really a force in itself, but a passive "effect" of other forces.
The river itself would be just such a force, not necessarily "time" itself, but a combination of forces that move the sticks along. The sticks themselves are merely "along for the ride" as it were.
""" Time's construct is that of a series of forces passed from one level of matter to another."""
Can you expand on the above statement...a series of "what" forces ?
""" The spacing and information is never diminished, only our perception thereof."""
So we would be considered stationary, and only percieve that the "spacing and information" ( the sticks ) are behaving in a manner different than which is actually taking place ?
And even if our perception of the spacing and information is diminished, but the actual information is not...how does this premise help us define "time" in a way that provides us with "an ability" with time ?
And: Welcome Back Kanigo2 ! Good to see you posting again. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
KerrTexas
Super Moderator
Sort of as a side-line to what you wrote in your post:
In getting ready to view the meteor storm, it occurred to me that the Earth has traveled this way before in it's orbit around the Sun. Of course there are variations as to exact location due to perhaps a wobble and a slight movement towards the Sun.
However, how far off are we from the postion the Earth was in at this "time" ( not necessarily as per the calendar date ) and would you say based on your thoughts :
""" There is ever present a record of every force which has acted upon an object and contained within the object. Recalling these forces will recall the momentum and the previous state. """
that, in theory, there could be energy that still remains as a ghost from the previous passage of the Earth through this "region" of space ?
Closer to what you have expressed, is something the Druid's have mentioned in their discipline. That everything has a memory, living AND seemingly inanimate objects.
The memory, or energy of the information of the event is embedded within the inner structure of; At a cellular level, or even deeper.
Non-scientific explaination-- but seems similar to what I believe you are trying to convey.
Am I getting warmer or no ?
In the Key of Time Thread, I quoted from one the Tablet's of Hermes. Hermes is said to have figured out the secrets of "time", and it would be interesting to compare what Hermes wrote to that of your premise regarding time.
"""
1. In the beginning, there was eternal thought
2. For thought to be eternal, time must exist
3. INTO the thought grew the Law of Time
4. Time is movement that is in a state of fixation
5. Time is the FORCE that holds events seperate
6. Time is not in motion
7. Your consciousness moves from one event to another
8. Eternal One Existence
9. Even though in Time you are separate, yet you are still One in all times existent.
"""
In getting ready to view the meteor storm, it occurred to me that the Earth has traveled this way before in it's orbit around the Sun. Of course there are variations as to exact location due to perhaps a wobble and a slight movement towards the Sun.
However, how far off are we from the postion the Earth was in at this "time" ( not necessarily as per the calendar date ) and would you say based on your thoughts :
""" There is ever present a record of every force which has acted upon an object and contained within the object. Recalling these forces will recall the momentum and the previous state. """
that, in theory, there could be energy that still remains as a ghost from the previous passage of the Earth through this "region" of space ?
Closer to what you have expressed, is something the Druid's have mentioned in their discipline. That everything has a memory, living AND seemingly inanimate objects.
The memory, or energy of the information of the event is embedded within the inner structure of; At a cellular level, or even deeper.
Non-scientific explaination-- but seems similar to what I believe you are trying to convey.
Am I getting warmer or no ?
In the Key of Time Thread, I quoted from one the Tablet's of Hermes. Hermes is said to have figured out the secrets of "time", and it would be interesting to compare what Hermes wrote to that of your premise regarding time.
"""
1. In the beginning, there was eternal thought
2. For thought to be eternal, time must exist
3. INTO the thought grew the Law of Time
4. Time is movement that is in a state of fixation
5. Time is the FORCE that holds events seperate
6. Time is not in motion
7. Your consciousness moves from one event to another
8. Eternal One Existence
9. Even though in Time you are separate, yet you are still One in all times existent.
"""
KerrTexas
Super Moderator
My fault, since I did not explain it in depth. However, from what you have said so far, it is something they have discussed for quite sometime, but in more of a esoteric setting. I will try to find what I have with what the Druid's have expressed that I feel are similar to what I have read so far within your posts..
A tad warmer than before reading this in your reply. And yes, I am very serious.
You are hoping to accomplish "what" with this approach in your replies to questions about your premise regarding time ?
Darby
Epochal Historian
Errr...hostility? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif Because I didn't agree with your incorrect statement it is hostile? Come on, you've got thicker skin than that, don't you? It's a discussion forum not a glad hand, slap on the back coffee klatch.
Analogy or not, the statement about speed vs. constant interval was not correct. Because you stated, "I was going to write an entire time tutorial explaining the physics and math of time and space", I only assumed that you knew where the mistake was and would correct it yourself.
You said that we were making it too complex and then you threw in a statement about "forces". Forces in physics is an extremely complex situation. My suggestion was, if you're going to add forces to the mix, then it's proper that you explain in simple but correct terms what force is, given that in your analogy you used water rather than vacuum as the medium across which the action at a distance takes place. I don't see, and didn't intend, any hostility in that portion of my post either.
Surely you don't want this discussion to digress into one where people voice the opinion that this sounds a bit too familiar, meaning that the OP has begun to obfuscate when answering specific questions based on the OP's previous statements, do you?
Darby
Epochal Historian
Isn't time one of four orthogonal axes (dimensions) used to describe the evolution of a system contained in a volume of 4D spacetime with 8 degrees of freedom?
Earlier in your analogy you used the term speed. Speed implies time. If time is simply an effect rather than a dimension with two degrees of freedom in 4D spacetime, where is the effect of time in speed and how is speed defined without time as a dimension?