Before the Big Bang
- Thread starter Irving
- Start date
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Mass density (dM/dS) is most certainly the physical parameter that influences Time (dt). One might even generally say that:
dt ~ dM/dS
Where:
dt = Time differential.
dM = Mass differential.
dS = Space differential.
The proportionality defined above is one way to describe what I call the <font color="red">Integrated Matrix of Massive SpaceTime[/COLOR]
Knowing how to manipulate the <font color="red">Integrated Matrix of Massive SpaceTime[/COLOR] can help you achieve your goals and dreams in life. Because when you understand the Matrix then you understand what Energy is, how we as individuals need it and use it, and how we can become more responsibile in using it.
But it all begins with learning and understanding the scientific laws of the universe and how they govern continuous change of dM, dS, and yes, dt (delta-time).
RMT
<font color="teal"> "Well you have a time coordinate (relative to the present) which references a place in the temporal record."[/COLOR]
What is a time coordinate? Is it based on the year, the month, the day or hour or events that happened in the temporal record?
<font color="teal"> What else do you see and what does it feel like if I may ask?
"Shifting and nauseous."[/COLOR]
Does one travel in something or just by themselves?
<font color="teal"> "You don't send a person through the mass lens. It's far too small for that. When matter is projected, it emits a form of radiation which can be used to take nearby objects forward or back in time. You build a linear accelerator and pass particles through the mass lens. It's more practical to change the lens' parameters than the linac's once in operation."[/COLOR]
Can you expand on this further? What particles are you passing through the mass lens?
When matter is projected it emits a form of radiation...the radiation is used to take nearby objects forward or backward in time? They travel by radiation? I do not understand.
Can you please explain step by step how this works?
<font color="teal"> "Time line? When you go into the past you create a discontinuity in the temporal record and change things in the past. If you sail a boat to another side of a lake, you merely change the arrangement of the water. But it all still exists"[/COLOR]
So you say past, present and future all exist at once and you are merely traveling to different points in the time stream.
However if you throw a rock into the water it ripples for quite some time
before it dies down does it not? Would not the temporal record be unstable for quite sometime?
Is not the temporal record constantly changing with each time traveler, for if there is one...there is many. If there are many travelers what does this do to the temporal record when there is a constant creation of discontinuity in the temporal record?
How are the time coordinates accurate if they reference a place in the temporal record if the temporal record always has a discontinuity being created because of changes to the past from time travelers?
<font color="purple"> *burp* oh excuse me. wiffing the fermented sugars/starches again. :oops:[/COLOR]
What is a time coordinate? Is it based on the year, the month, the day or hour or events that happened in the temporal record?
<font color="teal"> What else do you see and what does it feel like if I may ask?
"Shifting and nauseous."[/COLOR]
Does one travel in something or just by themselves?
<font color="teal"> "You don't send a person through the mass lens. It's far too small for that. When matter is projected, it emits a form of radiation which can be used to take nearby objects forward or back in time. You build a linear accelerator and pass particles through the mass lens. It's more practical to change the lens' parameters than the linac's once in operation."[/COLOR]
Can you expand on this further? What particles are you passing through the mass lens?
When matter is projected it emits a form of radiation...the radiation is used to take nearby objects forward or backward in time? They travel by radiation? I do not understand.
Can you please explain step by step how this works?
<font color="teal"> "Time line? When you go into the past you create a discontinuity in the temporal record and change things in the past. If you sail a boat to another side of a lake, you merely change the arrangement of the water. But it all still exists"[/COLOR]
So you say past, present and future all exist at once and you are merely traveling to different points in the time stream.
However if you throw a rock into the water it ripples for quite some time
before it dies down does it not? Would not the temporal record be unstable for quite sometime?
Is not the temporal record constantly changing with each time traveler, for if there is one...there is many. If there are many travelers what does this do to the temporal record when there is a constant creation of discontinuity in the temporal record?
How are the time coordinates accurate if they reference a place in the temporal record if the temporal record always has a discontinuity being created because of changes to the past from time travelers?
<font color="purple"> *burp* oh excuse me. wiffing the fermented sugars/starches again. :oops:[/COLOR]
Again out there in Space and not Time at least to me, yes, this is my opinion.
>>>>What is a time coordinate? - In the Classical Sense or the Quantum Sense. Even in the Quantum Sense there is not that much chaos, so time although being a measurement is also a reference that can be used - say like the thought of age of the universe, as accurate as can be held to be another opinion in the present time. In astronomical terms, they use 30.6 for the length of the month as persay coming up with trying to equate equations to astronomical events for the year. But because there are still measurements that wobble sort of to say, in a few years, all these formulas used for astronomical calculations soon get too far off. That is to figure out the Julian day that is used starting at 12:00 noon GMT (Greenwich Mean Time)(Universal Coordinated Time - WWV - Time shortwave radio signal channel band) for the initial calculating formulas used as the Julian date is standard starting in the year -4813B.C. I have to look up why that year?? (and the days in 1582 when the calendar was off to get it back to where the Sun and stars are really - Oct.3 I think till Oct.15 are not used in the Julian date. One day it was Oct. 4 I think in 1582, and the next day was Oct.15th, 1582. Then the Gregorian Calendar came out with the Leap Day and Leap Year which is still closer, but really the year according to where the stars are at is 365.2522 days which means that the calendar is actually still off but not as much. (the accurate numbers can be found I am going by memory so I may be wrong right now). But that also means that there is a wobble in the Earth's orbit and so these anomalies and other inaccuraies all keep adding up. I forget the amount that they added to the second for the National Institute of Standards and such determined by the International Astronomical ah League I guess but it is something like 0.6244xxxxxxx something or other I just read. (when you read a lot all the figures seem to go out of the head after awhile.)
You can also buy a book issued by the government of England and the U.S.Naval Observatory every year that lists all that stuff also for about $72 at Amazon.com. I was just looking at it while thinking if I wanted (like always) to pay such a price for such a book. I don't think I need it.
But if trying to write a computer program for say an astronomical program like for example Starry Nights or one of the other ones - like Stellarium you can download for free, or any of the others you can download like Ephem or Pyephem (python coded) or even the one I am looking at the programming like the one I had a link to before - Homeplanet - to really display the stars and time to where they will really be - say you want to time a Occulation - or transit of a moon across Jupiter - the reason for WWV and time signals, then the program to really be accurate would have to correct its self every year or after a few years to be accurate. Again all they really can make is an approximation of an Astronomical program which goes back to say the 0A.D. year (which you include as well as positive or negative years) and any of that depending that with a lot of programs they all get off after around 500 years of time.
Of course I think gravity also has something to do with that also so in the end time is kind of separate and also a measurement just like Space can be with distance and also figuring out really how far away it really is.
We all don't know nothing when it really comes down to it, although the best guess is still the best that can be done.
So then divergence should be how far something strays away from some normal standard depending on what normal standard humans agree on - say with the International Astrnomical League or any other group who comes up with a basis for determining such things as Time and Space.
Well, in the end, simpler formulae are used because it really gets complicated if you try and take every perturbance in say just the planet's orbits around the Sun. The further out in space (and in time then) gets even more or can be more off when humans are just sitting here on this planet trying to come up with better ways to increase measurement accuracy without actually being Out-There. Well, that only proves that humans sit around a lot on this Planet going nowhere except along with the planet and the Sun in the galaxy along with the galaxy and the local group of galaxies along with even if the Universe is having some sort of movement also let alone expanding which tends to be at least to me - Oblivion in the end.
Whatever it is, I suppose a lot of humans are just getting tired of paying taxes for any of it also in the end when all that can be done then is more work, because where then is all the rest of what should also be important to humans on a Planet in this Universe?
Glad I talked myself out of that one! Whew!
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
>>>>What is a time coordinate? - In the Classical Sense or the Quantum Sense. Even in the Quantum Sense there is not that much chaos, so time although being a measurement is also a reference that can be used - say like the thought of age of the universe, as accurate as can be held to be another opinion in the present time. In astronomical terms, they use 30.6 for the length of the month as persay coming up with trying to equate equations to astronomical events for the year. But because there are still measurements that wobble sort of to say, in a few years, all these formulas used for astronomical calculations soon get too far off. That is to figure out the Julian day that is used starting at 12:00 noon GMT (Greenwich Mean Time)(Universal Coordinated Time - WWV - Time shortwave radio signal channel band) for the initial calculating formulas used as the Julian date is standard starting in the year -4813B.C. I have to look up why that year?? (and the days in 1582 when the calendar was off to get it back to where the Sun and stars are really - Oct.3 I think till Oct.15 are not used in the Julian date. One day it was Oct. 4 I think in 1582, and the next day was Oct.15th, 1582. Then the Gregorian Calendar came out with the Leap Day and Leap Year which is still closer, but really the year according to where the stars are at is 365.2522 days which means that the calendar is actually still off but not as much. (the accurate numbers can be found I am going by memory so I may be wrong right now). But that also means that there is a wobble in the Earth's orbit and so these anomalies and other inaccuraies all keep adding up. I forget the amount that they added to the second for the National Institute of Standards and such determined by the International Astronomical ah League I guess but it is something like 0.6244xxxxxxx something or other I just read. (when you read a lot all the figures seem to go out of the head after awhile.)
You can also buy a book issued by the government of England and the U.S.Naval Observatory every year that lists all that stuff also for about $72 at Amazon.com. I was just looking at it while thinking if I wanted (like always) to pay such a price for such a book. I don't think I need it.
But if trying to write a computer program for say an astronomical program like for example Starry Nights or one of the other ones - like Stellarium you can download for free, or any of the others you can download like Ephem or Pyephem (python coded) or even the one I am looking at the programming like the one I had a link to before - Homeplanet - to really display the stars and time to where they will really be - say you want to time a Occulation - or transit of a moon across Jupiter - the reason for WWV and time signals, then the program to really be accurate would have to correct its self every year or after a few years to be accurate. Again all they really can make is an approximation of an Astronomical program which goes back to say the 0A.D. year (which you include as well as positive or negative years) and any of that depending that with a lot of programs they all get off after around 500 years of time.
Of course I think gravity also has something to do with that also so in the end time is kind of separate and also a measurement just like Space can be with distance and also figuring out really how far away it really is.
We all don't know nothing when it really comes down to it, although the best guess is still the best that can be done.
So then divergence should be how far something strays away from some normal standard depending on what normal standard humans agree on - say with the International Astrnomical League or any other group who comes up with a basis for determining such things as Time and Space.
Well, in the end, simpler formulae are used because it really gets complicated if you try and take every perturbance in say just the planet's orbits around the Sun. The further out in space (and in time then) gets even more or can be more off when humans are just sitting here on this planet trying to come up with better ways to increase measurement accuracy without actually being Out-There. Well, that only proves that humans sit around a lot on this Planet going nowhere except along with the planet and the Sun in the galaxy along with the galaxy and the local group of galaxies along with even if the Universe is having some sort of movement also let alone expanding which tends to be at least to me - Oblivion in the end.
Whatever it is, I suppose a lot of humans are just getting tired of paying taxes for any of it also in the end when all that can be done then is more work, because where then is all the rest of what should also be important to humans on a Planet in this Universe?
Glad I talked myself out of that one! Whew!
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
However, I really just think right now that the temporal record does not become unstable - for it all exists as far as humans can tell. So that is another factor to consider there with coming around to a better understanding of time being both a measurment but also a standard of sorts in the end just as gravity has rules it conforms to or the speed of light has a speed that seems to indicate a fastest speed it can go.
My brain has to take a rest now, for it is once again on the verge of being boggled!
:D
My brain has to take a rest now, for it is once again on the verge of being boggled!
:D
Before the Big Bang there was a book to explain it all, I guess!
The Supplement needed to explain the next book:
http://www.amazon.com/Explanatory-Supplement-Astronomical-Almanac-Seidelmann/dp/1891389459/ref=pd_sim_b_6
Oh, ya this is the book: (ah, I am thinking I guess)
http://www.amazon.com/Astronomical-Almanac-Year-Companion-Online/dp/0118873423/ref=pd_sim_b_3
Well, not too many people buy this book, the supplement explaining the formulae they use I think I guess.
It is five minutes until Midnight.
http://www.thebulletin.org/
PlanetQuest:
http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/atlas/atlas_index.cfm
I can not find the other link to an article that was about being in a third bounce universe.
Bouncy, I guess???
:eek:
The Supplement needed to explain the next book:
http://www.amazon.com/Explanatory-Supplement-Astronomical-Almanac-Seidelmann/dp/1891389459/ref=pd_sim_b_6
Oh, ya this is the book: (ah, I am thinking I guess)
http://www.amazon.com/Astronomical-Almanac-Year-Companion-Online/dp/0118873423/ref=pd_sim_b_3
Well, not too many people buy this book, the supplement explaining the formulae they use I think I guess.
It is five minutes until Midnight.
http://www.thebulletin.org/
PlanetQuest:
http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/atlas/atlas_index.cfm
I can not find the other link to an article that was about being in a third bounce universe.
Bouncy, I guess???
:eek:
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Are you claiming it is a constant? I'm not convinced that it is.
But if what you are getting at is:
dt = K*(dM/dS)
And then you are further asking what I think "K" equates to, then let me just say "it's a tensor" and leave it at that for now.
More later... perhaps.
RMT
<font color="teal"> As with many things in science, there are many ways to do the same thing. Currently I suggest at least 4 parallel particle beams of equal energy contained in their own tubes surrounding a central cylinder in which the traveler resides. The central cylinder helps to diffuse the radiation and make it more uniform, and being between the beams as they pass through the lens causes the greatest temporal distortion within the central region.[/COLOR]
How does one get back then...the same way?
How does one get back then...the same way?
<font color="teal"> You can use several particle types, but the easiest to start with is an electron because of the ease of creating a particle source. However, the more massive the particle the faster you can potentially travel through time. [/COLOR]<font color="red"> Someday I will convert it to a proton or ion source.[/COLOR]<font color="teal"> Regarding the type of radiation, a simple analogy will help. Think of a large cone in a lake. Now move the cone quickly downward so that a smaller conical section is exposed at the surface. The radiation is similar but very different from electromagnetic radiation. The E and H components do not change direction, and there is a massive component. Mass and time are closely related, and these waves are readily absorbed by all nearby nucleons. The radiation decays quickly with distance.[/COLOR]
You are a scientist or engineer then?
You are a scientist or engineer then?
"Yes." Is not an appropriate answer. you said it feels " <font color="teal"> "Shifting and nauseous." [/COLOR]
So I am assuming it is past theory stage. However....are you just the engineer or have
you yourself actually tried it?
<font color="purple">Burp! excuse me. :oops: [/COLOR]
p.s. do you like my color I use for your words? Its the closest to marine I could get.
I tried Aqua but you couldn't read it. <font color="aqua"> see? [/COLOR]
<font color="marineblue">Marineblue [/COLOR] Marineblue doesn't show up very well either.
<font color="seablue"> actually seablue is kind of pretty.[/COLOR]
Hmmmm....do you like <font color="teal"> teal[/COLOR] or <font color="seablue">seablue [/COLOR] better?
Yes...I am kind of artistic. So I have to match your words to a color. LOL I like it!
Hmmm..Teal is probably closest to marineblue ...just darker. or do you prefer seablue better?
Seablue is kind of a bighter color and looks kind of "happier" than Marineblue...Hmmmmmmm.
Which do you prefer? They are your words. Do you want the darker but more marine color or the happier more light bluer upbeat color? However...The teal is probably easier on the eyes than the brighter blue.......
(this can drive an engineer to drink...more.) heheh
So I am assuming it is past theory stage. However....are you just the engineer or have
you yourself actually tried it?
<font color="purple">Burp! excuse me. :oops: [/COLOR]
p.s. do you like my color I use for your words? Its the closest to marine I could get.
I tried Aqua but you couldn't read it. <font color="aqua"> see? [/COLOR]
<font color="marineblue">Marineblue [/COLOR] Marineblue doesn't show up very well either.<font color="seablue"> actually seablue is kind of pretty.[/COLOR]
Hmmmm....do you like <font color="teal"> teal[/COLOR] or <font color="seablue">seablue [/COLOR] better?
Yes...I am kind of artistic. So I have to match your words to a color. LOL I like it!
Hmmm..Teal is probably closest to marineblue ...just darker. or do you prefer seablue better?
Seablue is kind of a bighter color and looks kind of "happier" than Marineblue...Hmmmmmmm.
Which do you prefer? They are your words. Do you want the darker but more marine color or the happier more light bluer upbeat color? However...The teal is probably easier on the eyes than the brighter blue.......
(this can drive an engineer to drink...more.) heheh
