+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Time/Space

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Time/Space

    To discuss philosophical aspects and shorten this thing a bit, when we refer to time/space in terms of special relativity, aren't we actually talking about information/space, that is, the "absolute" time it takes for information regarding an event to be "experienced" by any observer?

    Isn't that in essence what Einstein was saying, that "observation" of an event would reveal the time frame in which it occurred?

    Light would be a medium conveying a message rather than the message, meaning that any message can be conveyed at one reference frame, with positions relative to that reference frame?

    Wouldn't this lead to the assumption that something occurred only as it was observed, and not in actual time?

    If we apply this to measurement of light as wave or electron, aren't we actually measuring an absolute reference of information in terms of time by time itself?

    I make this statement because it seems that math is a digital measurement in time superimposed over space. In Zeno's paradox of Achilles and the Turtle or arrows being shot through space, he measured time without regard to space, which had to diminish as time increased.

    For example, if a rock falls from a cliff, the time it falls increases, but the space it has to fall decreases in proportion to time.

    We select digitally any point in time at which the rock falls because we know the rate of gravity. The rock will be at a specific point with a minimal variation at any point selected as "now" in its trajectory.

    We confirm by observation.

    In Einstein's idea on Special relativity, the occurrence of an event is "confirmed" in terms of observation by light speed, which means the process of observation is not measured in terms of the rate of movement from start to finish, but in terms of where any observer happens to be once information is transmitted to him/her.

    The "now" of such an event is recognized by the transforming of that event to a relational position in time.

    An event is no longer measured in terms of the relations between space and time, but in terms of the relation between light and time, with space determined as a result of the two measurements.

    This means that time doesn't contract or expand in relation to space, but in relation to light, which merely conveys the information of the experience, which has in fact already occurred. If light becomes the constant of measurement, then time and space must contract in that relationship.

    Time and space become sub-units of information, which can be measured in any relational form so long as the equations are balanced in all relations.

    Time and space must contract in relation to light, and they do, as long as we measure from that frame.

    The implications of this in quantum mechanics is that in order to observe an event at the quantum level, it must also be measured in time as it relates to light, and each sub-atomic unit of information will have varying forms in its relation to light speed.

    IOW, if math is a digital form of time superimposed over space, contracting and expanding in relation to space, then math superimposed over the speed of light will simply be time superimposed over time, resulting in a measurement of time without space, or space without time.

    Electrons have no "velocity" in time because the measurement of position eliminates velocity and vice versa.

    The entire sub-atomic world "works" because we have transferred time to units of information that exist within time, and they become "real" when they are observed, just as the experience of the lightning flash became real at the point it was observed.

    The universe begins to look like information over physics because all units are relational measurements of position and information, not position and space, or time as related to space.

    This creates the philosophical conundrum that if it cannot be measured, it cannot exist apart from measurement.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    26,313

    Re: Time/Space

    i was STRUCK by the word observation!? so,....servation seems plain to me but i had to look up OB!? and the dictionary defines it as......he/she DIED!! spooky stuff if ya ask me!?....YOU DID ASK ME!?!?,..NO!? :freak3: :spin2: :


    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ob-
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4

    Re: Time/Space

    So I don't get it?

    Who is the scammer here?

    Time? Or Space?

    Otherwise, what was the FREAKIN Point of that long dissertation?


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: Time/Space

    Otherwise, what was the FREAKIN Point of that long dissertation?

    Why does a mountain climber climb a mountain?

    Put simply, all of mathematics is units of time superimposed over space, with math or time being digital, and space being linear.

    Einstein superimposed time over time, so that if time was measured in terms of space, it had to represent space. If measured in time, it had to represent time.

    Since time is digital, measurment of an electron as time would correspond to an electron as POSITION.

    But, if we measure its velocity, it's relationship to space, it would appear as a wave.

    Quantum physics is not time superimposed on space as observable phenomena, but time superimposed over other units of time, called atomic or sub-atomic particles.

    They can only "appear" as one measurment or another, but never both, because the act of measurment in one area cancels the measurment of its complementary area.

    This means that we can only measure the effects of light, but never light itself. It goes back to the 'thing in itself" of Kant's observations.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    26,313

    Re: Time/Space

    my question is!? why is DIGITAL SQUARE!? i know what square wave synthesis IS and it seems to mean a synthesis of another kind!? but not kinder/smoother/soother in VIBRATION/tone!? so SINE is KIND is the original intent expressed!? while square is dare to be DIFFERENT!? to what end i would ask!? is the SPEED of the vibration it's TELL!? as to which origin is revealed!? rock a bye baby, in the tree top!? watch the next STEPPING as to the big DROP/JERK!? :freak3: :spin2: :
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

Similar Threads

  1. Space pens
    By evo-llusion in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-02-2013, 02:56 PM
  2. Why is there a Space Command?
    By foxbaron in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-19-2008, 10:50 PM
  3. My space
    By tweetykiss in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-27-2008, 11:07 AM
  4. Space shuttle and space station.
    By bogie in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-28-2007, 06:59 AM
  5. Space vampires
    By Solver in forum MLM Scams
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-27-2005, 11:55 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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