Automotive Deals HPCC Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Water Sports
Customer Discussions > Science forum

Space-Time


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Aug 27, 2011 1:28:53 PM PDT
compuhorse says:
How does the past, present, and future fit into Space-Time? I've heard that all time exists at once, and that we only experience a part of it. It's like a line where every point is actual, but we're stuck on our point and take it be the only point when there's a future point that we aren't experiencing.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 27, 2011 2:02:47 PM PDT
Why are you bothering to ask this when you're already dead and you haven't even been born yet?

JL

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 27, 2011 4:20:26 PM PDT
compuhorse says:
James Longmire: Why are you bothering to ask this when you're already dead and you haven't even been born yet?

compuhorse: That's the issue I'm trying to get answered, if that's what space-time implies at some level. At one point in space-time, I'm not born yet, at another I'm alive, and another I'm dead. But, from what I've heard, all three of them exist at once in space-time if space-time contains all of these events at once.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 27, 2011 4:49:16 PM PDT
That says more about the nature of mathematics than it does about the nature of time.

Let's see the empirical evidence...

JL

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 27, 2011 5:02:00 PM PDT
compuhorse says:
James Longmire: That says more about the nature of mathematics than it does about the nature of time.

compuhorse: That's definitely true.

James Longmire: Let's see the empirical evidence...

compuhorse: I don't think this is tenable, because we can't have evidence for every statement that we make. But if that's what space-time implies, then it seems we have to accept it because it's a well-corroborated theory. But I guess this depends on a person's philosophy of science point of view, or meta-scientific point of view.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 27, 2011 10:23:33 PM PDT
noman says:
this isn't a question that can be answered on a forum. or w/o a great deal of graduate study. However there are some resources that may help:
http://www.wfu.edu/~brehme/time.htm

http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2008/10/the_nature_of_time.html

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/time-
thermo/

and finally, the concept of time I'm most familiar with, times arrow & thermodynamics as related to chemistry and kinetics.
http://secondlaw.oxy.edu/

in any event, the answer is easy, it's getting the right *question* that's difficult.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 28, 2011 4:47:21 AM PDT
JL, still beatin that same ol-same ol unborn dead eohippus with the same ol Missouri 20-pounder says: " Let's see the empirical evidence... "

Jack : You can do this one all by yerself at home on the kitchen table, all you'll need is a white rabbit, Blue pointed conical hat with a silver slice moon symbol and a long black stovepipe hat with a clandestine rabbit size hatch on the top. Sneak the Blue moon hat into the Lincolnesque Stovepipe hat with a concealed rabbit size hatch on top and then Place the white rabbit into the concealed moonhat at the bottom of the Lincolnesque stovepipe . Swiftly pull the hat off table - allowing the rabbit hid inside the conical moon hat to fall through hatch and then brazenly jerk stovepipehat onto the top of your head { closing hatch } while deftly turnin around blocking any view of moonhat plopped on table { just in case ol Brer rabbit is feeling frisky } and voilette !!! - present empty Stovepipe hat to the amazed audience. While all eyes are on the empty hat quickly reach behind your back with your left hand and grab moonhat containing Ol Brer Rabbit. Slowly move hat back onto your head and simultaneously sneak concealed rabbit back on top just as Stovepipe hat covers your head. Remove both hats and - voilette !!!
First there was a rabbit then there was no rabbit then there was .... See, same deal as with this here spacetime continuum stuff -it's just eternity repeating hijinks with a rabbit named Josh .

Time is a rabbit in hat in a hat
that's apparently missing
from where it's not at

" When logic and proportion
Have fallen sloppy dead
And the White Knight is talking backwards
And the Red Queen's "off with her head!"
Remember what the dormouse said;
"Keep YOUR HEAD "
Grace Slick

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 28, 2011 5:06:56 PM PDT
Jeff Marzano says:
compuhorse says:

[How does the past, present, and future fit into Space-Time? I've heard that all time exists at once, and that we only experience a part of it.]

One of the strangest ideas I have heard is that people can be reincarnated into any time period past or future or even live the same life over again to try to change something they deeply regret for example.

This is a very strange idea if true because as you said it implies that all possible futures exist simultaneously. I believe it is true. If I recall correctly Edgar Cayce chose to repeat the same life experience in the American Old West time period.

I just finished reading the following book which is very strange:

The Philosopher's Stone: Alchemy and the Secret Research for Exotic Matter

Alchemy is like a thread or connection back into the ancient past and the mysteries of Egypt and Atlantis. The initiation candidates in Egypt learned about alchemy and something called the universal solvent.

That book tells how the alchemical secrets were rediscovered in the 20th century either by accident or intentionally in Nazi Germany first and later in America and Russia during the Cold War.

Himmler and the Nazis had much more than just a casual interest in the occult. Their occult beliefs included alchemy and they were studying ancient manuscripts to rediscover the lost sciences of the Very High Civilization to create super weapons.

Alchemy is related to time in certain strange ways. The philosophers' stone material loses a large percentage of its mass when heated and then that weight loss mysteriously re-appears when it is cooled down. The theory is that this exotic material is composed partly of time itself and during the temporary weight loss the missing mass moves into another dimension.

This matches up with the enigmatic statements of the alchemists such as Paracelsus who said their 'stone' doesn't take up any space under certain conditions.

One of the many strange and esoteric points of the book is that time can be quantized. Just like there's some minimum amount of mass that can be measured in quantum mechanics which is called the Planck Constant there is also some minimum unit of time. This time unit would be the basis for a new form of physics called 'causal mechanics'.

The author, Joseph Farrell, says that Einstein's relativity idea and quantum mechanics both do not include this idea of the quantization of time and as a result both of those forms of physics are counter intuitive. I guess he thinks the causal mechanics idea is more intuitive.

There was a Soviet scientist named Kozyrev who felt that the size of a star and the amount of hydrogen fuel a star contains do not by themselves indicate how much energy the star will produce. He felt time had an effect on a star's energy output and time itself is like an energy source.

Kozyrev claimed that he created a telescope which he could direct at the actual location in space where a star really is, not its optical location, and he could see the star. This is implying that the real time image of the star reached his telescope at speeds which are much faster than the speed of light. He said he could also point his telescope at a future location of the star and see it there also.

There were many brilliant scientists working in both Nazi Germany and Russia during the 20th century as is well known. It was Kozyrev who thought of the 'causal mechanics' idea.

The yield from a hydrogen bomb test is affected by the location on the surface of the Earth where the test is performed and also the position of the planets, the moon, the stars, and especially the sun. The affect of those things on the yield is very significant. That book claims this was confirmed during the above ground atmospheric hydrogen bomb tests.

These are all alchemical ideas which the alchemists of old stated using their veiled and ambiguous language. They were talking about the subtle and mysterious relationships between space, time, and matter.

Alchemy is mainly associated with the elements between the platinum group metals and mercury on the periodic table. Mercury in particular is part of the alchemical trinity. Alchemy involves changes to the structure of the atomic nucleus of these elements.

Jeff Marzano

The Lives of Edgar Cayce

Edgar Cayce on Vibrations: Spirit in Motion

Initiation

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 28, 2011 6:12:59 PM PDT
What don't you believe in Jeff?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 28, 2011 6:42:27 PM PDT
A. Caplan says:
James Longmire says: Let's see the empirical evidence...
>Research the Special Theory of Relativity. It states that time, like velocity, is not a constant but is relative to speed as compared to another object. I think that what compuhorse is talking about might be more closely related to the multiuniverse hypothesis proposed by string/membrane theory.

Posted on Aug 29, 2011 9:12:38 PM PDT
compuhorse says:
I just want to point out something. What I'm asking isn't based on a multiverse or any other type of theory, and it's only based on one universe {which is the one that we experience}. Space-time says there's four dimensions, and they're all connected together. We only experience three of them, and there's said to be the fourth of time. And I'm wondering about what Space-time says if we were to go to that fourth dimensions, which is the dimension of time. Would we not see everything in time at once, like the past, present, and future all at one time?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 29, 2011 10:03:59 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 29, 2011 10:04:16 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
Would you see anything if there were no height and length and width dimensions?

There are actually 11 dimensions, and these are required by higher energy states. 9 spatial dimensions, that's 6 more than just our 3, but they're curled up very small, so they're invisible to us.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 30, 2011 4:28:47 PM PDT
compuhorse says:
werranth413: Would you see anything if there were no height and length and width dimensions?

comuhorse: I'm not sure.

werranth413: There are actually 11 dimensions, and these are required by higher energy states. 9 spatial dimensions, that's 6 more than just our 3, but they're curled up very small, so they're invisible to us.

compuhorse: This theory hasn't been tested yet. They're still trying, and we only have one theory that has been tested, and has past it's test. This theory is that of Einsteins, and they only have four dimensions, and my question is about the 4th one.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 30, 2011 5:02:05 PM PDT
A. Caplan says:
compuhorse says: We only experience three of them, and there's said to be the fourth of time.
>We do experience the fourth dimension, time. Like the other three dimensions, it is a variable.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 30, 2011 7:14:06 PM PDT
compuhorse says:
A. Caplan: We do experience the fourth dimension, time. Like the other three dimensions, it is a variable.

compuhorse: We supposedly do, but it's usually past and present. But Albert Einstein said that past, present, and future are a persistent illusion, and that's usually considered our expeirence of time. Ergo, it seems like he's saying our experience of time is an illusion, and that's one of the reasons for my question.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 30, 2011 9:52:27 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
How was it tested? Wasn't it wrong?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 31, 2011 11:49:48 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 31, 2011 11:50:04 AM PDT
compuhorse says:
werranth413:How was it tested? Wasn't it wrong?

compuhorse: I can name three things, off the top of my head. The first was measurement of time slowing down. The US Air Force put two cesium {atomic} clocks in their planes, and had one cesium clock running at Naval Medical. They flew these planes around the world, and eventually found a time differential between the clock on the ground and the clocks that were flying through the air. This was predicted by Einstein's theories.

Another prediction was that there should be "Black Holes", and we've supposedly found one at the center of every galaxy that we've found so far.

Another prediction was light bending around massive objects, like that of the sun. This was confirmed by Arthur Eddington during a solar eclipse. Those are at least three predictions that I know of that were derived from Einstein's theories, and he's predictions have been right so far. That doesn't mean that his theory is right overall, but it does mean that his theory was correct about the predictions.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 31, 2011 3:01:01 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
And you think these only apply to a 4 dimensional manifold?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 31, 2011 3:33:04 PM PDT
compuhorse says:
werranth413: And you think these only apply to a 4 dimensional manifold?

I don't think those only apply to a 4 dimensional manifold, since they *could* be applied to other manifolds. But I've heard that those are imbedded in Einstein's theory, which itself involves the 4 dimensional manifold. And, as of now, Einstein's theory is the only one that's been corroborated and considered testable.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 31, 2011 4:44:08 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
Heh, what do you think Einstein would say if he was alive today?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 31, 2011 5:34:40 PM PDT
compuhorse says:
werranth413: Heh, what do you think Einstein would say if he was alive today?

compuhorse: I think he'd say he'd only care if it's corroborated and testable.

Posted on Aug 31, 2011 7:16:29 PM PDT
Jeff Marzano says:
Some people think Einstein never finished his Unified Field theory.

Others say he did finish it but the implications were so unimaginable that those ideas were given a very high security classification and removed from mainstream physics, universities, etc..

British author and researcher Nick Cook feels that entire industries are in place today trying to solve technical problems that were in reality solved many decades ago.

Certainly we know that some scientific ideas are kept secret. Exactly where that line begins and ends I don't know.

The HAARP radar array up in Alaska is one of those subjects where people have different opinions about what exactly it is capable of doing.

Jeff Marzano

Occult Ether Physics:: Tesla's "Ideal Flying Machine" and the Conspiracy to Conceal It

Haarp: The Ultimate Weapon of the Conspiracy (The Mind-Control Conspiracy Series)

Posted on Aug 31, 2011 7:18:26 PM PDT
Cocoa Puffs, 11.8-Ounce Boxes (Pack of 6)

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 31, 2011 8:55:58 PM PDT
werranth413: Heh, what do you think Einstein would say if he was alive today?

R3: He might say, "Hey, I'm 132 years old!!"

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 31, 2011 10:28:11 PM PDT
GPS satellites only work because they are corrected for special relativity.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 41 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Science forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  54
Total posts:  1018
Initial post:  Aug 27, 2011
Latest post:  Aug 2, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions