Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Is time an ephemeral construct of material existence?

                                Image result for time clock images free 


The nature of time is an age-old and unanswered question, but this ignorance might handicap current scientific progress. Time is considered a fundamental quantity in physics. Therefore many core problems in contemporary science, such as entropy, the big bang, and the cosmological principle, are dependent on this crucial understanding. However, a new clue might suggest that the global nature of time is static. The idea, proposed in 1982 by Page and Wootters, indicates that the universe maintains a static state concerning outside observers. This is a powerful idea. A 2013 experiment by Moreva and her colleagues, 'Time from quantum entanglement: an experimental illustration,' proves the principle of static time. 

In a carefully controlled experiment, an interconnected pair of photons can evolve relative to each other. An internal observer connected to one of the photons would experience the changes of the other photon as a time evolution. The experiment implies that our environment and the visible universe have clock-like properties. When we look at galaxies that lie at increasing distance from us, we find that we are observing a younger and younger version of our world. The further we look, the closer things get to the big bang. However, to arrive at the notion of a static universe, we have to find the complementary subsystem of this clock-like material world. Where in the universe is the other half of entanglement?

In practice, we know that whatever goes up also comes down. A cup of hot water cannot cool down without warming up its environment a little. Entanglement acting through mirror symmetries and dualities would always produce energy conserving, symmetric spatial topology. But if this is true, then negative curving space and anti-gravity should be part of our world. This is only possible if the experience is limited to the visible part of the universe. In Einstein's general relativity, the universe should have two poles, black and white holes. While black holes form a point-like singularity, white holes would be sources of expansion. This quality seems to satisfy the entangled pair of black holes. In black holes, time grows so old it stops changing, whereas time is zero in the white holes. They expand space so nothing, not even light, can approach them, and this would make their discovery a practical impossibility. However, the existence of Polar Regions allows the whole cosmos to maintain a static state. This way, time stretches between the poles and forms the basis of a cosmic symmetry. Time is directional and points toward the black holes only within gravitational regions. Moving toward the black holes would destroy not only life but also the material structure. Reversing time is possible by moving toward space's expanding white hole regions, but this would also mean an end to biological systems and even matter. Anti-gravity would push people, spaceships, and even planets or galaxies away due to its expanding, cold influence. Recent vacuum studies found anti-gravity effects supporting the possible existence of expanding regions. 

Existence and life are limited to mild gravity regions. Yet, here we are at Home.

The book on Amazon                                mailing list                                          


The Science of Consciousness Post, your news about the mind
The Science of Consciousness, please join the discussion
Website: evadeli


Copyright © 2017 by Eva Deli
                                   


5 comments:

  1. Interesting! Existence in my opinion is in the ever-present, and existence is caused by the ever-expanding Universe space from within. Everything we can experience from within the Universe is caused by this expansion: time, energy, mass, gravity, inertia, electromagnetic forces, etc. Time occurs with the first order linear expansion of space and is just a record of expansion. http://danbowlds.blogspot.com/2017/02/what-time-is-it.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I discovered a new simple time formula. As it is known, every simple
    physics formula explains a law of nature. My formula says, ‘In a
    physical process, a certain amount of time emerges as much as the
    amount of energy in that process.’ that is, “The more energy there is,
    the more time there is.’ Please can you evaluate my website and
    articles? my website timeflow.org and three articles,
    https://magneticuniverse.com/discussion/307/timeflow-theory-by-salih-kircalar

    Special Relativity Theory (SRT) equations revealed that mass and time are
    proportional.

    t / t' = m / m'

    My 'Timeflow'='Time'/'Energy' Formula makes a small but important
    contribution to this. It expresses that the relation of mass to time is equal
    to the amount of mc2 energy of the mass, which is 9x10'16 s or
    2,851,927,903.26... years for 1 kg of mass outside the gravitational fields.
    Very small free particles in space must be observed by organizations such as
    NASA or ESA, only then my proposal will be verified.

    In addition,The flow of the thought energy intensity in our brain is
    body pain, unhappiness and boredom, joy and joy, happiness and love,
    sleep, and finally death, respectively, from low to low. At the moment
    to sleep, if we had a good sleep, our thought energy is very close to
    zero or zero. When the energy flow intensity increases in our brain,
    according to the 'Timeflow Formula (Timeflow=Time/Energy). The
    timeflow will slow down. As the energy density (power) decreases, the
    timeflow will accelerate. In the case of sleep and death, the timeflow
    will be infinite. The timeflow formula explains very clearly and
    simply that this situation, which is perceived as psychological time
    is actually a purely physical event. I think it would be very useful
    for psychology experts to evaluate the 'Timeflow' Formula and the
    philosophical interpretation of the formula.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for sharing your work. You propose an interesting idea. Good luck!

      Delete