36grit

Perhaps this is beyond the reasoning capacity of my current imagination. I've seen the double slit experiment cartoon by Dr. Quantum on you tube, and I can grasp the concept and difference between a particle and a wave. I always figured that our means of viewing the electrons passing through the slits, was causing them to "particleize" so to speak. I don't think I'm alone in the persumption. So, with this presumption in mind, and the contemplation at hand, I'd have to say that perhaps these changes do not occur as a cycle but rather as a result of outside forces acting upon the quantum material at hand. Or perhaps random transition and outside forces working in comination, or They are both, wave and particle, all at the time and action determines results? Hmmmm, Looks like I'll have to some research to gain a proper undersanding.

I saw a globe of the comsic radiation background left over from the big bang. How faraway is this from earth? How can we see anything beyond the big bang?

Well, I understand that if you want to engineer something you would use math for a particle, or wave accordingly. I find it very interesting that these things are more likely to be a particle in the first orbit near the nucleous. I'm sure these things could be calculated either way at any given moment but, How do we know it's not a very quick cycle? I imagine a band, and the proton is the drummer, (because I read they cannot coexist in the same nucleuos in the same state) and the better all the other quantum particles keep time, that is switching from particle to wave, the more stable an atom would be. Thus building more stable materials like stainless steel and gold that do not decay like other materials. And most importantly, I'm trying to reverse engineer the universe like every other curious soul does.

Well, I'm a simple minded guy. And ofcourse I have a simple minded explanation that fits the model in my head. Here goes, Ever drive down a highway on a sunny day and notice that bright spot on the gaurd rail that seems to be cruising along just ahead of you, No matter how fast or slow you go? That spot is the rays of light that are actually hitting your eyes dead on. When you look up at the sky at night and see a star, it's the same thing. You only see the the light rays that directly hit your eyes. Now, the star itself might be a solid ball of light thousands of miles in diameter, but your just seeing a very small section of light rays that's usually millions of light years in diameter. On top of that, those rays probably only took a fraction of a second to be created. Therefore: they are probably less than a couple of hundred thousand miles long. That means that they will only hit your eye for a fraction of a second. That is to say, the light rays are not continious from your eye to the distant star. There's a lot of distance between and inbetween all those rays of light. To make it even darker, the distance between you and star and the rays of light is expanding very fast. Personally, I think it's amazing that we can see stars at all.

My theory, exteme reductionism, I think time is very physical and real. The universe is a sea of time and every movement therein, is time travel. Before the super spec of singularity there existed only an endless sea of infinite possibilities. There was nothing more than the future, a static realm of silence and motionless awaiting. The advent of time and a time line changed all of this. Infinite possibilities was and is transformed into fibers of statistical probabilities. These things are very real and have physical properties that are transferred into the momentums that string all things together. The present time is the only thing that is "real". Touch the table and let go. The touching only exists as a gohst like memory. Now imagine touching the table. Again just a gohst of the probable and possible future. If you say, "I'll never touch the table", I'll say you rember things that never happened. Only the present instant of time is real. We look out into the distance and see the past. Consider the distance occupied by mass. It is real, but only from instant to instant as the future comes bubbling up from the quantum energies that are traveling the momentum strings left behind. These waves become particles and define another instant, of time.

Photons, electrons, and I think many other "things" in quantum mechanics are said to be both particles and waves. I'm wonering, does this happen as a regular "timed" cycle or is this cycle of transformation irregular and unpredictable? And does anybody know why this happens or what event/s might cause this phenominom.

Why six dimensions? Well, when we build machines to travel around on earth, we use newtons laws of gravity to aid in their design. When we send space craft out small distances in space, we use Einsteins principles of relativity to help guide them. To travel long distances in space, in any practical manner, we'll have to build machines capable of quantum leaping. I beleive reffering to space/time in six dimensions will be impartitve. In fact, I doubt if we'll get any closer to the "dream" than we already are, until we divide, and define, these instances of time, into very real and physical entities. Those who believe that time is only an abstact series of events should consider that time is a mechanism working in conjunction with motion that governs the speed of all sequences of events relative to one another. Those who think that the quantum leaping of mass is imposible, might consider the possibility that we are already quantum leaping from one instant, and place, in time the next, continually.

My guess, The situation that causes the object to burn up in the atmosphere.

The scenario above makes perfect scense but it is an illusion. Your voice needs to travel a distance to reach my ears. Therefore your request for me to meet you in the future came from the past. This might not seem very important as matters go here on earth but if we were traveling the heavens it would be make huge a difference. In fact it would require some very complicated math involving six dimensions of space/time.

I have heard of other theories but the big bang seems to be tho most popular. Most others include or explain some kind of big bang. I saw a show on TV where Carl Sagan and some of his collegues claimed that they solved the mystery of what caused the big bang, and attempted to explain the origins of our universe. They explained that two (or more) Universes collided and caused a chain reaction. Ofcourse there where diagrams, math, and lots of scienticfic hype and mumbo jumbo that I tried to understand. I like to think that I am a man of reason and I really do enjoy watching and learning from the reasonings of other deep thinking people. After the documentery the big question that loomed between my ears was, where did those other universes come from? And what caused their big bang? Somewhere somehow there must have been a single original universe and what makes them think that this one is not it? Seems that one way or another we still have to explain an orinal big bang if the theory is going to hold water. I hear Steven Hawkins has a new theory called bounce theory. I will check that out a little later when I find the time. I've also heard, and used to believe, that mass and everyting will keep on expanding until even the tinyest of particles and waves reach a point of nothingness and then the cycle will start all over some how. As far as I know there are not to many other theories on the origins of the universe. Ofcourse all the "Gods" have their stories and I have mine. Somehow a big bang seems to be a pretty common thread though. I'd like to hear some other theories and/or other problems that people have with the "big bang" theory. My own personal opinion is that the Big Bang model is becoming a little out dated. What we need are some new ideas to ponder. Some new models to calculate. Something to fill the gaps and holes in the old theory. Sting theory sounds kind of cool but I think it's way to complicated to be true. I'm don't think that "complicated" necessrily constitutes a "hole" in the theory, but I did see a clip or two where it made some physicist feel uneasy about it. M theory has a similar problem but again, I guess that doesn't make them wrong. I'm starting to see progress on you tube in the understanding of quantum physics and it seems it's starting to out grow it's "Quack" stage. Ifyou know what I mean. And we've come a long way since the big bang theory. Today we have a much better understanding of back holes, and pulsars. Scientists have recently discovered that reality is an energy wave. We've come to the conclusion that this might not be the only universe existing in the realms of what is, and the ideas of parallel universes has gained some degree of acceptance in the scientific community. So let's have it, come on with your theories and lets poke and plug holes. The biggest obsticles in our way seem to be a lack of understanding in the study of gravity and time. I look forward to hearing some other theories. Mark out!

pretty cool, I got it after a several seconds of contemplation, but I didn't know that there was a name for it.

sounds to me llike either way he's probably going to wind up being a near sighted wittler.

Well, I guess I'll put my two cents in. The universe is a sea of time, all movement therein is time travel. This is what I call "Horizontal" time travel. In this type of time travel going backwards and forwarda is not only possible but very probable. It is similar to a VCR tape going back and forth. The only difference is that the tape is two dimensional and we are three dimensional. We move back and forth in time and don't know it because our thoughts and actions are always within the prespective time frame. That is to say that all of this is but a rerun and everything has happened before and again and again. within my theory "infinite theory" it is possible for mass to quantum leap from one point in space time to another. This is also a "horizontal" time movement. Atoms appear and disapear as they define present moments of time by converting future distance into past distance space. All things are a matter of relative perspective within infinite scales except the speed of light. This is the only constant and seperates and defines our universe from the ones around it. The type of time travel being discussed on this forum is what I call "vertical" time travel. It has to do with going into the past and the future. Every instant of time has it's "time signature" past, present, and future. It can be calculated by the size of the universe at any given point in time. The speed of light is infinite. The present time signeture is the amount of time it takes for light to travel one on edge of the universe to the other. Like the counter on an old cassette deck measuring the inches on the tape back and forth. Light records the distance and places everything in it's proper order accordingly. There are two ways to time travel vertically as far as I can predict. In the first instance: It is possible to isolate the time stream of the present and project it into the future or the past where you do not exist in your present state. Since you cannot live without your physical body (as far as we know) you can only project a small percentage of the time stream around you. The past and future is real and a part of your present, but you will only experiece it as a ghost and in a dream like state. In the other instance you'd have to remain in the forward time state that we are in while shrinking or expanding the universe around you. This would require existing in one universe while creating other versions of the universe around you. Hence, parallel universes that expand and contract to the point you wish to enter in and reform a new future. This may seem impossible to the casual observer but some believe that every possibility already exists. If this is true then this type of time travel is simply a matter of marking your current universal time signature and traveling to another that already exists inbetween the frames of time that we currently experience. This instance of time travel leads back to the question of "why have'nt time travelers visited us before? Personally, I think they have. I'm sure they try and blend in and enjoy the time frames at hand. If they are here than they must have traveled from the future, because the technology does not exist yet and you cannot explain how a cell phone works to a cave man. However, stories that contain magic wands have been around for a long time. Poof! your insane! LOL Well, that's my take on time travel. I hope at the very least it gives somebody a little food for thought. And if your a time traveler, maybe you could give us all a better insight than mine. Just bring your two cents worth and have no fear of the rubber room or the straight jacket. I think the world is ready now.

Scientist describe the big bang theory as starting out a mere speck of near infinite density. A very poetic statement but not very scientific. Within an infintie scale everyting is realtive. Exactly what are they saying? At some point within an infinite scale, a neutron star is no more dense than bubble wrap. It's all matter of relative perspective. They describe a universe that started off smaller than the head of a pin, and expanded to it's present size and it is still expanding. Within an infinite scale of size, it is still smaller than the head of a pin. It's all a matter of relative perspective. Scientist say that outside of the speck, nothing existed. No space, no time, no mass, no distance, just pure and absolute nothing. It would stand to reason that if nothing existed on the other side of the speck then, than nothing exists on the other side of the speck that we are today. If nothing exists on the other side, than one might say that math and statistical probability also cannot exist, because that would be something. Therefore it would be impossible for science to suggest that , "it is a statistical probability that the universe will expand tommorrow". To say that we are expanding into an infinite or finite nothing, would be to describe nothing as something. According this (insane) train of thought, there can be no such thing as nothing. Nothing is at the very least statistical probability. Is'nt this just a mathamatical means of predicting future events? According to the reasoning above one must conclude that we are not and did not expand into nothing, but that we are and have always been expanding into the litteral and physical future. Or perhaps grape jelly heavily laden with heavy metal rock and roll, or I don't know. But expanding into the future seems to make sense. Mathamatically nothing is equal to zero. Anything times zero is always zero. So if we are expanding into nothing than we would be nothing. Those who believe that we are something must search for a better understanding. If the future can be described as infinite distance, than the sequence of events that led to the point of "unfolding" or "creation", or "the expansion" of mass existed then. Than it probably exists now. The scientific community, and most people, acknowledge that the universe is expanding. Why do they believe that this only pertains to space and distance and not mass? If the universe is expanding, why exclude it's mass content? It's like, a jet that flew over the head of a child who experiences a sonic boom. He is to young to understnd that the wave is continuous and relative to the position of the jet.

If time is not physical, then their would be no decay. If thought were not physical, there would be no gravity. Debatable I'm sure, I just like to inject food for thought, that's just what I do. because I'm hungry to. So, If the big bang is correct in it's assumption that all mass was once a spec that inflated almost instantaniously, ( or at least very fast) then how can the atoms decay at the same rate but not the same time? I am typing in English and there are things we need learn real fast. Today, I am a world wide charity of thought tommorrow, we'll identify the stars in the same way that we discerned the ancient contents that drifted and why do laugh at the time machine today when you know we will be building one tommorrow yet, how can we build a time machine, with no understanding of six dimensional space/time and the substance their of.

I hope to study at BU someday, But for now all I can do is try and get an acossiates degree here at Iguess U. I go to class two nights a week and there's a very nice view out the window. We are currently studying chapter three entitled, Galactic Black Holes. Tonight we learned that; they are emitting future time waves as massless gravity at the same rate they are sucking in past time waves of ultra pure enegy. The result is a galaxie spinning at a predictable rate adjacent to the perimetter, as gamma waves escape from the slower center. At current, the gamma waves have scientists in the past scratching their heads bald while comming up with all kinds of theories and mathamatical equations. I know their all doing their best to make sense of it all. Seems like just yesterday. We don't have a lot of money here at the Iguess U timology dept, but we did manage to scrape up enough to buy an old delapadated time machine. We hope to have enough money real soon to hire a team of professionals to fix it up and get it running. Hopefully before the end of the year school trip to the edge. I always look forward to seeing those colorful gas clouds rain down into the heavens, Truly, an awsome site to behold!. Perhaps we'll even get lucky enough to see a mass storm. That would be great. Tell everyone I said hello and I'll see ya soon. wishing all of you the very best. Mark

I think Einsteins theory of relativity calculates it pretty good. His theory states that large bodies of mass warp time and space. Why not say that mass radiates space? what's the differece? It's just another way of saying the same thing to gain a new frame of perspective around an old picture, so to speak. If the momentum of a black hole in the middle of the galaxie is causing the matter of the galaxie to spin, then is'nt it responsible for the future point in space the mass will soon occupy? Therefor it can be termed, future distance momentum. If we could calculate the area and weight of a galaxie (Inculding the black hole in the middle, and of course all the others) We should be able to calculate the density of the gravity on the other side, of the event horizon at the edge of the universe, but I don't know how you could prove it. I see black holes (solid or near solid, gravity) destroy mass by shrinking it down to the size of energy. Why not an edge that expands mass at the speed of light? If we can derive energy from mass then we should be able to derive mass from energy. I don't know. There must be some way to prove or disprove it though. If we could smash matter into anti-matter a zero distance space might emerge. I don't know if you'd be able to measure something going through it before it collapses under the preasure of the dominating normal past time distance. It might even hang there due to the vacuum of space. Here's a poem another poem to help expand the evolving train of thought though: The nature of a galaxie a planet strays to close to a black hole where it is crushed to the size of energy the information is pobably still there but black holes are made of condensed future time space they are made to rain down gravity the momentums are there because mass needs to feed to perform the task at hand we need to expand at the speed of light nothing is free my freind we need expansion to slam into the edge of infinity because we need more future BAM! the past crashes and the future collapses at least to some extent as the edge moves on the view most excellent a shock wave of galaxies, stars, and quazars comming down in sheets as far as the eye can see the other side is static and infinite the inside has a beginning and an end now, far far from here and far far from now the momentums will be spent the present will collapse that is, all of the galaxies mass because it cannot exist if it cannot pump out the past it will return to a static state and wait for the next wave to pass

E=MCsq The past expands as the future collapses instant entropy at C Hello mass expand me said the universe in a forest of time trees I am an artist in a sea of time think I don't laugh at your theories? Science screams, "No such thing no such thing as perpetual motion Oh, expaneion of this little thing It's nothing The first part is a little hard to understand so I' m going to rewrite it.

(acording to popular and accepted theories in the scientific community) Is time a one dimensional entity? I've heard that space is made up of length, width, depth, and time making it a four dimensional entity, But isn't time itself three dimensional, being past, present, and future? If time is three dimensional then would'nt each instance have similar but seperate attributes makeing space/time a six dimensional entity?

According to the model in my head (that is more artistic than scientific) Mass does not bend space time but radiates past time as distance. See infinite theory by Mark Beal in the speculation forum.

I do write a lot of poetry. In fact this is posted on a few sites where I publish poetry. As far as poets go, I'm constderd average. As far as poems go, I'd have to agree that this one is less than average.

Infinite Theory By: Mark Beal Please read slowly. The words are compressed for maximum efficiency Mass is time and distance present. It moves into time distance future, leaving time distance past behind. Our galaxie is (in large part) an expanding past time;time wave distortion bubble. This time wave distortion bubble is expanding amidst a static, infinite field of pre-present, and pre-history energy and distance, probably rich in gravity in a thin and stretched state. This gravity leaks in amidst a cosmologicaly intense electro-static energy storm, coupled with the surge wave suface tension at the event horizon. The event horizon is chaotic and not uniform. The gravity condenses once free from the static and infinite distance. Some in the form of huge swirling vortexes of zero time distance. zero time offers a path of least resistance for light, energy, and mass nearby. Stretched thin they disapear then exit on the other side with great force. Some of the gravity that leaks in is much smaller. Smaller, less intense, gravity vortexes condence into the atoms if great gas clouds, ice, and rocks of various elements, as they capture the storms energy attracted to the zero time distance. A meduim sized vortex may well create a galaxie similar to our own in it's state millions or billions of years ago. ___________________________________________________________________________________________ I'd like to hear your thoughts, question, and challenges to this model. Please step up. I was asked (On another forum) to expand the explanation of three dimensiol time. This was my reply: keep it simple, you will understand. Time can be broken up into three dimensions that we are all familiar with. The past, the present, and the future. It may be difficult at first, but try and realize that we are not moving in space but time. Let's examint these instances of time: If we look at a star 30 thousand light years away, we are measuring time as a distance. The light that came from that star traveled a distance of 30 thousand years. We are not seeing the future or the present, but the past. Therefore: we can conclude that if our universe has an edge it must be the edge of an instance of time space past. We also know that our universe is expanding. This makes sensce because history is always growing. At this point one might ask, "What is space made out of?" The answer is mostly distance. The fabric of the distance itself is probably gravity, but that's another subject. So now we can define past space. It is the distance from the beginning to end. The present is the point inwhich the future and the past meet. Because it is time it must also occupy distance. Mass might be described as a tangible distance. Gas, liquids, and solids define the distance of the present. The location of the present is contantly changing according the momentums and forces acting upon it. The atom is a time machine, sucking in the future and spiting the past. It is the physical point of the exchange. Mass is made up of atoms. There would be no expansion in the universe without it. Large bodies of mass pump out enough past distance to bend light. It stands to reason, at this point, that the future space time is also made up of distance. It also stands to reason that our universe is expanding into the future. The future must also be in a very still (static) state. Any movement therein would constitute a present action and an instance of past time space. Future distance also exists within our universe in the form of black holes, Quazars, and gravitaional forces being drawn in to the atom for conversion. Time stops near a black hole because future distance cancels out the past distancs. These future distance objects draw things in because they radiate a thinner atmosphere in the space time continuum. The future must be infinite because if it were nothing, there would be nothing, and I am something. Therefor I have named this theory, "Infinite Theory" In this model the universe had a beginning state. It probably started off as a single atom caused by some movement in the highly volitile, static, future distance space and then as a chain reaction started growing. It is probably that it will keep expanding forever.

what is time? As I see it, Time is a three dimensional construct of past, present, and future. Each is comprised of it's own seperate atmosphere of distance (space). I have found different theories as to wether or not space has a substance but it seems all agree that at least past time is comprised of distance. Look up infinite theory by yours truly, on this forum and I think you'll get a better understanding of time. PS: I'm no expert, but there doesn't seem to be any other timologists in existance to date.