pantheory

Looks like fun. Making predictions of the future of science seems like fun. For me it would depend upon what questions were being asked and how well and for how long they will keep track of the score concerning who made the best predictions.

Yes, I think this Medical Forum is the right place for this posting. I think the scientific interpretation would be that people today that believe in such a "blue-blood" reptilian origin royalty idea would have psychological or mental issues that need treatment //

The only single valuable quality this claim has is it's humor But I seem to be less productive in my own sense of humor concerning providing a cool reply as others have done here.

Daedalus, I think that most of the preposterous proposals stemming from Quantum Theory involve the fact that QM does not recognize the existence of background field particles that make up the ZPF. If there were such particles which influence quantum behavior, I believe that by their discovery or recognition, many if not most of the preposterous aspects of Quantum Theory would slowly disappear. On the other hand such hypothetical proposals of background field particles are common and many, such as dark matter, Higg's particles, gravitons, quantum sand, field strings, etc. etc. I believe there are Planck size dark matter particles that are so small that they rightfully could not be called matter (like photons), which I think will lead back to rational models of time which will relate to change/ motion, like a relatively simple definition

Pardon me. I should have said both Special and General Relativity, concerning my last question -- considering all the LT's involved in the math The General Relativity comment related to GR being the mathematical basis for the Big Bang model Quantum Theory, I believe, is where all the complicated theories concerning time, stem from regards

Daedalus, Again, your graphics are exceptional. Outside the framework of the Big Bang model and General Relativity, do you see how Temporal Uniformity might fit in?

Wow, Lots of cool equations and graphics. How do these equations and graphs relate to Temporal Uniformity? best regards

Thanks again, looking forward to it. I also concur that we are in agreement concerning our understandings of time.

Thanks Daedalus, looking forward to it. Here is a good example of my postings concerning understandings of the concept of time. I was just researching modern concepts of time in physics and came across this book called From Eternity to Here: The Quest for the Ultimate Theory of Time. Although I haven't read it, there is a huge difference of "opinion"/ theory here. Mine is that time is one of the simplest concepts to explain and understand in physics, similar to space -- that time can simply and fully be explained and understood by a one sentence definition and no more. On the other hand the author's opinion, concerning modern physics, is that an entire book is needed just to explain the possible theoretical developments needed for such an "Ultimate Theory of Time" to someday be created. I would call the difference of these two opinions an abyss. This is what I consider a good example of the logical problems with modern physics, many of which I think stem from misguided attempts to translate theoretical physics into language. //

Sounds good to me. Although I describe gravity via the pushing forces of aether particulates in vortex and fluid dynamic motions, the math is MOND-like vector equations and not that sophisticated. I have been struggling with the realization concerning gravity formulations and galactic motions, that math alone including a particulate aether or dark matter, will never seemingly be able to predict anything at the galactic scale without direct observation of the details of the observed motions involved-- seemingly remaining an ugly step-child in physics requiring retrodiction -- even though we may be able to improve on the poor level of retrodiction that present dark-matter models are presently producing. But yes, show me the math and if I understand its possible application , maybe I could somehow realize how to use it to make better gravity formulations/ predictions

Thanks for the extended reply to my comment Daedalus. I agree. I cannot think of any kind of change that does not in some way involve motion of some kind, but I prefer using the word "change" rather than the word "motion" to define time since some motion, like particle spin, for instance, presently concerns nebulous descriptions of it in physics, in my opinion. I think your presented proposal on time can be based solely upon logic alone and needs no math. I think sometimes mathematical physics confuses more than it clarifies. As we both know in some facets of physics time has different meanings according to a particular theory/ model, but I believe all those that think that time has any other meaning aside from change or motion, are following "false gods." I think that time can best be understood and explained by definition alone using simple words such as "an interval of motion/change" and little more. Unfortunately nowadays some physicists seem to like making the simplest of concepts into post-grad college material if somebody is paying them to do it. Defining time with complicated concepts and math that seemingly reinforces the complication, I think is a good example.

Yes, I agree. Time is one of the simplest of concepts but motion is not its essence, just one of the most important factors of it. I think the simplest single word to define time is change. A point in time is not time itself, it is just a single time frame. Time itself might best be considered an interval of change(s). Although I believe everything in reality is relatively simple, many believe the opposite: that much of reality is extremely complicated and beyond the comprehension of humans, ever. Some theorists believe reality is very complicated with multi-verses, many extra dimensions, worm holes, etc. and believe that time is also complicated enough to allow the possibility of time travel. Occam's Razor may not always be the best indicator concerning the mechanics of the universe, but it often provides wise guidance concerning better directions to look, as you seem to suggest.

I agree Daedalus, Time is motion but maybe more accurately could be described as "change." Since motion can be solely relative motion, and fluctuating energy levels certainly represent change. I also agree with you that traveling backward in time is impossible based upon our concept of time. You cannot undo what has already happened. But that's why we are in the speculation forum because there are other explanations of time depending on which field of physics you are discussing. That's why everyone does not agree. There are a number of ideas concerning what the essence of time is, even though in truth the best definitions might simply be an interval of motion or change.

I just took a quick look at your site. Cool! Mine is pantheory.com It appears that we both have a book in cosmology and plenty of related ideas. I'll read more of your site as time permits, Regards, Forrest

Howdy all, I'm from California and have spent a lifetime studying physics and cosmology. I am an alternative theorist and have written a book and technical papers concerning alternative cosmology and related theoretical physics. The model that I propose is now more than 50 years old. I have broad interests in science along with many other subjects. I enjoy a good discussion on the net but in my experience arguments on the net do not bear fruit . I am not married but have adult children ages 30 to 34. I am of retirement age but have several on-going businesses. One is in construction, another is in stem cell research. I have been a science teacher in science and technology. I am always looking for science minded readers who would read and criticize my theoretical/ cosmology book or related new technical papers. I like to make friends so give me a holler. Presently my friends run the gammut of ages form early twenties to 85 for my best friend. best regards, Forrest