Zephir Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 By GR the time is one of dimensions of space-time, therefore we should explain the more fundamental concept first. Because many of us are allergic to AWT shortcut (I don't know why, it's theory like many others), I will not reference the Aether concept here, but we should realize a few trivial connections, which are quite general and independent to any particular theory. At first, the energy can spread through in two kinds of waves, the longitudinal and transversal one. The longitudinal waves doesn't spread through inhomogeneous environment by random ways, it always follows the path of maximal mass density, while the transversal waves are follows the path of maximal density gradient. For example, the waves at the water surface are mostly transversal waves, so they follow the water surface gradient. Is that clear? The light spreads in transversal waves nearly exclusively, so we should consider, every bit of energy is using some density gradient and we can use the water surface as an 2D analogy of space-time. The number of spatial dimensions of water surface is defined by degree of freedom for inertial energy spreading, i.e. the number of congruent directions, in which the surface wave can propagate without affecting the energy propagation in another directions. This makes the water surface model of two-dimensional space-time. And the time dimension is the direction, which is normal to the spatial dimensions. From the above description follows the recursive definition of time dimension for space-time formed by density gradient in high level space-time as a spatial dimension of high level space-time, normal to spatial dimension of given low level space-time. In fact, this concept is known quite well and understood from general relativity description of geodesics in 4D space-time as a Hamiltonian flow in 5D space-time, because we know, the matter waves are propagating through 4D space-time like the waves through 5D space following the Fermat principle of least action and the same formalism is relevant for Hamiltonian at quantum scale - so it will be a quite difficult for us to refuse it. The water surface model just makes the understanding of this concept more apparent, thats' all. Only those, who doesn't know all these connections call call it trolling. What follows from such definition of time? Well, a lot of connections. For example, if we realize our space-time as flat (mem)brane in hyperspace. The brane space-time concept is crucial for explanation, how the density gradients can form the 3D space by quantum foam. We can see, the time is in fact two dimensional quantity, because the flat membranes consist of two surface gradients with two conjugated time dimensions (1,2,3, 4). You can understand, why the heterotic brane theories are operating in E8×E8 gauge group and many other connections, why the Dirac called the antimatter as a matter living in the opposite time arrow and many other things, which we can dispute in details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 Nobody's "allergic" to AWT, or any other concepts. All that is being asked of you is to not hijack threads by posting off-topic/alternative responses. Discuss these in their own threads. That is why this post has been moved. It is not an appropriate response to the topic under discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephir Posted April 16, 2008 Author Share Posted April 16, 2008 ...It is not an appropriate response to the topic under discussion... This is just a subjective claim without any reasoning. My stance is, it's the most relevant explanation of time, which we have and it's fully consistent with general relativity model of space-time, the brane model in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 This is just a subjective claim without any reasoning. It's the most relevant explanation of time dimension, which we have and it's fully compatible with general relativity model of space-time. The staff on SFN have to make subjective decisions it's their site. If you don't like their decisions try talking to an admin, but they're likely to side with the mods and there is no appeal then, it's THEIR website, the service they are providing you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephir Posted April 16, 2008 Author Share Posted April 16, 2008 The staff on SFN have to make subjective decisions it's their site. If you don't like their decisions try talking to an admin, but they're likely to side with the mods and there is no appeal then, it's THEIR website, the service they are providing you. I've no problem with this, I'm just insisting on the subjective character of their stance, which violates the proclamativelly scientific state of this forum. The science has character of intersubjective consesus, therefore every subjectivelly controlled site, which is labeled as scientific is using such denomination unfairly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 I've no problem with this, I'm just insisting on subjective character of their stance.Look, let's make this all about *you*, Zephir. Suppose you started a thread about the aether concept and someone else wanted to tell you about his own theory, how it may not be accepted by many but made sense to him. He posts his ideas and suddenly everyone stops talking about your topic and starts talking about his. Now imagine that this guy does this to virtually every thread you start, constantly taking over the topic of your thread and changing what everyone's discussing. Your ideas get no time because everyone is busy telling this other guy what they think of *his* thesis. This is what you've been doing. You're the other guy who keeps trying to make everyone discuss what *he* wants to talk about, even in someone else's thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephir Posted April 16, 2008 Author Share Posted April 16, 2008 ..Suppose you started a thread about the aether concept ... I never interrupted the thread about foreign theory by such way, so your example is irrelevant. In thread about general concepts (like this one about time definition, where my above post was placed originally) everybody has the very same chance to present his personal opinion about subject. ..you're the other guy who keeps trying to make everyone discuss what *he* wants to talk about... I can say easily the same about forum moderators. I'm just presenting my personal opinions here like others and you're not required to answer me at all. But the forum moderators learns us such behavior very actively, because they're practicing it in great extent. Btw The number of post of yours is 3500+, while mine is forty times lower. I'm not very sure, you're the right person to teach me not to overwhelm the threads by number of posts. Somebody could call such behavior a hypocrisy, don't you think? Anyway, it's just you, who is off-topic in this thread by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 Btw The number of post of yours is 3500+, while mine is forty times lower. I'm not very sure, you're the right person to teach me not to overwhelm the threads by number of posts. Somebody could call such behavior a hypocrisy, don't you think? No. You have been here three weeks and Phi for All has been here for four years, which is about 70 times longer than you. So he is in fact posting at a much lower rate than you (2.43 posts per day compared to your 3.80, if you are interested). Please don't misrepresent the purpose of moderator action, accuse our staff of being hypocrites, or impose false and arbitrary benchmarks on posting frequency. It just pisses people off. For the record, the administrative staff not only support moderator action to remove spurious claims or off-topic posts from current threads, we actually encourage it. The wonderful thing about the web is that if you do not like this practice there are plenty of other sites which might accommodate your specific needs. Anyway, it's just you, who is off-topic in this thread by now. Don't goad the staff. He was responding to your complaints, and you don't really have the right to call "off topic" immediately after provoking him. This thread can carry on according to the first post and whoever wants to discuss the explanation of time by inertial environment concept can do so, or it can carry on as a thread about another thread and end up being closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephir Posted April 16, 2008 Author Share Posted April 16, 2008 ...don't goad the staff....It just pisses people off .. At first, just because you're member of staff, you're not required to have an absolute truth in everything. Believe it or not, I'm providing you a valuable feedback of your activities here. Your stance is demonstrating, how even the feeling of power deforms the behavior of some people toward totalitarian, arrogant and confronting behavior. If it's pissing you, it can serve as an evidence, it targets the problem, but this is not purpose of my posts. Just try to think about it. While I accept your stance concerning the activity benchmarks, I'd like to point out, I didn't provoke "Phi for All" at all, as he visited this thread spontaneously with OT post first by the same way like you just with apparent intention to provoke a confrontation. You guys are full of testosterone. What purpose this forum is supposed to serve for? Is anybody here interested about new ideas at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 The hint was plainly there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts