Time Shift via Astronomic Alignment

[SwampeastMike]

Should the earth be properly aligned to receive a coronal mass ejection from the sun of sufficient size to cease all alternating current on earth for one half of one cycle after which the magnetic poles of earth have reversed, would this appear to be a loss of one half instant of time relative to the rest of the universe?

 

I found the following while researching:

 

http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Predict.html

 

Regardless of your perceptions of Dr. LaViolette, he was certain that the galactic center was not acting like an empty, imaginary center of rotation.

 

Since we are now nearly certain that the most powerful force in the universe lies at its very center, must we not assume that it directly influences the orbit of our sun, the earth, the moon, the planets and the stars in periodic fashion? Consequently, and as we see in other astronomical alignment phenomenon like tidal action and precession, is it not likely that this periodic behavior varies in intensity based on the alignment of other, much closer, celestial bodies?

 

Is it fair to liken the effect of a supermassive black hole on a lone observer to be a force that for one half instant pulls from your very center and the next half instant pokes you in the back and no matter your distance appears to be a single point in space? Like all other forces it has an equal and opposite and like many others it magnetically alternates--at light speed with the positive portion of the wave tugging at your center and the negative poking you in the back.

 

Now, should the center of the sun pass through a line between the earth and the point that is the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy, particularly at a time when the magnetic fields of the sun and earth are parallel or perpendicular, could the earth not be influenced by a sun-sized push in the back, the reaction to which is a coronal mass ejection directed at the earth?

 

If asked, I will gladly move this to pseudoscience and speculation, but I believe that I pose reasonable questions and considerations given our current understanding.

[swansont]

Should the earth be properly aligned to receive a coronal mass ejection from the sun of sufficient size to cease all alternating current on earth for one half of one cycle after which the magnetic poles of earth have reversed, would this appear to be a loss of one half instant of time relative to the rest of the universe?

 

One half instant? How long is that?

[SwampeastMike]

One half instant? How long is that?

 

One half of a full alternating cycle at the highest possible frequency and greatest possible* amplitude--perhaps the frequency of magnetic shift of a supermassive black hole...

 

The amount of time that it takes for a "massless" object traveling at the speed of light to fully and completely reverse direction to travel at the same speed.

 

One half of a sine wave by the simplest comparison and one unit of distance (i.e. space) advanced since the wave last crossed center.

 

A <B>full</B> instant of time is a complete alternating cycle and one full unit of time thus comprises two indivisible units of distance.

 

*the greatest possible amplitude for a "wavelike" object <I>with mass</I> at the highest possible frequency is < 1 where 1 = the distance advanced by the wave during one half cycle or one half unit of time. "Massless" objects however have an amplitude exactly equal to 1 or -1. A real observer will not be able to detect this modulation perpendicular to the axis and will instead detect a force that appears to alternate <B>along</B> the axis of modulation.

 

If the greatest force in our galaxy does indeed lie at its very center is it not logical to use its action as our reference of one unit of time and space?

 

Given this one assumption that the most powerful force in our galaxy which lies at its heart provides a reference for 1 and 2 --formerly a fringe theory and now seemingly required by physical law--have I provided a reasonable and beautifully simple way to not only visualize the dichotomy between space and time (2 units of space - 1 one unit of time = 0) but the fundamental forces that result by the creation of ∞ to a real observer over a full unit of time?

 

-------------------------------------

 

Back to my initial question:

 

Should all alternating current on earth be discontinued for one half unit of time (also expressed as one unit of space) after which the magnetic reference has flipped would we appear to have lost one half unit of time compared to other observers that did not experience this magnetic shift? Or perhaps would we appear to wobble in an direction contrary to the forces we can observe?

 

-------------------------------------

 

Previously, we believed our galaxy to spiral around an unusually empty, imaginary locus of central mass and by all our measure it appears to act in this way. Now, we find that instead of nothingness, we have a point of all somethingness forming the most powerful force in the galaxy--a force that alternates at the highest possible frequency between poking and pushing along a line between the center of two objects. How can nothingness behave similar to all somethingness unless it alternates between a poke and a push?

 

2d ∞ 1t

where d = distance and t = time

2d - 1t = 0

Edited May 13, 2009 by SwampeastMike
swapped 0 and ∞--was looking from opposite directions when writing which resulted in conflict

[swansont]

I can think of no reason why this would happen.

[SwampeastMike]

I can think of no reason why this would happen.

 

Thank you, but may I inquire as to the meaning of "this"? If it means "everything", I certainly will not impose further upon you.

[swansont]

I don't see a mechanism for any interruption of a half cycle of electricity, nor for a CME to flip the polarity of the earth's magnetic field, or any change to time.

[SwampeastMike]

Thank you again. At least "everything" wasn't wrong...

 

I don't see a mechanism for any interruption of a half cycle of electricity

 

Am not suggesting that a CME would interupt or stop electricity; but that it could short the alternating cycle between the earth and its atmosphere via the magnetosphere. A direct current pulse caused by the arrival of a great deal of matter so energetic that its positive and negative components appear to disassociate into the ionosphere where the existing electron deficit compels the earth to momentarily loose its electron surplus in order to retain the ionic molecules in its atmosphere instead of loosing them to ionic inceration in the presence of plasma. Fantastic lightning as a minimal consequence.

 

Presuming that a high pressure, molten-like iron/nickel core does indeed rotate somewhat differently than the surface of the planet (the dynamo theory) to create our magnetic field, it would seem implausible for any CME that didn't burn away the entire atmosphere to disrupt the rotation of the core.

 

nor for a CME to flip the polarity of the earth's magnetic field

 

Nor do I, save one circumstance: when the sun lies directly between the earth and the galactic center which is now highly suspected to be a supermassive black hole--a true point in space--the most powerful such point in our observation or reflection.

 

A perfect wave forming a point because we cannot observe its massless oscillation across one unit of space and instead see nothing save a similar dead point always offset by one unit of space around its "true" location in "real time" in it apparent reflection in amirror. We detect the holes presence by the difference across time between direct and indirect observation at the fastest cycle by becoming the "special" observer who can see both directions simultaneously.

 

I asked at this cosmology/astronomy forum specifically because if any field of science has recently experienced a "you have to look at it backwards to understand the cycle" moment it should be here with the revelation that a supermassive black hole lies at the center of our galaxy.

 

I try to "prove" concepts by imagining the opposite circumstances to see if I achieve the same solution; similar to what I do in fine joinery when I check my sliding saw for square by cutting and then flipping the work to ensure a perfect rectangle is cut away. While this method has worked for nearly everything, it does not (to my intense curiosity) work at the truly fundamental level that would seem compelled to exist in a supermassive black hole.

 

At this level and as a real observer in time, when I attempt to solve from the opposite perspective, I wind up one unit away and anywhere around the orignal point of interest. The closest to what I see is a tightly twisted, two-strand rope fabricated from a circle composed of an imaginary string one unit of distance wide. From one direction and at one instant of time it appears to be a point when viewed along axis. When viewed alternately from both directions along the axis, no matter how fast I flip, the only clear view is two dimensional and appears as two points spinning around each other without changing relative location--the points are thus offset by one unit of space around the center of rotation. Upon reflection of this condition, I ponder the notion that a point is imaginary because it does not exist in time but a point in time exists because it is by all appearance two units of space in diameter and, thus, real.

 

Were the two equations I provided comprehensible?

 

Zero was defined in terms of time and space in two different ways: as literal depictions of 0 and ∞ through which a "massless" object appears to follow wavelike in the same amount of time despite the apparent but indescernably perfect doubling of distance.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Again I thank you and fully appreciate your position--you are the man with the gun and menacing by-line and I am attempting to define "half an instant" and the basic action of a supermassive black hole in a place where reason and understanding of natural law are expected and cranks are rightfully rejected.

 

It has taken me seven years since first imagining to convert and simplify a similar pair of equations originally in the form of energy and mass through time into space across distance over time.

 

I still don't quite know what to think about my vision of the difference between time and space, but I will say that it excites me to consider the beauty of allowing the most powerful force in our understanding to compel the difference between one and two to be the same as the difference between imaginary in space and real in time.