Your saged opinions please

[annaz]

I have a little question about a 'time synapse' theory I'm working on.

Working on the principle that time is a sort of 'dark' energy, in that we can't see it but we can see the effects of it in everyday life and that without time there can be nothing, because it would take time for any action to occur. Also that time and space were one in the same thing (Space = time)

I was wondering if it would be possible for a black hole to replace what matter it consumes with time, and therefore space. So if a star collapsed into a singularity it would mean that either it's cubic area was replaced by an equal amount of space, or that its eqivalent mass was replaced by space. This would in itself cause expansion, as there would be more room in which celestial bodies could move. A bit like partially de-cluttering a room with a vacuum cleaner, so to speak, then re-arranging the furniture to make more space.

Obviously the theory is a whole lot more complex than just this one element but it does seem to unify the the theories of reletivity and quantum mechanics and has a beautiful asthetic, in that it means that space would be neither finite or infinite in size, as the size measurement would be redundant in the usual sense. But the possiblities would be finite and ending in a decay process where everything becomes a giant inert lump. With no time left everything would cease to exist, as long as nothing could observe it externally.

I would really appreciate your thoughts on this.

[Double K]

To me the idea of Time as a "force" or element doesnt really work.

The main thing that relativity suggests to me regarding time is that it is dependant on the other factors, not them dependant on time.

Time is an arbitrary bench mark that has been assigned by man, and although measurable in the same manner as a force or distance, or weight etc, it has no effect and is in fact a consequence of other measurables (our distance from a set benchmark/how many revolutions/seasons etc)

 

Although measurable, it has no weight/force or physical manifestation of any kind, it's an ethereal measurement...and although we can see the effects of time on a rock face (this is in fact not an effect of time, but an effect of the frictional force of the water or sand blasting etc not actually of "TIME")

[Realitycheck]

First of all, there is nothing mystical or mysterious about black holes. The term black 'hole' has grown quite obsolete as it is not even a hole(to some unexplainable dimension or parallel universe or whatever.) It is an object that has grown so massive that its gravity overcomes anything and everything around it. As it pulls more and more stuff towards it, it gets bigger and bigger and bigger, so big that it can be at least several? light years across. The term singularity has grown somewhat obsolete, as it is just the theoretical center of gravity, not some mysterious focal point where everything is funneled to somewhere else. They tear up stars and put their lights out and don't let any light escape and that's about it.

 

As far as time is concerned, it is just time, so inextricably married to everything else that to classify it as energy just wouldn't work. Space (which is married to time) contains matter(and jtherefore energy), but to say that time is energy sounds a lot like a very potent god, but why would the energy be dark? Anything and everything in this universe that really amounts to anything is constituted by light energy. The dark energy is just out there in the middle of nowhere pushing expansion of the universe.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

A bit of a correction on black holes. Theoretically, a black hole is supposed to look a lot bigger than they really are, though they can undoubtedly become the largest structures in the universe. Take a well-grown supermassive

black hole like the one in the Milky Way. The event horizon is measured to be about 4 million times the diameter of the sun. This actually ends up being .0025 light year wide. However, when you take into account the effect that gravity has on light escaping it, it is actually smaller, but hardly a mathematically defined singularity or point. It is all of the mass which gives it all of its gravity and there is just no way you are going to fit it into a point.

Edited May 5, 2010 by agentchange
Consecutive posts merged.

[Double K]

A bit of a correction on black holes. Theoretically, a black hole is supposed to look a lot bigger than they really are, though they can undoubtedly become the largest structures in the universe. Take a well-grown supermassive

black hole like the one in the Milky Way. The event horizon is measured to be about 4 million times the diameter of the sun. This actually ends up being .0025 light year wide. However, when you take into account the effect that gravity has on light escaping it, it is actually smaller, but hardly a mathematically defined singularity or point. It is all of the mass which gives it all of its gravity and there is just no way you are going to fit it into a point.

 

But a black hole is so dense that no light can penetrate it (hence why its black) or is it that no light escapes it? I forget now..!

If no light can pass it or penetrate/escape it, then how can it's width be measured in light years, as it could theoretically be larger than that given that it devours light...

[Realitycheck]

No light can escape it, but its hold on light extends out further than just its surface. Take a star, for instance, that is being drawn in, gradually torn apart, and is being sucked into the black hole. As it is drawn inward, eventually it reaches the event horizon, where no light can escape anymore, even though it has not necessarily hit the mass yet.

 

Light cannot pass throug it either and if light from a star behind it, but not exactly in the same line of sight, will be warped by the immense gravity in a process called gravitational lensing, which distorts the actual position of the star.

 

A light year is simply a distance, that it takes light to travel in a year, or about 6 trillion miles. I also made an error calculating the diameter of our galactic core. According to the wiki, it is comprised of 4 million solar masses, not diameter. It's interesting to see how they were able to calculate the mass of a black hole and not just its size, as if that is even possible since it is hidden behind the event horizon. Apparently, they calculated its effect on 16 nearby stars over an extended period of time.

Edited May 5, 2010 by agentchange