a reply to: Peeple
I think what's cool is that by simply introducing a timeless realm, it can make a lot of different concepts "click."
Everything from an afterlife to a piece of the time filled universe existing in two places at once (quite easy when time isn't spreading everything
I think the next step is to explore how
these different realms would be connected, as well as introduce the concept that its not just one time
bubble and a timeless one, but many others with many differing parameters could exist. The next after that is how we might be able to interact with
such structures from the typical and mundane to the magic, "spiritual," and woo.
By going to the limits of the time realm, I believe we start to see the membrane between time and the timeless (perhaps more accurately, membrane just
seems the easiest thing to visualize). So, looking at the very small, going a certain velocity, looking at the very big, and instigating transient
events can bring this barrier into view. For now, really only looking at the very small is readily available to us, but over time, we will start to
approach the other barriers as well. In the loosest terms, the anomalous behavior of what we see with the quantum arises from peering into the
timeless realm, and the "membrane" that connects us. In a way, something like the Planck length could be seen as the mesh size.
So, in this system, everything moving towards entropy is the result of time "draining" back into the timeless at a rate that is mostly controlled by
that membrane. However, this can be drastically changed by events that exceed the typical parameters. Just like a strong enough explosion inside a
sealed container of water will tend to break the container, or enough pressure inside a balloon will cause it to pop. Even if it doesn't break
something, things like mass can change the normal composition of the "membrane" and in that, change the rate of flow back into the timeless. The
increased pressure causes the metaphorical mesh size to expand.
Alongside this, the time filled realm wouldn't be so much an elastic string of time stretching from beginning to end, but more of a framerate. When
things like frame compression (the rate of change speeds up) or frame dragging (rate of change slows down), VERY anomalous events can occur. What
would normally be a limit can be stretched a bit, as it is dispersing the forces over multiple frames. Since a single frame from 3482 BC has
essentially the same energy potential and parameters as a single frame from 2027, we can begin to see behavior that may be impossible in the normally
defined, distinct framerate.
So, it all started with certain forces from the timeless bursting into a time bubble. I see this happening as a result from some kind of cavitation in
the timeless realm that introduced a distinct wave, or oscillation, that gained enough stability to continue spiraling off into the universe we know
today. The same equation which could predict the range of possible behaviors in that first frame are repeated constantly, wherein the variables from
the current frame dictate the possibilities for the next. That equation would be "reapplied" at a nearly incomprehensible rate, but if done correctly,
could feasibly allow us to run a total simulation of our universe from beginning to end, and from the smallest events to the largest ones. The
implications of that are quite.. profound.
I like to visualize this as a bullet hitting ballistic gel. In its path, it hits an area of different, higher density that changes its path. This
change in direction causes it to hit another area of different, lower density. While those changes are predictable, the bullet would have never hit
the second region without the influence of the first. When we know the presence and location of those density pockets, and that a bullet will hit the
gel block at the right point to start the event cascade, we can predict where the bullet will be and in what frame it will be there, long before it is
I think that very roughly covers the next step. Only one more, and it should be a rough, terse description of my answer to your question
edit on 11-2-2017 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)