It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I have an idea slash thought on time or space time and gravity... require opinions please

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2017 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: DaRAGE


The road that led Wheeler to “It from Bit” started with a joke that he made to his student Jacob Bekenstein in the early 1970s. Alluding to the law of non-decreasing entropy (a measure of the lack of usable energy as bodies of disparate temperatures approach equilibrium), Wheeler used to jest that if he placed a hot cup of tea next to an iced cup and allowed them to even out their temperatures, he’d commit a crime by raising the amount of entropy in the universe.
...

Bekenstein brilliantly developed a solution that connected the surface area of a black hole’s event horizon (spherical region inside which light cannot escape, according to the classical picture) with a measure of black hole’s gravitational entropy. Any material falling into the black hole would deposit entropy via a corresponding expansion of the event horizon’s girth. Consequently, Wheeler’s dropping of cups into the universe would enlarge the black hole’s invisible frontier and thereby lead to a net gain in entropy after all.

Via the work of Claude Shannon, Bekenstein and Wheeler learned about another form of entropy, called information entropy, which quantified the content of strings of bits. That connection led them to an insight: if the black hole event horizon’s surface area is pixelated in squares each the dimensions of the Planck length (about 6 × 10^-34 inches, the lower limits of measurement according to quantum theory) squared, then its information content could be depicted as a single bit (0 or 1) in each square. Therefore, as the event horizon grew, its array of bits would increase as well, leading to greater and greater information entropy.

Forbes.com Sept. 26, 2017 - It From Bit: Is The Universe A Cellular Automaton?

That is from the guy (Wheeler) who was the go-between Einstein and Bohr while they argued about quantum mechanics. The article's author got it wrong when he say "its information content could be depicted as a single bit in each square". No! If you stop and really think about it, a neutron star is a quantum being in our material world; a black hole is its bigger brother: a black hole is quantum in nature. The bits of information on its surface would be quantum as well, or, qubits.

Feynman said because the universe has quantum mechanics it cannot be simulated by a classical computer. He did not say anything about a quantum computer doing the simulation! In fact, it that insight that led him to invent the idea of quantum computers!


50 qubits can represent 10,000,000,000,000,000 numbers,

Source: Inverse.com


Adding one qubit does not double the information handling because the growth is logarithmic.

It is my belief that galaxy resonates, like the Schumann resonance on earth, but at the quantum level. From there, who knows? Could be a simulation.

Time slows down because time is relativistic. The "if you are travelling near the speed of light and shine a flashlight at spaceship next to to you, what happens?" The answer, as weird as it seems, is the other ship sees you turn a flash light on like any other place.

What if you flip it around? We are living on the surface of a black hole experiencing a holographic universe that is slowly experiencing heat death at the end of universe's life!! It is because time is slowed down here on the BH surface that it seems like a lifetime of billions of years!! The quantum information the BH holds creates the quantum mechanic world we experience!!

**POOF**





posted on Nov, 16 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   


Schumann Resonance
At any given moment about 2,000 thunderstorms roll over Earth, producing some 50 flashes of lightning every second. Each lightning burst creates electromagnetic waves that begin to circle around Earth captured between Earth's surface and a boundary about 60 miles up. Some of the waves - if they have just the right wavelength - combine, increasing in strength, to create a repeating atmospheric heartbeat known as Schumann resonance. This resonance provides a useful tool to analyze Earth's weather, its electric environment, and to even help determine what types of atoms and molecules exist in Earth's atmosphere.


In case anyone is curious.



posted on Nov, 16 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Kashai

Nikola Tesla was engaged in some interesting research suggestive that the Schuman cavity could be utilized for all manner of different purposes.

Certainly accommodates some interesting frequencies that may be linked or effect Human consciousness in all manner of different ways.

That's if it does what it says on the tin.




Taken with a pinch of salt obviously but still rather interesting.
edit on 16-11-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2017 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Tesla Radio



Most “professionals” monitor the magnetic component of the peaks using large induction coils. This method has the advantage of being immune to the ambient weather conditions (the coils are often buried), easy to calibrate and suffering from lower levels of man made and natural interferance. Unfortunately, to have the required sensitivity at the frequencies of interest, the sensor coils must either be physically large in area, contain a huge number of turns or be wound on special very high permeability cores. Recall that the voltage induced on a coil by a time varying magnetic field is V = ωANB and the problem becomes apparent. Although this method is surely not beyond the means of ambitious experimenters (see, for example, www.vlf.it/inductor/inductor.htm) it is tedious and potentially expensive. For those having shallow pockets (me), or lacking the resolve to construct such a massive coil (me again), detecting the vertical E-field component of the Schumann resonances gives a workable, if somewhat less robust, option. The hardware is relatively simply and the antenna small, a 2 meter whip.


www.teslaradio.com...


Teslas career was marred by the politics by the politics of the day nonetheless his works has outlived mindset, of his detractors.
edit on 16-11-2017 by Kashai because: Content edit



posted on Nov, 16 2017 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Music break





posted on Nov, 17 2017 @ 02:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: ErosA433

Which swings around in its orbit, the focus point of which is about 45AU away at its nearest point... all points at an object, of about 2-3 million solar mass, within less than 45AU, that is producing ZERO visible light.

im not a gambling man, but that kind of sounds like a black hole


If it were producing visible light, I thought we wouldn't see it anyway because of the dust?



posted on Nov, 17 2017 @ 04:53 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

But you WOULD be able to see through the dust by making observations in the Infrared spectrum, which is why its useful to use that part of the spectrum. It gives one information that observing just the visible part of the spectrum cannot.



posted on Nov, 17 2017 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: DaRAGE

Here's a post I made some time ago which you may find interesting:

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: neoholographic

"So if gravity is emergent, like temperature is, that means it must be emergent from something. But from what? This is where Verlinde borrows from the holographic principle. His theory suggests that gravity is emergent from fundamental bits of information that are stored in the fabric of spacetime itself."

In some sense this is already what General Relativity says. Gravity emerges from the properties of curved space-time, the detection of gravity waves makes that clear. Mass causes space-time to curve, and mass is made from particles, which can be described with bits of information according to quantum mechanics. It's also interesting to note that gravity affects the rate at which time flows, such that time flows slower near large objects, as if slowed down by reality to compensate for the intense computations performed in that region of space.

edit on 17/11/2017 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2017 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

If it is producing visible light, you are right, that light is less than the extension from dust. Almost everything we observe in space produces black body radiation, which includes lots of Infra Red light too... the object produces not enough light to be observed in the optical spectrum, or IR spectrum.

So there is an enormous object... that does not shine... At all, in a manner that other objects around it do.

Only thing that happens occasionally is that it will produce a big burst of Radio and X-rays
edit on 17-11-2017 by ErosA433 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: ErosA433

Ah so it's invisible in IR too. Anyway, the LIGO results to me make black holes an unquestionable fact.



posted on Nov, 17 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

Infrared cannot detect the black hole but it can resolve/detect the accretion disk that forms around the event horizon of such. Problem is that any other, as of yet, form of detection in the visible light range is blocked out by all the stars that are also near the center of our Galaxy.



posted on Nov, 17 2017 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: DaRAGE
Hi,

So I have an idea about space, time, and gravity.

I kind of believe we are living in a simulated reality like on a computer. Therefore everything is information.

The more information there is to compute in a local area, the more time it takes. So just say empty space doesnt have much to compute in its area, a place where there is much to compute in a local area would take more time to process.

We have all heard of space time.

Space and time.

Time slows down the closer you get to a black hole. That i believe is because there is much more information to compute in that local area. The more mass you have the more time slows down aroind that mass due to more information to calculate and process.

The universe is made up of space time. Ever expanding. Which means more space and time is created constantly.

Imagine the universe as a huge lake filled with calm water constantly getting bigger creating space and within that space time as well.

The objects within that lake like planets and the sun and black holes contain mass... mass in information. The more mass the longer to compute that information within its locale.

Imagine mass as a sink hole within the lake of space time.

Sure... that mass takes up space... but it takes up more time within its allocated space to compute.

So time flows out of the space time around that mass and into the sink hole that requires more time to compute.

Could that flow of time into the sink hole of mass be what we experience as gravity?

Or is it the flow of space time... both space and time into the sink hole that we experience as gravity?


Thats why time slows down the closer you get to a black hole or an object with mass because time is flowing into it.





But space-time isn't flowing near mass, it's static. What changes is it becomes "bent" or the curvature changes.
We see that when light changes it's course near mass. Light follows the shortest distance so around mass that short path becomes a curved path.

so we know the geometry of space-time changes near mass.

Postulating a universal computer which must process mass as information is a modern way of getting into the "turtles all the way down" idea. Because now we need to figure out what physical form this mass/information takes and what this universal computer is made of, how would it interact with information and and at what level does it exist and all sorts of questions along those lines. It's really a postulation of an entire new level of physics behind our current standard model version.

Ideas about reality being a computer simulation generally don't answer any questions because it creates an entire new level of reality that still would have to be figured out.

For example if a reality generating super-computer is creating a simulation for us then there are two general possibilities which arise. One is that the true reality is completely different than the physics we experience and would require an entirely new science and the other is that the computer is identically mimicking what true reality is like. If that is the case then nothing at all changes.
Meaning that if we exited the simulation, quantum mechanics and the standard model would still be the correct physics and the questions we are currently trying to answer about reality are still valid. We could leave the simulation and go to a real life particle accelerator and pick up doing science right where you left off in the simulation. All the same unanswered questions would still exist and need science-ing.
So in that way it solves nothing. It's a redundancy.

Keep in mind that in the Newtonian mechanistic era machines were the big new thing and it then became popular to view the universe as a giant machine. It was a modern and progressive idea at the time. So that phenomenon is now happening with computers.

There was a time when the word "machine" had no meaning to humans and in the industrial revolution/mechanistic era the word "computer" had no physical counterpart. I think that started with Turing in the 1920?
I believe someday there will be another technology that we as yet don't even conceive of that might be again compared to the universe. Each time it might be closer and closer to the truth?



posted on Nov, 18 2017 @ 02:13 AM
link   
a reply to: joelr

"But space-time isn't flowing near the mass, it's static. What changes is it becomes "bent" or the curvature changes.


Why are you offering that because mass curves space-time it would constitute a "static" event?

You're suggesting that that in a condition that in an of itself could be defined as another state of order, cannot be defined as unmeasurable in relation to activity because we cannot measure it. Saying "I cannot measure something
so it does not move", as opposed to "I can not measure this because to measure its movement is beyond me". Is in all sincerity a big difference with all due respect.

It's not my job to let my ego involved in this so if I determine something is unmeasurable as mass does not mean I can no longer relate to it as mass. Like in the case of Pi, there are consistencies that do not make it perfectly random.

Further reading.

phys.org...



posted on Nov, 18 2017 @ 02:25 AM
link   
A point would be that Mass in a black hole ability to resonate could achieve a state beyond stasis and instead go beyond such a condition to achieve a negative state and so, becomes negative mass, naturally.

Thoughts?
edit on 18-11-2017 by Kashai because: Content edit



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: joelr



Why are you offering that because mass curves space-time it would constitute a "static" event?

You're suggesting that that in a condition that in an of itself could be defined as another state of order, cannot be defined as unmeasurable in relation to activity because we cannot measure it. Saying "I cannot measure something
so it does not move", as opposed to "I can not measure this because to measure its movement is beyond me". Is in all sincerity a big difference with all due respect.


Ok.

What?

Well, I was responding to where you said "Thats why time slows down the closer you get to a black hole or an object with mass because time is flowing into it. "

I just meant space-time curves into the mass but there isn't any "flow" in the way I thought you were describing it.

There is a flow of time but it's constant and really WE are doing the flow.

So, without mass we/you are always traveling through the time dimension but we don't always have to travel through space.
When we do travel through space we travel a bit slower through the time dimension.
When mass is present flowing through time causes us to also move through space. That movement through space is gravity.
Does that make sense? That is how Minkowski four dimensional space-time is viewed.



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: joelr

"Kaluza's theory was a purely classical extension of general relativity to five dimensions."

en.wikipedia.org...–Klein_theory

Yes but this is what I have been talking about.



posted on Nov, 30 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: joelr

"Kaluza's theory was a purely classical extension of general relativity to five dimensions."

en.wikipedia.org...–Klein_theory

Yes but this is what I have been talking about.




Ok.

Also what I should have said was: when mass is present we move a bit slower through the time dimension so to compensate we begin moving through the space dimension (falling towards the mass) that movement through the space dimension is gravity.

It keeps energy/momentum conserved. This is a way to view General Relativity that makes even more sense than just thinking of curved space-time. If you consider curved space-time and the fact that we "fall" through it, it really doesn't make sense. Just because it's curved why should that mean we fall through it?
But because our movement through time has slowed there is some extra energy/momentum that has to be used up somehow or there would be a violation. So that extra momentum goes into moving (or falling) through the space dimension towards the mass.

To me this makes GR even more ingenious. Einstein was a freak of nature.



posted on Nov, 30 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   
In a way, you are describing friction in that falling results in decay.



posted on Nov, 30 2017 @ 11:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Zelun

its an interesting approach and read from your link but even the article states.

"There is a caveat to this conclusion: if our universe is a simulation, there is no reason that the laws of physics should apply outside it. In the words of Zohar Ringel, the lead author of the paper, “Who knows what are the computing capabilities of whatever simulates us?”"



posted on Dec, 1 2017 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42


Yeah as however, the simulation is occurring there would result in something outside of what we currently can calculate as reality.

In contemplation, it is not that there is an outside observably but conceivably, an inside that is different.

Hope Y'all don't mind I occasionally mention, something fringe.





edit on 1-12-2017 by Kashai because: Added content



new topics




 
11
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join