e-nonymous you obviously don't get it...it obviously is TOO hard for you to understand...
Originally posted by e-nonymous
Depending on the nature of the edge of the universe, your either gonna hit and go boom or your gonna surpass it. It's not hard to understand.
These are not the only options.
Xeno's paradox (whatever the dude's name is) is another option.
The universe can have a finite area, definition and such, but you could travel as fast as you want and never reach the end because for all we know, it
goes from 0-infinity.
I'm getting time put into this, because I used to think time was just a "cycle" that we can measure to calculate stuff.
Now I think Time is an actual force, entity, or fabric that permeates everything, in fact, it IS everything...because don't you see how many pillars
it would shake if physics were to adopt a theory that only one particle exists at any GIVEN point in time?
Can you imagine how much this might mean? This would redefine science as we know it!
To apply Time not as the 4th dimension but as the 3!!!! That is something that has never been thuroughly researched, and might just well be the
proper path to take!
Your analogy of a cave-man "discovering time" does not work. What you are talking about there is "Observable time" which is
a man made
invention. What a physicist is talking about when he mentions time is "Physical time"...time before anything was there to observe it.
Your stance on time is laughable, it is not "infinite" if it were we'd never progress through time.
Time affects all things, you see it in Entropy, in motion, everything. It is not 60 seconds a minute, 60 minutes an hour, it is SOMETHING...but
Well that's what I've attempted to explain with my theory.
Time isn't 1 second 2 seconds...it is a particle's existance in this universe...we already see that with gravity even, that particles only exist at
certain points...well perhaps they do not so much exist at certain points in the universe, as they do exist at certain times.
Now measuring when a particle exists and doesn't, is completely impossible for us now, but solving it mathematically, maybe that is possible...and
that's what I wish I could get Stephen Hawkings or some super smart dude who already has a great grasp on physics and time in particular, to see, so
that maybe they'll turn their eyes to time being quantums of existance, and not so much as cycles of days//weeks and hours.
Which I doubt many physicists would say that that is what time is, but that's what the main-stream people think time is...they think it is a clock on
a wall, no it is something far different. Afterall, that clock on the wall is not time, it is just something spinning in a ryhthmic circle, meanwhile
time is a divisible constant that can be used to determine positions and such.
And because of my theory, Time could very well be none other than the existance of a particle in "our" universe, because what happens to particles
or anything, when you measure it at the singularity of time?
singularity being what I call the "Indivisible incriment of time", being no smaller amount of time than that "sigularity". So a second becomes a
millisecond and so on which then becomes this singularity, and this singularity is what we must begin to study, because who is to say particles will
be in every interval of this "singularity"?
No I think we would find that a particle exists at only certain intervals (1 interval over a number of intervals for every existing particle, which
would make the smallest incriment of time if based on atoms...some 1/10^80th power, and so every atom in the universe only exists at 1 of those
10^80th power intervals. But we must go to the very basic existing particles to truly know what the interval is, not just atoms which are comprised
of smaller particles.)
And it would be from that indivisible amount of time, that particles are known by nature to not be the same. Afterall again the question...how does
nature know that you have 2 particles A+B and not just one particle in two locations of space?