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.

 

Does Time Create friction?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Hi everyone,

I just had this Idea, and someone else has probably allready had it.''What if'' time creates friction.
Friction creates energy, and that energy could be tapped into. And used for many applications, ofcourse mainly thinking about free energy.

Is this allready done in alternative energy sources?
What are your thoughts?

Thanks

Sol.

[edit on 8-8-2009 by Solidus Green eye]

[edit on 8-8-2009 by Solidus Green eye]




posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
You're sort of onto something. Time is motion in a curly Q wave. Physically we resonate inside the circle. Energy is created by the wave like Q motion.

There is already massive amounts of untapped 'free energy'. By free i mean regenerating energy caused by the 'time' motion and gravity. You just can't capitalize on it in this monetary cancerous worldwide society so it is nonexistent to the slaved minds of the world. The people who do know about free energy also know of nikola tesla's patents to harness this electromagnetic energy. Until the people with the money have no control of power through the monetary system, 'free' energy will not be available commercially.

Anyone feel like grasping their full human potential yet?



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Time does not physically exist, techinically. We observe "time" by the setting of a sun and motion of the planets, from "outside" of this, there's no time, just motion. All time is happening right now, also. So from "Outside" of the physical world we look like Chaos. I think.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Sorry Idy, but I don't agree...entirely. While I agree that time is most certainly not a physical thing (i.e. no mass or matter for that... ...matter
), I do think that time exists, as in a reality with more than the simple 3 dimensions we are perceptive of with our eyes.

But aren't we all universally (tough word) perceptive or aware of something as simple as the time it takes for an idea to go from thought to fruition - From your very romantic and admittedly quite eloquent thoughts of time coming into your awareness until you got them down in your post.

Time is the progression from now to now...to now...to now. Whether you enjoyed this post or not determines your perception on how fast the time it took you to read it felt.

I think that time is indeed, the 4th dimension - it's what's most obviously separate enough from everything else, but still real enough to demand a classification. That classification is the 4th dimension, IMHO.

EDIT: 'Scuse...lost train of thought.

What the OP is asking is something quite interesting. Is there truly some viscosity in time, and does the friction caused by that viscosity produce energy? And if so, can we, or have we already been able to tap into or harness that energy in some more than current efficient way?

That about it, Solidus? Star & Flag

And I hate to say it, but jvm222 is absolutely right...unfortunately, we have to keep it to ourselves and our friends (en masse) quietly, if we're going to grass-roots it into existence.


[edit on 8-8-2009 by lagnar]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 01:01 PM
link   
I enjoyed the post. it was an interesting read, but I am not sure that time has viscousity, but then again I am no expert. I think only matter can experience time, but given that is it possible fo time to cause energy? Possibly because energy is a form of matter. I just don't know exactly how that would work is all.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   



...not the first time i have posted this diagram on ATS.

in my own conception, time (or rather the FORWARD motion of time) is generated by a friction (or interference pattern) between energy and matter, both of which exist on a dimensional plane higher than time.

unfortunately, there is not a huge potential for "free energy" in this model, as our current universe is more or less a stasis....a balance.

a more simplified explanation was already given in this response:


quote by jvm222:
Time is motion in a curly Q wave. Physically we resonate inside the circle. Energy is created by the wave like Q motion.


[edit on 8-8-2009 by tgidkp]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by tgidkp
a more simplified explanation was already given in this response:


quote by jvm222:
Time is motion in a curly Q wave. Physically we resonate inside the circle. Energy is created by the wave like Q motion.


Sure, that simplifies it....if you say so.

Time is not a "thing" that can be held separate and whole as an individual entity. "Time" is the word we attach to the observance of celestial motion relative to other celestial bodies, and more recently, the slow decay of matter. It cannot be measured separately apart from other circumstances. It's much like "center of gravity"....you can't hold it in your hand, nor can you separate it from the characteristics of the entity.

"Time" is nothing, has nothing, and cannot stand alone without other circumstances. It's like the flavor of food......completely determined by what constitutes the "food".

"Time" is the flavor of our existence. My experience of time may be just as varied as my response to the flavor of a white radish.....relative to yours.

"Time" is a weirdly subjective experience that humans have attempted to make objective with clocks and schedules.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by cranberrydork
 


oh yes. time is one of the most fun things to theorize about because its exact nature is not clearly understood. i appreciate your viewpoint.

but in order to understand our own existence, we must try to characterize time in ways that are more meaningful than "weirdly subjective".

for example: it cannot be argued that time does indeed seem to be propelling us in a "forward" direction. there is a certain directionality to time in our current 3D experience. but is it possible that there is another frame of time which has no directionality? is directionless time a meaningful concept?

you say that YOU are experiencing time. but how can you be sure that TIME is not experiencing you?!



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
The way I see time is that it is yet another construct that helps us make sense of space. This is why it is called space-time.

The question as to whether or not it exists in a real sense is determined by the question as to whether space is infinate.

The way I see space is that it is, in fact, infinate because whatever is bounded in the universe is defined by what lies outside of that boundary, making space necessarily infinate by definition.

Therefore, time does not exist but as an illusion. A concept we created to make sense of our own location in an unknown construct.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
Therefore, time does not exist but as an illusion. A concept we created to make sense of our own location in an unknown construct.


I'd agree that "time" as an individual thing, does not exist, but I don't think what we measure as "time" is an illusion. Clearly, events occur and atomic actions take place that we can measure as "time".....

But "time" is the result of other, more basic, mechanics. Just like one would describe a towel as "wet" only because liquid was absorbed into it....it could never be reasonably described as wet when it is absolutely dry. It's the same thing with time.....you could not describe or note the passage of "time" unless some other event has occurred....the sun rose, or a particular atom lost a portion of its mass.

And that brings up the subjective thing again......at what point does a towel change from "damp", to "wet", to "sopping"? The sensation of what we call "time" can be just as indeterminate....cognitive scientists describe the sensation of what we call "now" as being roughly 6-10 seconds that clearly has no starting point and ending point. Odd isn't it.....that "now" has a clear and immediate meaning to everyone....but no one can tell another exactly when "now" starts, or ends. Weird.

"Time" does not interact with anything. One cannot change a parameter of time in an experimental way to see what would happen to some other variable. Our experience of time is purely a human way of describing our sensation of existing.

[edit on 9-8-2009 by cranberrydork]



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by tgidkp
reply to post by cranberrydork
 



for example: it cannot be argued that time does indeed seem to be propelling us in a "forward" direction. there is a certain directionality to time in our current 3D experience. but is it possible that there is another frame of time which has no directionality? is directionless time a meaningful concept?

you say that YOU are experiencing time. but how can you be sure that TIME is not experiencing you?!


Ah, very interesting thought you have there!.

Here's a thought that came to me when reading your post:

We come to the conclusion that it must be a forward propulsion, into the future. Just because we were thaught that way. Maybe it is stagnant, and 'we' create time in itself.
Matter(that uncludes us to) creates time, as matter itself is created. It has a duration of decay, a lifespan, wich we(with our sense and understanding of progress) interpret as time.

And next to that, star for you all!, very interesting theory's and suggestions.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Solidus Green eye
We come to the conclusion that it must be a forward propulsion, into the future. Just because we were thaught that way. Maybe it is stagnant, and 'we' create time in itself.
Emphasis added by me


Ah ha! I think there may be someone who shares views very close to my own.

In that same line of thought.....does "time" exist or occur for a non-sentient object?. Does geography experience "time"? I don't think anything but consciousness that has to be somewhere, or justify its existence, experiences anything like the passage of time.

I suppose it could be argued that consciousness creates time and the experience of "moving through time". Incidentally, it's not so much "moving" through it, as being dragged along with it. Take the concepts of the "past", and the "future". Realistically, neither one exists. The past is recalled only through memory, video, the printed word, etc.....in a concrete sense though, there is no past. Same as the "future".....there is no concrete future to be propelled towards; only the absolute certainty of death and decay....and again, only experienced as "time" because of other influences. Sure, I can sit here and imagine a reader looking at these words at some later date.....but it is only my consciousness and its need to have some worth and effect that creates that future....concretely, it--the future--has no existence.

As to the idea of "directionless time"......I often dream of events that seem clearly to be the result of warped, or meandering timelines. And it is created only in my consciousness.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by cranberrydork
 


Nicely said, and I agree.
The question now is, if this would be the case, if we indeed would create subjective time our selfs.
Could it create friction? Or release energy?

It would release energy , but on a physical level. For example: You are 20 minutes late at work in the morning. This causes friction in the mental department of your body, you are stressed out. And also on the outside, because you were walking extra fast to the train that morning, slamming the doors of the train station as you go.

But this is not the friction I am talking about.
Its more the metaphysical friction I am talking about.
Does 'time' (meaning the subjective creation and acknowledgment that there is time) create friction or energy. And I am not talking about the energy of running late and getting stress releases worldwide. I am talking about the fundamental thought of there simply being time, and what kind of friction it would make with, perhaps our surrounding matter.

Makes sense?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Time is both non existent and also existent in a relative perspective.

The measure of time is an organic one, observed and measured by humans and carried by every living being on the planet.

The strange thing is though, is that time is relative. One short minute to one man can be a long moment to another.

"When you are courting a nice girl an hour seems like a second. When you sit on a red-hot cinder a second seems like an hour. That's relativity." - Einstein

"The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once." - Einstein.

As for friction.... I really don't know.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


Ah yes, time is on one side a measurable unit. The other side is the comprehension of time that has to do with time going slower or faster from ones point of view.

A human can process 18 so called 'impressions' during a measured second.
The more things happen between or in on of these impressions, the faster time seems to go.
The less happens, the slower time goes.

A good example: A bird flaps his wings 10 times during 1 impression. Now lets say the bird can process 10 times more impressions, the bird would now flap once during 1 impression, making time go slower from the birds point of view.
Because a lot less is happening during one impression.

That is why time seems to go fast when you are with some nice girl, a lot happens during one impression.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
See my real problem here is attempting to have time as a tangible and physical item. You can inventory time in a way.

There will be a day or a week or a year but at the same time you can't inventory time as in a physical means. Even atoms can be counted if you look close enough and light can be quantified in photons but can you do the same with time? I can't feel or touch time so I have a hard time believe time is physical. Imagine if ages ago we never invented the calendar or watch. Would time exist then?

Heck of a subject though!

-Kyo



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by KyoZero
 


Well we share the same problem then, as suggested above, what if time is subjective. Would it still be causing friction?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Solidus Green eye
 


If time does produce energy through its passage, one would assume that it is a closed system wherein the energy it produces thereby is used to allow time to continue moving. If we were to begin draining the energy from this system, would time cease moving?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   
NASA's tether experiment proves there is an abundance of energy in low orbit. There was so much energy going through the tether that is burned right through it. There so much energy it melted the copper cable. If a space elevator could actually be created it could ground out either destroying the structure or that energy going back into the Earth causing unforeseen problems. That energy could be tapped into using orbiting satellites that beam that energy back to the surface.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by BriggsBU
 


Interesting thought, how did you come to think this?
Altough we cant come to conclusions, thats just out of reach, for now.
But if it were a closed system, and it would be self generic...I wouldn't tap anything from it
just in case.




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join