Where's Your Space-Time?

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


YAWN

I don't agree with your conclusions. But also, good night, Mister Toad.

Time really fascinates me, its something (I think) thats way beyond our comprehension. Einsteins laws state time is directly related to the speed an object travels at- in that case what we understand as a "second" happens by pure chance..... the world rotates at Xmph and travels at Ymph around the sun, we travel around the galaxy at Zmph and the galaxy zooms around the universe at ????.....put all those together and we get our second.
.....scary stuff !

EEEEK (had to add this....so that implies if an object is actually stationary time STOPS !!
(wheres those headache pills?)

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


Who or what operates the construct?

you seem to be implying that universe is filled with infinite discrete constructs with no continuous elements to seemingly link them. A digital system disguised as an analog system in the form of a 2 dimensional projection turned into a 3 dimensional hologram

Originally posted by xkillbox5000x
you seem to be implying that universe is filled with infinite discrete constructs with no continuous elements to seemingly link them. A digital system disguised as an analog system in the form of a 2 dimensional projection turned into a 3 dimensional hologram

Turned inside out, blown apart, thrown back in time to 1955 where it gets into the DeLorean with Doc Brown and speeds up to 88 mph changing it back into a 3 dimensional hologram that breaks down into a 2 dimensional projection in the form of a analog system disguised by a digital system.

You forgot about that part.

Originally posted by andersensrm

Turned inside out, blown apart, thrown back in time to 1955 where it gets into the DeLorean with Doc Brown and speeds up to 88 mph changing it back into a 3 dimensional hologram that breaks down into a 2 dimensional projection in the form of a analog system disguised by a digital system.

You forgot about that part.

All jokes aside, perception is the only thing that governs our reality,but what exists beyond that perception?

Originally posted by xkillbox5000x

Originally posted by andersensrm

Turned inside out, blown apart, thrown back in time to 1955 where it gets into the DeLorean with Doc Brown and speeds up to 88 mph changing it back into a 3 dimensional hologram that breaks down into a 2 dimensional projection in the form of a analog system disguised by a digital system.

You forgot about that part.

All jokes aside, perception is the only thing that governs our reality,but what exists beyond that perception?

More than we could possible conceive.

My space-time is -10687 just for listening to a frog.
Even more minus for answering !

.

it's my understanding that space time doesn't exist. Tesla debunked the idea of space time and was running sucessful experiments under a unified field theory at a time when einstein was only just formulating quantum physics.

reply to post by hudsonhawk69


Can you refer me to some good nicky tesla reading material? Been meaning to brush up on my electromagknowledge for some time now, might as well learn from a boss!

P.S. I am loving life and learning!

space time doesnt really exist to a blissfully ignorant sentient being.....

if space and time spin and swirl in a universe and everyones around but no one really cares, does it even matter?

Could this moment of reality be called a 'thing' or a number? This moment right now is not a number or a 'thing', it is no-thing and from this no-thing we get every thing.
Can you step 2 seconds into the past or future or are past and future just words arising now.
Only words appearing make humans believe there is more than this - whatever 'this' is.

In the begininng was the word, before the word there was.... nothing. Words are not the 'thing', words are words. Words begat language and language became ideas and concepts, which make us humans believe that there is something, something outside our experience.
Experience is the real and words and language are descriptions, abstractions, narration of what we 'think' is going on. The 'thinking' mind never knows what is going on but it second guesses. By the 'time' the mind works it out it is gone. The sensing and knowing is happening presently but the mind can only work with imagined past and imagined future.

Nothing is happening right now and it looks and feels like this.

This moment is not a place in 'time'.
We name this 'place' of seeing here and now, when really seeing is happening.
Appearances can only appear if there is a seer and knower of the appearance.
Where you are present, when you are present appearances can appear, you are what it lands on.
You can never leave 'here and now'. You are always 'here and now'.
You are the space in which all appearances appear.

Nothing is never truly at "rest". The earth we live on is moving, the solar system we live in is moving, the galaxy we live in is moving.... and so forth.

Originally posted by hudsonhawk69
it's my understanding that space time doesn't exist. Tesla debunked the idea of space time and was running sucessful experiments under a unified field theory at a time when einstein was only just formulating quantum physics.

Unified field theory, yes & no.
Einstein's laws, yes & no.
Simply because his laws do not work well when trying to compute non-terrestrial algorithms.
It could be postulated that that unified theory is accurate in matters of space, and Einstein's when under/around/or on a constant source of gravity (ex: on the ground).

Space time doesn't exist? It might not be that so much as it just being an issue of relative frame. Just ask those guys that recently "punched a hole" in time...

It's interesting that I was just U2U'ing something in regards to this very subject. We have known how to attain harmonic couplings between two scatter plots in space. but without the tech to use it just yet, it's done nothing but sit.

Of course the speed of light travels at 186,000 mps....ish +/- a few kilometers/miles, but essentially that speed. So far, it is an accepted time/speed, however......however........ ok, now......... since I have your attention, current theory has it that there can be fluctuations from point A to point B as light travels. If light passes an immensely large heavy object, or a black hole, the gravity of that object/planet can have an effect on the light path passing that object, bending that path from straight linear, by pulling the light towards the object due to gravity, thus increasing the linear distance of that path by a measurable amount since the path is linear in a straight path, then slightly curved to the gravitational object,...... passes the object, and then returns to that linear path, thus lengthening the linear path, or increasing the total amount of time. There is another school of thought that believe that possibly, having passed the singularity/planet/black hole/object..... the beam remains bent. This is sort of like how satellites are slingshot with the help of planets gravitational pull.
They start at a trajectory, but the end trajectory is much different (picture balls on a pool table changing direction from A to B by bouncing off of one an other). To my way of thinking, if the beam remained bent with only a singular change in direction, it would remain the same speed/distance, but point B would have changed in relationship to the gravitational pull exerted, and the degree of gravitational pull would translate to the degrees distant from the initial point B, yet ultimately have traveled the same total distance. The beam would not have been bent in and then return to the linear path, thus not having increased the distance from A to B. This time would be essentially normal light-speed/time. The double bent light would be modified light-speed/time. Although in the bent light scenario, it could also be assumed that the point B would come up slightly short in distance of the original point B in relationship to the offset of the degree variance.

Hope this is clear'ere them muddd Buba.

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


i dont know much on this subject but what i do know is that time is relevent to the observer. quote from einstein if im not mistaken. so as i take up space that space time is relevent to me. i do have to say in my mind than can be now because of memory yes its in my head but again time is relevent to me. numbers dont matter to me but hey im not a physicist.

Well, events happen in linear time at points of linear time, thus we as humans form a 'memory' or timeline. And for a moment occupy that timeline........ what was the question again?

I have just skimmed over the thread...

And I have come to the conclusion that this topic not only has no answer, but is pure nonsense.

Toad, go peddle your wares somewhere else unless you can prove beyond a doubt (WITHOUT quoting yourself) that what you say is true.

Otherwise, you're just "croaking".

One would think that with all of your supposed knowledge and calling everyone a fool, you might be better served educating a college class somewhere...