It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# "measure it once and time it infinitely" theory.

page: 1
0
share:

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 04:38 PM
The universe is big. "big" what is that? a size, distance, density, composition? What steers the perception into quantifying an "infinite" concept as "all" into the confines of a finite word like "big".

If I asked you to walk across 10 football fields you would consider the distance before answering me. You would quantify the effort, (Energy/ Exertion) required. You can do this having seen at least one football field with some degree of scaling (trees, buildings, people along side it)

What if I ask you to "walk" across the universe? You would consider completely different things altogether. Time and distance would be of foremost concern. Thinking linearly of times progression, and our own perception of time elapsing across ventured distances ( boat ride, walking a route, daily train ride).

You would say no because I can't live that long. It would take too long to walk across it even if I walked at light speed.

You would be right so I would give you a little something and all of a sudden you are immortal. Tada!. SO,

You would consider the distance. You might still say no. You would say that since the universe is expanding faster than you can travel from a perceived "center" out, that you could never reach from end to end. Your starting point would now be somewhere closer to the middle. Your destination, the "end of the universe" would never get closer. It would always be "faster" than you. That is thinking linearly of time and matter progressing from a big bang center out. Like a shock wave of creation.

Well here is point one. The big bang has not stopped. It is still happening. Our perception of "progress" through time and space is warped by our looking glass lives.

The most important moment in the history of everything was this one time, when the universe formed. Everything there after is just matter and energy in a swirling dance of gravity and time. Energy and matter converting into each other. Matter condensed so dense that it explodes with the workings of a whole universe in all its varied components.

When did that happen? Any measurement we take would be only an indication of how well we measure, not an actual date. Let's take a look at the Earth's crust for example. It renews itself daily. Slowly but surely everything on earth is sucked underneath and melted down and recycled back up. That's why we wanted moon rocks to tell us how old we could be. What if the moon is "recycled" as well through some unseen system of renewal?

What if in 1 google years from now all the matter of the universe is similarly recycled? How can people from then after "know" how old the universe is? can they measure a single grain of sand and "know" what transformations it has undergone in all its existence before and thereafter. How can you tell then? All you can measure is your ability to measure.

Here is point 2. Since time is relative to matter then the event with the greatest concentration of mass and density would have the most exaggerated time ever. Those gravitational pressures' would literally be eternal.

We think it is an expansion. What if it is like a sun? A swirling ball of renewing energy to matter conversions, itself part of a greater system of mater and energy that create time. Let's focus on "Our" perception of time at least.

The measure is adapted throughout the "event horizon" and out to compensate for loss of matter. As the universe expands time slows down as relative to the matter present. The net force of the gravity created by the density of matter is what creates time.

Time does not exist for "energy". If we say that there is at least as much energy as matter then half of the universe does not exist at any given moment to be "measured". The system then has to be understood first so as to understand the true concept of time.

Time passes through matter. Matter passes through time.

There is a release from time / gravity when matter is converted into energy. Well since creation entails energy "creating" matter, the universe. Then any act of matter creating energy is part of the original big bang.

The smaller you go, the farther back in time you go. Time is not linear. Our perception of it is constant because our distortion of it is constant. The earth is only so heavy. The more dense something is, the more time is distorted around it.

If you go infinitely dense and infinitely small, you go to the original moment of the "big bang". Time is relative to matter.

edit on 18-5-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 04:49 PM
Ok so what theory did you want help naming? The only question you have asked is what does 'big' mean. Big is a word to describe something positive, relative to zero. Just as small, is something negative relative to zero.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 04:51 PM

Big is a word to describe something positive, relative to zero. Just as small, is something negative relative to zero.
all

that's assuming that there is a starting point to time. The first instance of time is still happening. The only thing that changes is the perception of it.

what if there is no longer a starting point. what is big then?
edit on 18-5-2012 by BIHOTZ because: adding as I go

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 04:54 PM
The starting point was when you asked the question. The fact that you are able to witness yourself and creation around you, that is the zero point.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 04:55 PM

I'm still under the impression that time is a measurement and only exists as such.

Id call your theory the "measure it once and time it infinitely" theory.
edit on 18-5-2012 by Bleeeeep because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 05:03 PM

well the starting point for me maybe. What if you want to look to a specific time? What if you ask how old the universe is or how long it will expand for until it no longer has enough energy to stretch any farther.

Will it collapse back in, dissipate?

Consider the universe to be a recycling ball of transformations of energy and matter like a sun.

Imagine trying to play a video of the entire suns existence and pin pointing a particular sun spot 3 days ago or one 4 thousand years from now.

Now imagine that every time you play the video it is a never the same. Every time it is new.

The universe is both constant and inconstant. In time and out of it. Half is energy the other matter. The slight imbalance in either is what generates the motion / heat/ energy.
The cooling down of the side of the universe on the Fringe of the snowball down hill followed by a consuming and recycling.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 05:14 PM
Yes, this is the duality that comprises the universe. Anything one is able to witness in this universe is polarized. It is all about where the focal points are, the happy mediums... this is where awareness lies. Our universe will continue to expand until energy depletes to a point in which awareness and consciousness will shrink to smaller particles that can still survive. Life continues, forever, with or without you... it is all dependent upon what you truly believe to your heart and soul. Something that is believed with 100% heart and soul is not learned, it is something that is experienced. Only an experience can affect one to the point of changing internal dynamics and push past 99.99999% learned belief.

The key to life is quite simple, turn off your tv, believe in yourself and what you do. Know that the love your parents showed you is your wall that you can put your back against in order to use yourself and love to triangulate (create the delta) with the unknown and find the angles.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 05:53 PM
Very interesting theory. Currently I am liking the idea that both time and space are composed of 3 dimensions, and the smallest unit is in fact not zero, but 1/t or 1/s, space and time being reciprocal. Basically the entire universe, at the smallest level, is composed of nothing more than "motion". I completely agree that it is difficult to visualize these concepts because of our preconceived notions of what space and time actually are.

For the idea I was talking about, alot of the math is the same, but there are separate quantities for the space and time region. Most of the Newtonian physics hold for the region of space in which we live, but for instance, in the dimensions of time, instead of v = x/t, or displacement (space or distance) over time, it is v = (1/t) / t , which is (1/t^2)... a = v/t becomes a = (1/t^2) / t which comes out to a = 1/t^3...Force translates into E for the time region as well. Reciprocity basically means that s, or d, or x = 1/t...and that time equals 1/s...That is how all these equations are derived. There are many more that can be derived as well, and the implications, once you understand how the 3 dimensions of time actually cooperate with space, it is pretty awesome.

Many physical problems that have supposedly been solved after much hard work and patching are actually nothing more than consequences of this theory. I just thought I would mention this because, although I am all for people attempting to come up with new things, I want more people looking into these ideas because I think they have the potential to actually replace certain parts of our understanding in physics, producing a wave of new advancements. Like I said, many equations are the same, and the only differences I have encountered were in quantum mechanics and another in relativity, with the only piece missing was something like a value of pi/3 I think. S&F for you though, as it is interesting.

new topics

top topics

0