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 this symbolise a collapse? Of time?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Here's a torus with a orbital track, stable, healthy, and in perpetual motion. This could be seen as a timeline or planets path through the galaxy perhaps.

flic.kr...

Now look at this monstrosity, is a wreck, it's flimsy, it looks unstable. It's stopped.

flic.kr...

Thats supposed to be a piece of art! At the London Olympic park. It's called the arcelormittal orbit.

Here's a link to a article about scientist who predict time will stop completely.
www.in5d.com...

Just a thought!

edit on 28-6-2012 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Explain more why you think the pictures model time deceleration. That's the part that is out of left field. Fill in the gaps.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Wifibrains
 


Thank goodness for science. How else would we be able to interpret what has been so eloquently described in painstaking detail 1000's of years ago.

The end of time is just that. The END of time. The statement always meant what it said.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   
When time ends it will not all disappear rather everything will live on forever in every state shape or form until time starts a new. No death, no birth just is.... everything now. The interesting question is does time apply to consciousness or can consciousness focus on any of those points at will when 'time' (relative positioning of the moving bodies end)? Is consciousness also a moving body or is it timeless?

(Had a dream that time never happens other than in our conscious which begs another question. Is time focused consciousness or actually the moving bodies)?
edit on 28/6/2012 by IAmD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
Explain more why you think the pictures model time deceleration. That's the part that is out of left field. Fill in the gaps.


If you visualise the 1st picture as a track of a solar sytems path through a galaxy, this is time. Think out of the box and look from a higher dimension,(scale)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by CynicalDrivel
 


The second looks based on the first but with not spin, it's stopped, so the external track has flooped, No spin, no centrifugal force.
edit on 28-6-2012 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
That monstrosity looks more like a mechanical tumour and is eating the other building. As for time stopping, would we even notice as time has stopped?



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 

Without external help? No, we'll be frozen in timelessness.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by IAmD1
When time ends it will not all disappear rather everything will live on forever in every state shape or form until time starts a new. No death, no birth just is.... everything now. The interesting question is does time apply to consciousness or can consciousness focus on any of those points at will when 'time' (relative positioning of the moving bodies end)? Is consciousness also a moving body or is it timeless?

(Had a dream that time never happens other than in our conscious which begs another question. Is time focused consciousness or actually the moving bodies)?
edit on 28/6/2012 by IAmD1 because: (no reason given)


This state you are describing is what is called eternity. "Consciousness" is eternal. It is outside of time. Any perception we have of moments, or events are illusory and exist only in the context of time, which itself is illusory.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by CynicalDrivel
 


Maybe we are traveling through space at the speed of light? If so and we know for sure, surely time will just stop. Time is relative yes? If you can be in two places at once, time between these places stops. If traveling around the universe at light speed we can get to where we where before We even left because time stops.
flic.kr...
flic.kr...
As long as we are moving, and we are moving fast, we will always be catching up to ourselves.
edit on 28-6-2012 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   
If the science behind this announcement is based on calculations of The Big Bang Theory then those involved are in massive error. Claiming that Dark Matter is not real when it's RIGHT THERE! is like claiming oxygen does not exist.
Well I hope they enjoy their funding and wasting it on projects such as this. They have not even discovered Universe B yet. Amazing, simply and utterly stupid and brilliant.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:59 AM
link   

They have not even discovered Universe B yet.


Have you? hahaha



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Tindalos2013
 


Dark matter is just the nothing that connects everything, it separates and connects at the same time. It's all part of the growth of light my friend. The Devine plan. The dark becomes larger, but the light shines brighter. Locked in a perpetual battle like the yin yang.

What's with your signature? I'm interested.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by rwfresh

They have not even discovered Universe B yet.


Have you? hahaha


Universe by definition means everything - so what ever they find must be part of it. Or are we saying that we are hoping(expecting) to find *another* everything?

Interesting that the word for everything in existence stems from uni (one) and verse (line) - it seems life is the ultimate one liner.



edit on 28/6/2012 by IAmD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAmD1

Originally posted by rwfresh

They have not even discovered Universe B yet.


Have you? hahaha


Universe by definition means everything - so what ever they find must be part of it. Or are we saying the we are hoping to find *another* everything?

Interesting that the word for everything in existence stems from uni (one) and verse (line) - it seems life is the ultimate one liner.




I prefer that use of the word as well. Universe was a good word for describing everything.. Back in the old days.. Before multiple infinities and multiple everythings.


Eternity was a good word too. Until it became "a long time". I'm sure science has a new word to mean the same thing.. it's more scientific now.

The end of novelty is nigh when you know the only thing left to discover is more confusion.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by rwfresh

Originally posted by IAmD1

Originally posted by rwfresh

They have not even discovered Universe B yet.


Have you? hahaha


Universe by definition means everything - so what ever they find must be part of it. Or are we saying the we are hoping to find *another* everything?

Interesting that the word for everything in existence stems from uni (one) and verse (line) - it seems life is the ultimate one liner.




I prefer that use of the word as well. Universe was a good word for describing everything.. Back in the old days.. Before multiple infinities and multiple everythings.


Eternity was a good word too. Until it became "a long time". I'm sure science has a new word to mean the same thing.. it's more scientific now.

The end of novelty is nigh when you know the only thing left to discover is more confusion.


Indeed there's only so many ways you can cut one into parts of one until you realize no matter how small you cut it you still only have one only now it is broken and pointless ;P
edit on 28/6/2012 by IAmD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAmD1

Originally posted by rwfresh

Originally posted by IAmD1

Originally posted by rwfresh

They have not even discovered Universe B yet.


Have you? hahaha


Universe by definition means everything - so what ever they find must be part of it. Or are we saying the we are hoping to find *another* everything?

Interesting that the word for everything in existence stems from uni (one) and verse (line) - it seems life is the ultimate one liner.




I prefer that use of the word as well. Universe was a good word for describing everything.. Back in the old days.. Before multiple infinities and multiple everythings.


Eternity was a good word too. Until it became "a long time". I'm sure science has a new word to mean the same thing.. it's more scientific now.

The end of novelty is nigh when you know the only thing left to discover is more confusion.


Indeed there's only so many ways you can cut one into parts of one until you realize no matter how small you cut it you still only have one only now it is broken and pointless ;P
edit on 28/6/2012 by IAmD1 because: (no reason given)


No doubt! Man has worked pretty hard at an attempt to prove separateness. Admitting oneness is scary... Nowhere to escape from oneself!



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
From the link:

Observations of supernovae, or exploding stars, found the movement of light indicated they were moving faster than those nearer to the centre of the universe.

Center of the universe huh? And just where in the heck is that?




We believe that time emerged during the Big Bang and if time can emerge, may disappear as well

The very act of "emerging" is a function of time. It implies there wasn't something and then there was. A measurement. Time is a measurement. So time emerged from... time?


Now I agree that the BB is the beginning of time (as we perceive it!), but all of time already existed, it does not emerge from anything. It has a beginning and an end which are infinitely distant from each other and have always existed within the context of timelessness (which is more fundamental than time). If we can perceive the beginning we can't perceive the end, and vice versa. But I subscribe to an infinite universe while most scientists don't.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by circlemaker
 


It's funny because all of them should subscribe to an infinite universe Since universe means as stated above everything, and the only thing that can be in everything has to by definition exist. Nothing exist as do everything. And they are one and the same) , what they might argue about is whether that universe fluctuate through ever changing random event periods or if it is a circular motion of repeat patterns going again and again and again in sequence. If you subscribe to infinte universe, then do you also subscribe to all and every possibility will be true at some point in infinity?



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by rwfresh

Originally posted by IAmD1

Originally posted by rwfresh

Originally posted by IAmD1

Originally posted by rwfresh

They have not even discovered Universe B yet.


Have you? hahaha


Universe by definition means everything - so what ever they find must be part of it. Or are we saying the we are hoping to find *another* everything?

Interesting that the word for everything in existence stems from uni (one) and verse (line) - it seems life is the ultimate one liner.




I prefer that use of the word as well. Universe was a good word for describing everything.. Back in the old days.. Before multiple infinities and multiple everythings.


Eternity was a good word too. Until it became "a long time". I'm sure science has a new word to mean the same thing.. it's more scientific now.

The end of novelty is nigh when you know the only thing left to discover is more confusion.


Indeed there's only so many ways you can cut one into parts of one until you realize no matter how small you cut it you still only have one only now it is broken and pointless ;P
edit on 28/6/2012 by IAmD1 because: (no reason given)


No doubt! Man has worked pretty hard at an attempt to prove separateness. Admitting oneness is scary... Nowhere to escape from oneself!


Nice. flic.kr... everything fits inside the ONE, but in duality choice includes being able to separate ourselves. This is illusion. So is choice illusion? Or a path?
edit on 28-6-2012 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join