Space-Time question, can this happen, need your input

reply to post by thePharaoh

its because im tired of using logic

Then you are tired of being correct.

By the way... time doesn't exist.... the more you know.

Originally posted by jeep3r

Originally posted by thePharaoh
... im saying the cores can expand, pushing the crust ...

... and perhaps "contract" as well?

In any case, I couldn't stop thinking about your 'thought experiment'. So I was wondering whether you already have a more detailed idea about what it means when you say 'something that happens at the end of our current timeline'?

And how could it be that different versions of one and the same planet (in terms of 'age', while varying in size and distance from the sun) exist on our 'current' timeline and that we could actually go there to explore it? Would you say they existed in their own timeline as well, a timeline though to which we have no access at this point?

Any ideas about that? I'm just curious ...

P.S.: S+F for coming up with an extraordinary (if not scary) question!

this is why i said
we are the observer.... our perception of light, and movement...can variate our results
so what if we remove the observer...then relook...wouldnt the answer be purer?

crazy isnt it
while seacrhing on mars
imagine if we eventually find out mars is earth, in a different dimension of spacetime

to answer your question, i dont know....i was trying to explain how the planets are related, so on ATS you have to show something, so i fresstyled lol

i think though, starting with mercury

soft core...lighter temperatures than the sun, though still hot
protected by a metallic thick hardcrust,
over time, the cores reactions will push out/expand the top hardcrust

though that comet that goes past us regularly...imagine if that eventually hits mercury, knocks its orbit and axial tilt....add some chemicals from the comet, heat from the sun....eventually it could be venus

add DA14 (lol).....becomes earth and moon lol...now im freestyling lol

thanks for your input mate...
i missed these ATS conversations lol

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by thePharaoh

 

its because im tired of using logic

Then you are tired of being correct.

By the way... time doesn't exist.... the more you know.

edit on 17-2-2013 by ErtaiNaGia because: (no reason given)

but what i was saying

when deadling with the unknown...and factors like the sun and time

using logic is dunce...because we dont know the initial step forward....so that logic would be building on irational concepts...cause we dont know the answers

if i existed on jupters moon...my sense of time, physics ..everything..would be different...
how do we keep it consistant?.....other than using terms like "stardate" which they use in star trek lol

reply to post by thePharaoh

because we dont know the initial step forward....so that logic would be building on irational concepts...cause we dont know the answers

And just guessing gives you better answers, I suppose?

if i existed on jupters moon...my sense of time, physics ..everything..would be different...
how do we keep it consistant?.....other than using terms like "stardate" which they use in star trek lol

No, I'm saying that Time is a mental abstraction for motion.

Time isn't a real thing.... it's just a convenient mental "Measurement" of the rate of change.

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia

And just guessing gives you better answers, I suppose?

i wasnt guessing...i keep an open mind
though as i said, iv noticed that my brain...when it cant find an answer..it takes leaps of faith...
which will probably be 99% irrational....

i agree with you...though this was just a thought i had that i wanted to share....no deeper meanings...just a convo
to have with my tea...lol

No, I'm saying that Time is a mental abstraction for motion.

Time isn't a real thing.... it's just a convenient mental "Measurement" of the rate of change.

brilliant comment

thats why im saying, that the sun, and the observer...these two factors...are so immense in our understanding of how things work....and why we cant understand it...its like a catch 22 to try

so, what if we remove our perception of time, movement,...from our math...

purer answer right

nice comments mate, thanx

reply to post by thePharaoh

thats why im saying, that the sun, and the observer...these two factors...are so immense in our understanding of how things work....and why we cant understand it...its like a catch 22 to try

I understand it just fine, actually....

What were you having difficulty understanding?

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by thePharaoh

 

thats why im saying, that the sun, and the observer...these two factors...are so immense in our understanding of how things work....and why we cant understand it...its like a catch 22 to try

I understand it just fine, actually....

What were you having difficulty understanding?

what if its a multi verse....that only the observer can witness existing at the same time.....but actually they arent
untill you move your perception of space time...ie fly there


looking at distant galaxies...is like looking into the past...known due to redshift...the universe expanding from a centre point

i was just playing around with the model
if it works and right...could i apply it to our own solar system....or in fact every atom,,,,

then i wanted to know, what was the universal time for the whole galaxy
then i wondered about travel in space
and how everthing is relative......

basically not confused...but enjoying my conciousness...and looking at life in different percpectives

i still think the idea is beautiful

peace

reply to post by thePharaoh

what if its a multi verse....that only the observer can witness existing at the same time.....but actually they arent
untill you move your perception of space time...ie fly there

I'm pretty sure that if there are multi-verses, then "Flying" there wouldn't be possible, as they would be existing in the same "Location" as our universe, but somehow "Phased" into a different dimension, or something like that...

looking at distant galaxies...is like looking into the past...known due to redshift...the universe expanding from a centre point

Redshift is actually the doppler effect of light, where the wavelength of the light expands due to the emission source moving away from the observer....

The thing that allows us to "Look into the past" is the travel time of the light itself... it takes a LONG time to cover the distance from there to here.

i was just playing around with the model

Yeah, I do similar stuff...

if it works and right...could i apply it to our own solar system....or in fact every atom,,,,

How would you apply this to our solar system?

The "Looking back in time" part? or the "Multi-verse" part?

It doesn't sound like you are too coherent, and are just throwing out buzzwords randomly....

then i wanted to know, what was the universal time for the whole galaxy

There is no universal time, is the thing...

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia

I'm pretty sure that if there are multi-verses, then "Flying" there wouldn't be possible, as they would be existing in the same "Location" as our universe, but somehow "Phased" into a different dimension, or something like that...

i meant from planet to planet

remember i said micro/macro

if it works and right...could i apply it to our own solar system....or in fact every atom,,,,

How would you apply this to our solar system?

The "Looking back in time" part? or the "Multi-verse" part?

what do you mean how would i apply it

its the whole OP dude ...lol thats how

It doesn't sound like you are too coherent, and are just throwing out buzzwords randomly....

im not even going to bother engaging with such dismissive remarks

There is no universal time, is the thing...

what if there is a central star...visible or invisible


cool

reply to post by thePharaoh

i meant from planet to planet

Fair enough...

what do you mean how would i apply it

its the whole OP dude ...lol thats how

Oh, you are just fleshing out an idea... alright...

im not even going to bother engaging with such dismissive remarks

I'm not trying to be dismissive.... that's just how you are coming across, from my perspective.....

what if there is a central star...visible or invisible

This is sort of a difficult concept to get across to a whole generation of people who have grown with clocks....

Time, is not a real, Concrete variable in the universe...

There is just motion, and that is all.

Your clock does not measure time... it measures the tension on a spring, or the piezoelectric oscillations of a quartz crystal... or the resonance frequency of caesium inside a microwave resonance chamber...

Clocks do not measure time... they measure the material properties of what they are constructed of....

Time is not REAL.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


i agree about your concept of time.

that its only us tracking our orbit and axial rotation.
the rate of which can, possibly differ.

i also add the sun and light into what your saying....in respect of the observer!

if one of the two above are right....which your one is....

then what is

E=MC2....isnt this only relevant to the observer and has no place in the "wider scheme of things"

reply to post by thePharaoh

then what is

E=MC2....isnt this only relevant to the observer and has no place in the "wider scheme of things"

Basically..... yes.

Mass is local, (especially the mass in question in the equation) and is different depending upon the object in question.

C, on the other hand, is something a little bit different.

Special Relativity states that the speed of light is invariant in all refrence frames.... that is to say, if a photon is moving from the earth to mars, and you are traveling at about half the speed of light in the same direction....

You would still, according to special relativity, see the photon as moving at the speed of light relative, to you, even thought you are moving (with respect to earth and mars) exactly half as fast as it is, and therefore should see it as moving (relative to you) at also, half the speed of light.

This has to do with the theory of relativity, and how it treats time as a Fundamental dimension (like the other three, height, width, and length.) and the specific geometric coordinate system transformation, that treats c as an absolute, and time and space (interval and distance) as "Mutable"

Thus, the theory of relativity posits that TIME is a fundamental aspect of reality, as opposed to the Mental Abstraction "scalar" measurement that it is.

In essence, Special Relativity is ultimately self defeating, as it relies on certain things to be true, in order to be a working theory, while simultaneously it is incapable of being TRUE, while those very things that it relies on to be true, are also true.

Basically, Einstein got his theory wrong.... but he got it wrong in such a way as that to the casual, and occasional professional observer... it "Appears" correct....

This is sort of like the "Wandering Planet" theory that was supposed to explain the apparent retrograde motion of mars as seen from earth...

web.clas.ufl.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...

apod.nasa.gov...

Eventually, this theory had to be scrapped when it was realized that the earth was not the center of the solar system, and in fact revolved around the sun, thus completely explaining the apparent retrograde motion of mars.

Relativity acts similarly in this regard, as the foundational assumptions of relativity are JUST wrong enough to appear correct, if one does not understand the nature of their incorrect assumptions.

Namely... that time is not a foundational variable of the universe....

So, to answer your question... Yes... but it's rather complicated.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


if energy comes from speed and mass

then how do you describe the sun...the source of the speed of light

the sun doesnt move...

lol

if i address the sun as the alpha and omega of the observers observation.
then...then mass and energy...are not relevant to speed...of anykind right!

I'm just so glad to discover I'm not the only one who's had this thought pass through their mind. Of course it doesn't fit with an awful lot of what we accept as immutable scientific truth, but a lot of the most fundamental things often do when you discover them by reverse-engineering.

Originally posted by Araqiel
I'm just so glad to discover I'm not the only one who's had this thought pass through their mind. Of course it doesn't fit with an awful lot of what we accept as immutable scientific truth, but a lot of the most fundamental things often do when you discover them by reverse-engineering.

nice post dude

welcome to ATS .. and thanx for reminding me about this thread

i enjoyed reading it again

reply to post by thePharaoh

There is nothing new under the sun. I am pretty sure all of this came before and will again, its all like always right under your nose. Must be why this existence and world is just so dam fake sometimes that it gives me the creeps like there is nothing alive about it, exactly like an automaton going about its predestined cycles over and over and over and over and over and over again and again and again. Or some such yada yada /etc /comment. That or like its a just one big experiment, trial and error of which its been mostly error.

But hey we will see in a few million years, if were still around that is. In fact the very idea of waiting for something to come about is erroneous when everything merely exists in the moment. But you no doubt have heard the crazy theory on this site or others about how one day Earth will evolve into a sun. Crazy I know. But hey! Whatever! Till then lets all pretend we know things after all they seen some dots move on some space spectrometer somewhere and so we know that there are other galaxies out there and such.

Let me ask you something if every molecule and atom in your body in this planet and in every other planet in this solar system was all produced in some other star long before our sun came to be. Then how old is any and all of it really? How old is the Earth? How old is the Mars? how old is Venus? how old is Jupiter? On a atomic subatomic and quantum scale there all the same and the same age? After all there all made of the same stuff which most likely came from the same place.

So the difference is one of temporal patterning, may as well ask how old is oxygen or helium, or how old are the molecules that form the crust of our planet, I mean when did they lose there charge and take the form you see them in now? Are they all really a whole bunch of different things, or just one whole thing in different forms and aspects. They say cells, viruses, microbes, fish, bird, animals all continue to evolve. Well why not celestial bodies? After all they will be here long before the microbes known as humans are long gone, dust, and not even memory, and even by today's sciences the fact that were just a passing phase is ringing true, after all look to the heavens and you will find your answer.

And they wonder why there is nothing but silence when you look up onto the void. Still waiting and looking for ET to phone home. There is nothing new under the sun, variations of what was, there in, only exist.

reply to post by SnowyOwl

Like the legend of the phoenix it all begins with endings.

reply to post by Druscilla

Here a theory have you thought that maybe all of that is just fancy chicken scratch, and its base has no intrinsic value but in those who have accepted its reality? You should consider it.

"Rotating wormholes produced by Lightlike brains" Sounds about as authentic as "Evolution of planets in 4d space time frame sequences" Not making fun of you. Well just a little. Do carry on. But ya you got a point just make some maths about it and magically it will sound more authentic. Shouldn't be that hard to do, you can pretty much equate anything you want to. I mean not me as I don't like the math and don't agree with it. It is against my religion to like math, but you know others can so definitely do it. Its not like its hard or anything, all you would have to do is stay awake through it all.

reply to post by Druscilla

Riiiight, and this solution worked soooo well for everyone that died of cancer from the beginning of human history on up to before 1900?

Cancer is not a disease just because humans happen to die from it. Its just one in multitudes of processes of evolution and it has been going on since all of human history adaptations to environments. Its not something that is ever really solved, its a constant ever going on process. Even if you got rid of it, there will always be something else eventually. But the dude is right, for the types of cancers ailing most people the cures are mostly environmental and ecological, that is including the sun.

You all cant do much about the sun even if you pump the atmosphere full of chemicals and UV reflecting/absorbing molecules the problem will still exist only in a different scope. But you could do something and pretty immediately about the artificial foods, wifi, industrial petrochemical emissions and all that. But you wont. And you know why? Its all a product of the state, change, and constant evolution of the civilized world. Besides its nowhere near as bad as everybody makes it out to be, well at least not yet.

Each planet existing in its own dimension of space-time

Cool thought OP, but the lower dimensions cannot see the higher dimensions.

The fact that we can see them all in the same context and spectrum proves they are all in the same 3rd dimension.

We may be able to see traces of the higher dimensions through means that CERN/LHC describe or when/if a higher dimensional being wants to be seen but that's it.