Splitting time - "Atime"

[DivideByZero]

"Atime" theory

 

 

According to Einstein, all people have their own relative time.

 

If I was traveling 0.5c on my ufo orbiting the earth really fast, and my friend on earth was sitting down, our times would vary.

 

Lets say person A is standing next to person B. Person A has a different time than person B (insignificantly small difference, but its still a "difference").

 

If person A is now holding one end of a rope while person B is holding the other end, their times are still different (plus or minus 0.000000000...............1 seconds).

 

You can think of person A as your left hand and person B as your right hand. Think of the rope as your chest connecting your arms. Thus your left arm has a different relative time than the right arm (even though the time change is insignificant).

 

This can be magnified to fingers having different times, joints, cells, etc...

 

How much can you break up time?

 

Atoms were thought to be the smallest unit of matter. But what is the smallest unit of time?

 

The smallest unit of time is a particle called "Atime" (I made this up...).

 

"Atime" has a positive time subparticle and a negative time subparticle. The positive particle, can be called "positime", goes forwards in time while the negative particle, can be called "negatime", goes backwards in time.

 

 

When you stay still (relative to the ground), you have more positimes than negatimes.

 

When you travel 0.5c, the number of negatimes increases.

Thus time slows down.

 

When you travel 1c (the speed of light), you now have equal number of positimes and negatimes.

Thus your time freezes.

 

And when you travel more than 1c, you have more negatimes than positimes.

Thus you go back in time.

 

Here is a diagram of what I'm talking about: http://b.imagehost.org/0129/ATIME.jpg

 

 

So what do you guys think? Could this be an accurate picture of the universe? "Atimes" being the fundamental unit of time? Its a new approach and its reasonable.

Thank you for reading,

- Nishant Shukla

[Klaynos]

You can't travel at c

 

What quantitative predictions could this hypothesis make?

 

I'm also going to say that the time dilation between your hands will be due to GR not SR, so not velocity differences, and I'm also going to make a bet that it's well under the uncertainty principle limit :s

[DivideByZero]

You can't travel at c

 

What quantitative predictions could this hypothesis make?

 

I'm also going to say that the time dilation between your hands will be due to GR not SR, so not velocity differences, and I'm also going to make a bet that it's well under the uncertainty principle limit :s

 

I never said it is possible for a physical entity with mass to travel at or faster than the speed of light. I only explained (or at least meant to explain) what happens to "Atime" particles.

Your hands have different relative times. Why should it matter if its due to GR or SR? The point is that time is offset by the tiniest amount.

 

Explain your uncertainty argument; it doesn't make sense.

 

As for what prediction can this make:

I haven't thought of that yet. Any ideas? I'll think about it and probably post it later.

[thedarkshade]

How much can you break up time?

You surely mean this is a metaphorical way!

 

Atoms were thought to be the smallest unit of matter. But what is the smallest unit of time?

Something that needs to be understood here is that time is subjective! It is something that you can have a sense of but not really deconstruct and see what's it made of!

 

 

"Atime" has a positive time subparticle and a negative time subparticle. The positive particle, can be called "positime", goes forwards in time while the negative particle, can be called "negatime", goes backwards in time.

It's really a fancy way to say that you are moving forward in time or backward in time. It's just that you are moving slower in time while you're traveling. For example, if you're traveling at 0.5 then [math]\gamma=1.1547005383...[/math], and what you're actually doing is you're sort of moving in someone's future, but on your own future. You can't expect to meet yourself there!

 

And when you travel more than 1c, you have more negatimes than positimes.

Thus you go back in time.

I've always thought of something when it came to visiting the past. Let's say we have somehow gone to the past. And we prevent the blast of atomic bomb. Now after doing that, all those people wouldn't have died, and universe would take another direction from the one we just left behind. Now what about the universe we traveled from? Will it be the same? Or will we have another universe without an atomic explosion in WWII?

 

But after all, it's a cute picture or remembering basic of relativity!

[Klaynos]

It was implied...

 

We can ignore the uncertainty principle right now I'm too tired to think through my own thoughts to make sentences that make sense...

 

You need to make predictions.

 

And whether it's SR or GR is important as you seem to only talk about GR...

[DivideByZero]

You surely mean this is a metaphorical way!

Yeah metaphorical. But also in a sense literal because what is the smallest unit of time? a second? no a millisecond? nanosecond?

 

Something that needs to be understood here is that time is subjective! It is something that you can have a sense of but not really deconstruct and see what's it made of!

So far "Atimes" are subjective. I haven't really described them as a physical entity. I only said they have some sort of positive and negative parts.

 

It's really a fancy way to say that you are moving forward in time or backward in time. It's just that you are moving slower in time while you're traveling. For example, if you're traveling at 0.5 then [math]\gamma=1.1547005383...[/math], and what you're actually doing is you're sort of moving in someone's future, but on your own future. You can't expect to meet yourself there!

Woah. I was watching the lecture online and the professor explained the gamma thing you're talking about. Thats pretty cool. link to lecture: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8550767253417678390&q=relativity&total=1331&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

 

I've always thought of something when it came to visiting the past. Let's say we have somehow gone to the past. And we prevent the blast of atomic bomb. Now after doing that, all those people wouldn't have died, and universe would take another direction from the one we just left behind. Now what about the universe we traveled from? Will it be the same? Or will we have another universe without an atomic explosion in WWII?

yeah thats true just like the grandmother paradox. I don't believe traveling back in time is possible in the same universe. I believe that there are infinite parallel universes.

 

There is nothing fundamentally wrong in assuming there is a smallest unit of time called "atime" or whatever.

[Daecon]

The smallest unit of time is the Planck time.

[jedaisoul]

According to Einstein, all people have their own relative time.

No. According to Eiinstein, the time differences are due to differing frames of reference. Frames of reference may differ by relative veocity (Special Relativity) and/or gravitational potential (General Relativity).

 

If I was traveling 0.5c on my ufo orbiting the earth really fast, and my friend on earth was sitting down, our times would vary.

That's primarily due to SR (see above). Arguably there would be a GR component as well, but it would be very small.

 

Lets say person A is standing next to person B. Person A has a different time than person B (insignificantly small difference, but its still a "difference").

Not according to SR or GR.

 

If person A is now holding one end of a rope while person B is holding the other end, their times are still different (plus or minus 0.000000000...............1 seconds).

 

You can think of person A as your left hand and person B as your right hand. Think of the rope as your chest connecting your arms. Thus your left arm has a different relative time than the right arm (even though the time change is insignificant).

 

This can be magnified to fingers having different times, joints, cells, etc...

As above, none of this is true according to Einsteinian relativity. Also, if it were true, your qualification "even though the time change is insignificant" would be incorrect. If the time change were insignificant there would be no difference in the time. I think you meant "minute, but not insignificant".

 

How much can you break up time? Atoms were thought to be the smallest unit of matter. But what is the smallest unit of time?

The smallest unit of time is the Planck time[/url'].

The smallest unit of time is a particle called "Atime" (I made this up)...

You've produced an interesting theory and I applaud you for that, but what is its purpose? Why do you think there is a need for a new theory? I'd briefly mention that I have proposed a theoretical model "simultaneity-time" which is, in some respects, similar to yours, but I'd suggest that you need to focus on the mainstream science first. There are excellent articles in Wikipedia that can help you to get a firmer grasp on Special and General Relativity. They can help you understand what SR and GR do, and do not, predict.

[Eric 5]

 

 

 

Lets say person A is standing next to person B. Person A has a different time than person B (insignificantly small difference, but its still a "difference").

 

If person A is now holding one end of a rope while person B is holding the other end, their times are still different (plus or minus 0.000000000...............1 seconds).

 

 

 

 

So what is the dividing line between these two times? There would have to be some sort of barrier that seperates these two times, right? What do you suppose this barrier is made of?