The problem with mathematics and time

[Klaynos]

My recollection was no where near that complicated. Nor could it decern thoughts, it was not reading brainwaves or thoughts it was just going "there is activity do something."

[Tres Juicy]

a quick search has turned this up

 

http://mashable.com/...m-mind-reading/

 

but what I wanted was an answer to my question about the brain affecting the state of electrons over distance, as stated here:

 

"just like the experiment with Electrons fired at a 2 slits form a orderly spectrum but the minuet you physically view this happening they scatter.

 

The reason this happens is the brain creates a electromagnetic pulse when a thought is manifested it is the interaction of this energy field that the brain creates that interacts with the electrons behaviour thus causing them to scatter."

[Klaynos]

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/001346949490135X

 

Looks interesting.

 

I still don't get where the two slit experiment fits in here...

[Tres Juicy]

http://www.sciencedi...01346949490135X

 

Looks interesting.

 

I still don't get where the two slit experiment fits in here...

 

I think he's trying to demonstrate that the brain can have an external effect maybe...?

[The time Traveller]

I was just trying to prove that time come into existence just by the mere thought by mankind.

 

and that before he consciously had the idea of time.

 

that time didn’t exist in that way

 

and it now only exist in its present state because man decided that that is what it was going to be and that is how its going to work,

 

and from that the whole of the numerical representation of time and the mathematics system that followed all came into existence it was all part and parcel from the very first thought of we exist in time and this is how we will measure it rite or wrong and the rest is history from there.

 

Everything is connected in the universe by frequency every single atom electron that make up us all even the conscious thoughts we have has an effect on our surrounding the examples I gave you were just but a few of the inter actions between man and his surroundings as some small proof that these interactions take place all the time

 

I think he's trying to demonstrate that the brain can have an external effect maybe...?

 

http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-499903.html

Have a read of this there are some for and some against but hey that’s what its all about the big discussion

 

 

[Klaynos]

Well in that case I think you must remember one thing, the universe don't care what you, I or anyone else thinks. The universe just acts the way it does because that's the way it behaves. The best we can do is model it, and predict it.

[The time Traveller]

I would have to agree with that statement about the universe and I believe we as a species are a long way of the correct formulas to do this accurately to an extent that we can evolve our technology to a whole new level because at the moment we just seem to make things smaller .

 

I don’t think it will be one of us old boys who master this problem its going to be one of your generation or the generations that will follow

 

 

[Tres Juicy]

I was just trying to prove that time come into existence just by the mere thought by mankind.

 

and that before he consciously had the idea of time.

 

that time didn't exist in that way

 

and it now only exist in its present state because man decided that that is what it was going to be and that is how its going to work,

 

and from that the whole of the numerical representation of time and the mathematics system that followed all came into existence it was all part and parcel from the very first thought of we exist in time and this is how we will measure it rite or wrong and the rest is history from there.

 

Everything is connected in the universe by frequency every single atom electron that make up us all even the conscious thoughts we have has an effect on our surrounding the examples I gave you were just but a few of the inter actions between man and his surroundings as some small proof that these interactions take place all the time

 

http://www.physicsfo...p/t-499903.html

Have a read of this there are some for and some against but hey that's what its all about the big discussion

 

 

"I was just trying to prove that time come into existence just by the mere thought by mankind.

 

and that before he consciously had the idea of time.

 

that time didn't exist in that way"

 

Time is time mate, we have no effect on it. In the grand scheme of things we've only been around for the blink of an eye.

 

Klaynos is right, the universe doesn't care about us, why would something as fundamental as time itself bend to human thought?

 

Humans have shaped it as a concept, labelled it and tried to describe it, that's what we do as a species. But we certainly did not bring it into existence, how could we?

 

Time is a very difficult subject/concept to think about, it defies even description and absolutely fascinates me, but the idea that it is a function of thought is arrogant in the extreme (not saying that you're arrogant TT).

 

I agree that maths must evolve and improve as a language/tool if we are to better understand the universe but I dont think that maths is limited by our concept or understanding of time (or lack thereof). Maths is the best tool we have for creating predictive models and describing the universe.

 

As for this "I don’t think it will be one of us old boys who master this problem"

 

Speak for yourself dude, I'll get right on after I crack perpetual motion and clear my overdraft!!

[The time Traveller]

I do apologize I think you misunderstood me I do not think time it's a function of thought I think that by man thinking a mere thought can have an effect on time on the quantum level man just invented the word time and a numerical system to measure it witch I must say is one of his most outstanding achievements to date oh and as to

 

perpetual motion we did that one 3 years ago ha ha ha you have a good day

 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2011 by The time Traveller

[Tres Juicy]

I do apologize I think you misunderstood me I do not think time it's a function of thought I think that by man thinking a mere thought can have an effect on time on the quantum level man just invented the word time and a numerical system to measure it witch I must say is one of his most outstanding achievements to date oh and as to

 

perpetual motion we did that one 3 years ago ha ha ha you have a good day

 

 

 

 

 

"perpetual motion we did that one 3 years ago ha ha ha you have a good day"

 

If you think you're clever, try clearing my overdraft...

 

Seriously though, you've made some pretty far fetched claims in this thread TT.

 

I hope you eventually back them up

Edited December 21, 2011 by Tres Juicy

[Klaynos]

I would have to agree with that statement about the universe and I believe we as a species are a long way of the correct formulas to do this accurately to an extent that we can evolve our technology to a whole new level because at the moment we just seem to make things smaller .

 

I think you are failing to see all the innovation over that last 10 years. Technologies like GPS would not be possible without special, or general relativity. Your computer would not function without quantum mechanics, the development of the modern MOSFET is amazing. If we venture back a bit further it is not so long ago that manned powered flight was first completed, we have come a staggering distance in very little time when compared to the technological innovations of say the 1600s.

 

I do apologize I think you misunderstood me I do not think time it's a function of thought I think that by man thinking a mere thought can have an effect on time on the quantum level man just invented the word time and a numerical system to measure it witch I must say is one of his most outstanding achievements to date oh and as to

 

perpetual motion we did that one 3 years ago ha ha ha you have a good day

 

 

 

 

Oh, and here was me thinking we were getting somewhere. There is no evidence that the brain has any control over the passage of time.

 

And, yeah, sure you did.

[The time Traveller]

There is no evidence that the brain can or can not inter act with time either lol its still an ongoing discussion but its not for me and you to say we can just have our own thoughts on the subject.

 

 

[Klaynos]

There is no evidence that the brain can or can not inter act with time either lol its still an ongoing discussion but its not for me and you to say we can just have our own thoughts on the subject.

 

That would be fine if this wasn't a science forum which requires evidence for claims. Just saying "but I think" isn't going to hold up, sorry.

[The time Traveller]

Point taken you are very correct and I will have to agree with that comment but it just goes to show how easy a sensible subject can go off track so quick given the subject matter but all good fun and some very valid points from all

 

 

[Allan Zade]

Well, colleagues! I traced conversation of this forum for few days saying nothing because it was too far from the matter that was mentioned on its topic.

 

From my point of view it’s possible to make some conclusion for all posts that were made last week. The TT are trying to tell us following.

 

There is flow of time as a physical process. That process makes some interaction with everything including human brain as a physical object of the physical world. That interaction makes some imagination in human mind. We use that imagination and call it "TIME".

 

That is good idea but we have grave problem here. Why human mind is unable to keep correct information of current point of “time” without help of a clock? In other words everybody needs to see indication of a clock before making answer on question “what time is it?”

 

If flow of time passes through the universe as described above human mind must have exact information about each point of time ever because of its indirect interaction with flow of time! But that stays in controversy with observable facts. Why?

[The time Traveller]

Time is unlike any mathematical equation.You can not put time in a box and just say that is it

 

( example 12345678910 and so on up to 60 seconds and then say it fits night and day to have 24 x 60 seconds to make night and day )

 

All this is is a reference to one of your atomic particles you will find later on that new particles discovered do not fit this model and that will cause confusion.

 

 

 

we are not saying this is easy to understand it means calculating within six dimensional space and having to apply different frequencies and algorithms that constantly change one moment to the next.

 

( this isn't speculation it is all being looked at by physicists in present day terms and all information is mostly available to read. They just haven't figured it out yet)

 

time is like that within the whole infer net of the known and unknown universes.

 

as to present mankind having the ability to do the equations I don't think he can at this stage of his development in evolution terms .

 

He has evolved to communicate with language from day to day experience and invented mathematics to try and get some sort of grasp on the space he occupies.

 

The place mankind calls home the earth and the known universe he inhabits.

 

( this to is true and obvious hence you have physicists biologists chemists and all the other learned faculties around the earth in this present time.

 

Al looking for the one answer where did we come from and how and why are we here )

 

 

There is still a long way to go before he starts to comprehend his place in time and overcoming the solutions .

 

But once he dose then mankind will advance to a whole new level with a full understanding of time and space and like we said before if there is one comfort in all this mankind is relentless and a most resourceful species and will get there in the end.

 

( the mathematical equations just need to factor in the constantly changing subatomic frequencies they will then find the maths will make a lot more sense and start to add up.)

 

and during the course of calculating how time works one answer will keep popping out that is a constant that will be the right answer all the other numbers are just background noise and should be ignored

 

this answer will then give you a true base number to calculate the other variations of time once mankind understands this he will realize the universe that he thought was so vast suddenly becomes not so vast as he thought.

Edited December 24, 2011 by The time Traveller

[Allan Zade]

The place mankind calls home the earth and the known universe he inhabits.

 

There is still a long way to go before he starts to comprehend his place in time and overcoming the solutions .

 

But once he dose then mankind will advance to a whole new level with a full understanding of time and space and like we said before if there is one comfort in all this mankind is relentless and a most resourceful species and will get there in the end.

 

and during the course of calculating how time works one answer will keep popping out that is a constant that will be the right answer all the other numbers are just background noise and should be ignored

 

this answer will then give you a true base number to calculate the other variations of time once mankind understands this he will realize the universe that he thought was so vast suddenly becomes not so vast as he thought.

 

That is a very interesting point of view! It refers to the future. But I guess that is not quite correct now.

 

There is my work that was published this year with name "Z-Theory and its Applications" (ISBN: 978-1452018935). That is result of my theoretical research. Primary source for my work is Encyclopedia Britannica (2008). But result of that work goes far away from the usual point of view.

 

It has some relation with quotation that I mentioned above and gives us final answer on question about nature of time. It describes some new aspects of space as well. As a result knowledge of physics in that area extends significantly.

 

As I can see there is nobody else from the members of this forum who has any publication (for the last decade) that covers matter of space or time. If that is not correct please send a list of your publications to me using e-mail from my profile. Each message will be highly appreciated.

 

Of course you can ask any question to me regarding my work that is relevant to this forum. If you have more complex questions send them to my e-mail box please.

Edited December 24, 2011 by Allan Zade

[swansont]

As I can see there is nobody else from the members of this forum who has any publication (for the last decade) that covers matter of space or time. If that is not correct please send a list of your publications to me using e-mail from my profile. Each message will be highly appreciated.

 

That would be incorrect, but I am not going to email you my publications list. Also, and more importantly, don't hijack others' threads to promote your own pet theory.

[The time Traveller]

I think it would be fantastic if the forum had a section for people who have had there work published so they can post their publications I think it would make it most interesting and hey who knows maybe a combination of the published work might fit together and help solve some of life’s annoying problems in the field of physics is this at all possible

 

 

 

Hi again my friend I will look forward to reading you paper and I think I would most enjoy having some discussions with you on this subject I to was published this year in the world physics book I was asked to speak at the world physics conference in Kiev as I am working out in the Ukraine I think you would have loved the conference I also had the pleasure of speaking at several universities across the Ukraine and was invited out to Egypt to speak at the follow on world conference there the book I was published in only go s out to key physicists around the world there are only 5010 copy’s published and they are dedicated to these physicists who work in this sort of field. but like your self my work is on the fringe

 

And sometimes taken to be highly controversial but luckily I have all the evidence to back it up to date hence speaking at the conferences you can read about the world physics conference in Kiev on the internet if you like

 

My work involves new types of magnetic energy and static effect it is something you can try for your self we had great results with our experiments and have since taken it to a whole new level

 

That is a very interesting point of view! It refers to the future. But I guess that is not quite correct now.

 

There is my work that was published this year with name "Z-Theory and its Applications" (ISBN: 978-1452018935). That is result of my theoretical research. Primary source for my work is Encyclopedia Britannica (2008). But result of that work goes far away from the usual point of view.

 

It has some relation with quotation that I mentioned above and gives us final answer on question about nature of time. It describes some new aspects of space as well. As a result knowledge of physics in that area extends significantly.

 

As I can see there is nobody else from the members of this forum who has any publication (for the last decade) that covers matter of space or time. If that is not correct please send a list of your publications to me using e-mail from my profile. Each message will be highly appreciated.

 

Of course you can ask any question to me regarding my work that is relevant to this forum. If you have more complex questions send them to my e-mail box please.

[Allan Zade]

Well, I had "yellow card" from the moderator. I'm sorry for violation of some rules of this forum. I got carried away by conversation with the TT and forgot good manners. That is another example of great interest for the topic that we are talking about.

 

Going further I'd like to discuss following.

 

Time is unlike any mathematical equation. You can not put time in a box and just say that is it

 

 

What if I have two closed boxes with a watch in each? Is it possible to say that I have two different "times" or I have the only one time that spreads for two boxes?

Edited December 25, 2011 by Allan Zade

[The time Traveller]

Firstly I would like to thank the staff on this forum for the patience they have shown for this subject.

 

The problem with mathematics and time.

 

It is a passionate subject for some people and its quite easy to get side tracked during discussions but that's what makes a good moderator understanding that this sort of thing is bound to happen now and again and I would say more often than not in this case ha ha But that's the nature of all good debates.

 

And I too apologise for the times I have overstepped the forums rules I have to say I feel it was my fault that ALLEN ZADE received a warning as I led him in this discussion and hope he excepts my apology.

 

Now that's been said. Time in two boxes. Well firstly its irrelevant what time is on the watches in the boxes for a whole number of reasons atomic ore mechanical man made devices.

 

2 you can not see the time in the boxes as to make a reference to mans given reference of time its only important once you open the box to ascertain the time on any given time piece that was in the boxes but I believe this takes one back to my first point man made

 

3 if time was a constant then I believe that in ore out of the box the time would only vary due to mechanical delay ore fault between the two time pieces and this would be rectified with a simple adjustment once removed from the boxes from a different reference point of mans interpretation of time so all three watches read the same but still incorrect in my mind.

 

4 there are too many galaxies out in the see able universe and all with there own reference of time I think its quite reasonable to assume that each one of these galaxies has its own time frame that is completely different to the one man has made up for himself in this part of the universe that he inhabits.

 

5 what of black holes and time.

Edited December 25, 2011 by The time Traveller

[Daedalus]

I would like to point out that all clocks use oscillation to measure time. This results in some form of mechanism that cycles within a given interval. Therefore our measure of time is nothing more than a count of cycles as defined by the duration of the standard cycle, the second. This results in an ambiguous definition for time as a duration and as a count of cycles as provided by a clock. We clearly mean to understand time as a duration but all clocks measure time as nothing more than a count of cycles that have been tuned to a specified frequency:

 

[math]\text{second} = \text{standard interval or cycle}[/math]

 

[math]\text{freq} = \frac{\text{cycles}}{\text{second}}[/math]

 

Such that:

 

[math]\text{seconds}=\frac{\text{cycles}}{\text{freq}}[/math]

 

We clearly maintain that a cycle and duration are two seperate things. However, we have no clear reference for the duration of a cycle. For example, consider you have a measuring rod with clear markings that divide the rod into equal units. It is easy to confirm that the units are equally spaced because each and every mark exists within the present. This is not true for a mechanism that oscillates because there is no device which maintains its existence into the past allowing us to precisely measure the unit of duration. Therefore, we are forced to rely on a mechanism that oscillates to measure the interval of time. This truly forces us to measure time as a count of cycles because we exist in the present leaving the past behind.

 

We build higher resolution time keeping devices because we have mechanisms, vibrating crystals - atomic clocks, that can produce a high number of counts precisely and accurately within our definition of the standard cycle. We have even redefined the standard cycle because we have reached such high resolutions that the idea merits such redefinition. This allows for integer counts of atomic oscillations to be defined as the standard cycle or second.

 

Caesium atomic clocks became operational in 1955, and quickly confirmed the evidence that the rotation of the earth fluctuated randomly. This confirmed the unsuitability of the mean solar second of Universal Time as a measure of time interval for the most precise purposes. After three years of comparisons with lunar observations, Markowitz et al. (1958) determined that the ephemeris second corresponded to 9,192,631,770 ± 20 cycles of the chosen cesium resonance.^[17]Following this, in 1967/68, the General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM) replaced the definition of the SI second by the following:

 

The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom.

 

Although this is an independent definition that does not refer to the older basis of ephemeris time, it uses the same quantity as the value of the ephemeris second measured by the cesium clock in 1958. This SI second referred to atomic time was later verified by Markowitz (1988) to be in agreement, within 1 part in 10¹⁰, with the second of ephemeris time as determined from lunar observations.^[18]

 

For practical purposes the length of the ephemeris second can be taken as equal to the length of the second of Barycentric Dynamical Time (TDB) or Terrestrial Time (TT) or its predecessor TDT.

 

This leads us to ask the question what is time? Is time truly an interval of motion through four-dimensional space, an interval of change, or nothing more than a count of cycles? I personally believe that time is motion through four-dimensional space because we experience a forward motion towards the future leaving the past behind. This is supported by mathematics that equates the four-vector velocity of a massive particle in the rest frame as equal to the speed of light. Since all observable bodies maintain this velocity, they move locally through four-dimensional space with a relative velocity of zero with respect to all other observable bodies. But because the speed is that of light, we can state that four-dimensional space is at rest and we are the ones moving through it resulting in the temporal dimension collapsing to a zero length as specified by the equation for length contraction. This is why we have no reference to the past or future. It is also why we are forced to use cycles to measure the duration of our motion through four-dimensional space because we have nothing else to reference it (i.e. massive bodies don't speed by us or fall behind us along the temporal axis allowing us to measure this motion. And even if they do, we cannot see the temporal dimension because it has collapsed due to our four-vector velocity).

 

I do not find it surprising or counterintuitive that we experience time dilation and length contraction as defined by relativity. After all, we measure time using cycles and frequencies which are affected by the relative motions of the person doing the observations as well as the relative motions of the bodies being observed. But this does not mean that these bodies are truly moving faster or slower through time and as such find very little flaws in our mathematics of time, just our understanding of it.

Edited December 26, 2011 by Daedalus

[Allan Zade]

I would like to point out that all clocks use oscillation to measure time. This resultsin some form of mechanism that cycles within a given interval. Therefore our measure of time is nothing more than a count of cycles as defined by theduration of the standard cycle, the second. This results in an ambiguous definition for time as a duration and as a count of cycles as provided by aclock. We clearly mean to understand time as a duration but all clocks measure time as nothing more than a count of cycles that have been tuned to a specified frequency ...

 

 

You are very close to the right point of view. Your definition of time is ambiguous indeed because it uses two different notions. First one describes time as a measurable period and next one describes the same thing as a thing that lacks spatial dimension.

 

That leads us to following question. What if there are two types of so-called "time"? One "time""is nothing more than a count of cycles" and next one ("as a thing that lacks spatial dimension") exists only in human mind (as an idea) without any relation to the physical world.

 

Using that point of view we have not any "ambiguous definition" of time. What do you think about that?

Edited December 26, 2011 by Allan Zade

[The time Traveller]

That was the closest answer I have had to date concerning time .

 

if you take it out of the 4 dimensions now and put it into 6 dimensions the two left out mans ability to make a choice in a simple manor of explanation left or right.

 

now do the same maths and factor in the other two dimensions then take into account the vibration distortions between the left dimension and the right dimension pulling from either side of the 4 dimensions

L

 

 

X X

 

 

X X

 

 

 

R

 

Its best to work this out in a cube for the 4 dimensions and place the other two dimensions on either side of the cube.

 

If you apply this maths to your Caesium atom and apply a number of cycles from the past then calculate any given number of cycles into the future.

 

I would just go 2 minutes to keep it relatively simple to start with then apply the left & right dimension this will show you just how time behaves.

 

if you do the same calculations for the electron it will show you how they manage to slip in and out of existence and what one would think impossible in what would seem to be two places at the same time.

 

ha ha ha

 

Time dose not flow in a straight line it resonates with in this six dimensional space constantly struggling against out side influences pushing and pulling it / in and out back and too and side to side .

 

All atoms / electrons / particles have a control tag and using this mathematical formula its possible to work out the position of this tag once you know the tags position you can set about reprogramming the resonant frequency of the matter into a alternate state thus changing the matters properties.

 

And how it exist in what you would call present time .

 

now imagine changing its properties so it has to abide by a different rule it will suddenly exist in a different time hey what do you know back to the behaviour of electrons .

 

Merry Christmas my friend I hope this helps and makes some sort of sense

 

Ps it doesn't actually have any thing to do with mans ability to make choice I just like to say that ha ha

 

That is just how it seem to be

 

One more point I should mention all matter doesn't vibrate or resonate in a strait line either so why would time abide by a different rule from every thing else in this part of the universe.

Time exists within six

 

spatial dimensions along with all matter and thus time has a profound effect on the said matter it all abides by set rules and it will vibrate or resonate accordingly . it is easy to see why mankind would get confused with this as he sees that there is only one time split into three planes past present and future when it concerns time if you reprogram the resonant frequency of some matter to an alternate state you can change its place within the order of things (time) it is quite possible to carry out an experiment to show this happen just like the observations of electrons slipping in and out of this time frame you can do the same with matter and it can be instantaneously moved from one point to another point in time with very little power for say 0.1 of a gram of matter.

 

 

 

 

Daedalus & Allan Zade you are so close to the solution ?

 

This is just a brief outline of a small amount of the work I have undertaken. The whole known universe is made is made up off atoms containing electrons which contain neutrons protons quarks ECT and gluons that modern day physicists believe hold them all together.

 

I would like to put forward a new concept based on the last 25 years work involving the research into the behaviour of atoms and there relationship to each other.

 

After developing a new form of mathematics

 

’ using 6 dimensional space and resonance frequency it was possible to map out the interactions and the multi dimensional space they occupy.

 

I then concentrated on just a few different atoms that make up magnetic material and the behaviour of atoms in static charge it was possible to conduct a experiment where a piece of matter that was alien to the controlled environment was placed in side the apparatus and then the natural frequency of the electrons in the static was put out of phaze and the piece of matter was made to resonate at the same frequency as the electrons in the magnetic material the outcome was the small piece of matter floated up ward in a helix motion approximately 7cm and then moved to the centre of the helix then proceeded to fall slowly down the centre of the helix the experiment was repeated a number of times with different bits of matter with the same result by of setting the static frequency by different degrees has a profound effect on the matters behaviour in the experiment the one most notably was the instantaneous acceleration from one side of the controlled space to a different point within the control space it covered 230mm in an instance the experiment was carried out many different times with the same result the only thing that changed was the direction and distance covered but controlling this was not easy to overcome a millimetre grid was set up 300mm2 and a piece of tobacco leaf strand was placed within the grid reference a magnified photo was then taken of the tobacco strand before the experiment was run and again after wards it was noted that no matter what distance it covered or how fast it instantaneously travelled it would keep the exact position it was in at point A B and C no matter how many times it moved it held it fragile shape this was shown by overlaying photographs many times .this effect was possible due to the interactions of the electrons/atoms that made up the tobacco strand and by reprogramming the resonant frequency of the atoms into a AlterNet state holds them in a 6 dimension stases field that protects them from the journey from point A to B at incredible speeds . All atoms / electrons have a control TAG and it is this TAG that tells the atoms /electrons how to behave and how to interact within there environments it is possible to mathematically work out where this TAG is positioned in relation to its given atoms once you know the position of the TAG you can work out the true frequency of the atoms and then set about to reprogram the TAGS natural frequency thus changing the matters state and its natural behaviour to many different AlterNet states.

 

 

Edited December 26, 2011 by The time Traveller

[Daedalus]

You are very close to the right point of view. Your definition of time is ambiguous indeed because it uses two different notions. First one describes time as a measurable period and next one describes the same thing as a thing that lacks spatial dimension.

 

That leads us to following question. What if there are two types of so-called "time"? One "time""is nothing more than a count of cycles" and next one ("as a thing that lacks spatial dimension") exists only in human mind (as an idea) without any relation to the physical world.

 

Using that point of view we have not any "ambiguous definition" of time. What do you think about that?

Time is truly a phenomenon which is observable and can be quantified within a FoR. I will agree that the standard cycle that we use to measure this phenomenon is man made, but that does not mean that time "exists only in human mind (as an idea) without any relation to the physical world". After all, our standard cycle still requires a duration of time to complete its oscillation. An alien race will most likely have defined a completely different length of duration for their standard cycle as well as for lengths and as such will have quite a different value for the speed of light. This just means that we would need a conversion factor to convert our measurements of length and time to theirs. So we cannot dismiss time as being imaginary or just an idea that we invented because it is only our units of measurement that was invented by us humans : )

 

That was the closest answer I have had to date concerning time .

 

if you take it out of the 4 dimensions now and put it into 6 dimensions the two left out mans ability to make a choice in a simple manor of explanation left or right.

...

Ps it doesn't actually have any thing to do with mans ability to make choice I just like to say that ha ha

 

That is just how it seem to be

It's nice to see that my answer was the closest one you have had concerning your views on time. But, I can only speculate along the lines of four-dimensional space. This is because my own theories do not fully take into account QM and I only consider that time is motion through multi-dimensional space without reference to speed, size, or distance travelled as specified in my previous post (all having to do with SR / GR along the lines of time dilation and length contraction).

 

I do not consider time dilation as one travelling faster / slower through time due the nature of the mechanics in which we measure time. The following image will help clarify my point:

 

 

The image on the left shows a light clock in the rest frame. We can see that the clock will measure time according to the length separating the two plates considering the speed at which light will traverse this distance. The image on the right shows a second light clock that is in motion relative to the observer. Both light clocks have the same length separating the reflective plates. However, the light clock on the right is in motion and therefore the light now must travel a longer distance to reach each plate and will cycle much less than the clock on the left. Not only will the cycle count drop but it will also take more time for the cycle to occur according to the observations of the observer in the rest frame. The difference in time is equal to:

 

[math]\Delta \, t_r = \frac{\Delta \, t_n}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/math]

 

The question is... has time truly dilated or was it the cycle count / frequency of the measuring device? Our experiments suggest that it was time itself that has dilated as shown by the lifespan of muons travelling near the speed of light. However, this is truly open to interpretation because we can use QM and describes these things as matter waves which also specifies a frequency and thus affected in the same manner as our above clocks. In other words, the decay of the muon has slowed due to it having a speed near that of light.

 

The de Broglie equations relate the wavelength λ to the momentum p, and frequency f to the total energy E (including it's rest energy) of a particle ^[3]:

 

[math]\lambda = h/p[/math]

 

[math]f = E/h[/math]

 

where h is Planck's constant. The two equations can be equivalently written as

 

[math]p = \hbar k[/math]

 

[math]E = \hbar \omega[/math]

 

using the definitions [math]\hbar=h/2\pi[/math] is the reduced Planck's constant (also known as Dirac's constant, pronounced "h-bar"), k = 2π / λ is the angular wavenumber, and ω = 2πf is the angular frequency. In each pair, the second is also referred to as the Planck-Einstien relation, since it was also proposed by Planck and Einstien.

 

Using the relativistic mass formula from special relativity

 

m = γm₀ allows the equations to be written as ^[4]

 

[math]\lambda = \frac {h}{\gamma m_0v} = \frac {h}{m_0v} \sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}[/math]

 

[math] f = \frac{\gamma\,m_0c^2}{h} = \frac {m_0c^2}{h\sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/math]

 

where m₀ is the particle's rest mass, v is the particle's velocity, γ is the Lorentz factor, and c is the speed of light in a vacuum. See group velocity for details of the derivation of the de Broglie relations. Group velocity (equal to the particle's speed) should not be confused with phase velocity (equal to the product of the particle's frequency and its wavelength). In the case of a non-dispersive medium, they happen to be equal, but otherwise they are not.

 

It is because of this that I must consider that time is truly spatial and not some temporal / non-spatial dimension where we might be able to change the future by altering the past. Thus, motion through time can be considered as the four-vector velocity of a body and because we have no way to reference this motion, we are forced to measure it with cycles / frequencies that can be dilated when viewed from a FoR that is in motion relative to the observer and vice versa.

 

P.S.

 

Merry Christmas and have a safe happy New Year to you as well : )

Edited December 26, 2011 by Daedalus