Our universe: An expanding bubble in an extra dimension

Our universe: an expanding bubble in an extra dimension
In their article, the scientists propose a new model with dark energy and our universe riding on an expanding bubble in an extra dimension. Credit: Suvendu Giri

Uppsala University researchers have devised a new model for the universe – one that may solve the enigma of dark energy. Their new article, published in Physical Review Letters, proposes a new structural concept, including dark energy, for a universe that rides on an expanding bubble in an additional dimension.

We have known for the past 20 years that the is expanding at an ever accelerating rate. The explanation is the "dark energy" that permeates it throughout, pushing it to expand. Understanding the nature of this dark energy is one of the paramount enigmas of fundamental physics.

It has long been hoped that string theory will provide the answer. According to string theory, all matter consists of tiny, vibrating "stringlike" entities. The theory also requires there to be more than the three that are already part of everyday knowledge. For 15 years, there have been models in string theory that have been thought to give rise to dark energy. However, these have come in for increasingly harsh criticism, and several researchers are now asserting that none of the models proposed to date are workable.

In their article, the scientists propose a with and our universe riding on an expanding bubble in an extra dimension. The whole universe is accommodated on the edge of this expanding bubble. All existing matter in the universe corresponds to the ends of strings that extend out into the extra dimension. The researchers also show that expanding bubbles of this kind can come into existence within the framework of string theory. It is conceivable that there are more bubbles than ours, corresponding to other universes.

The Uppsala scientists' model provides a new, different picture of the creation and future fate of the universe, while it may also pave the way for methods of testing .


Explore further

Is dark energy even allowed in string theory?

More information: Souvik Banerjee et al. Emergent de Sitter Cosmology from Decaying Anti–de Sitter Space, Physical Review Letters (2018). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.261301
Journal information: Physical Review Letters

Provided by Uppsala University
Citation: Our universe: An expanding bubble in an extra dimension (2018, December 28) retrieved 20 September 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-12-universe-extra-dimension.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
7335 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Dec 28, 2018
If it ain't Popper falsifiable then it ain't science.

Dec 28, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Dec 28, 2018
I watched a science documentary many years ago that had a leading scientist (a real scientist, not a media scientist) who denounced string theory for wasting the creative years of many, many talented young cosmologists and mathematicians. Apparently, string theory is like mathematic 'crack'.

Dec 28, 2018
the preceding comments are proof that when monkeys are given keyboards to play with? All they manage to accomplish is amuse their audience.

That they do not understand the science is not an indictment of the sciences. But rather a revelation of their limited capacity to reason & learn.

Dec 28, 2018
Determinism is useful. String theory's power is its ability to keep classical systems serendipitous. It does not come without its problems, but it can explain a complete theory accessible using variant dimensiality. If classical and quantum theory continue to possess auxiliaries, with interpretation as only a human frustration, it should continue to be used. Throwing out orthnomaility is still not Nature, she does not give a MUX, but permits us to make one.
I ponder Decaying Anti–de Sitter, as isotropy to bundles breaking from some sort of blueshift. Created and destroyed of nondeterminism is a balance for conservation. Unitarity is a necessary component to being able to return to free parameterization. A mechanism of deloading to entanglement or dualities? I do agree tangent bundles complete by definition quite the quandary, and relational faith. Cotangent catching closed strings of other substrates for an absolute domain, insanity, but perhaps the only anthropic one

Dec 28, 2018
Spacey, if you mean the implications of a MUX as quantum transdimensionsl 'FTL' and 'Stargates'...in which the extra dimension leads to a 'hyper or superspace'?

Dec 28, 2018
The author phoned this one in, and composed it while in his/her shower.

Dec 28, 2018
Here's the arXiv pre-print copy of the paper: https://arxiv.org...07.01570

Dec 28, 2018
This is a novel approach, going back to a line of research that was abandoned earlier. It also, to my mind, has a connection with the AdS/CFT correspondence. But the math is going to be the sticking point.

Dec 28, 2018
Spacey, if you mean the implications of a MUX as quantum transdimensionsl 'FTL' and 'Stargates'... 'hyper or superspace'?

MUX as in the CNOT gate, no physical wholism has this. But XOR is inseparable from the finite gates that make deep belief possible. That bridge a collectively exhaustive discrete theory and GOFAI.
Counterfactual completeness, might be a means of seeing the transition between the objects you mentioned, as the narrator's problem with attachments to the pinhole, if consistency seems lacking. Pushing and popping is a difficult inquiry. What once was smooth and embedded can quite quickly become ungeneralizable. It seems there is the naked bootstrapped Weyl and the vanishing Weyl conjecture.
FTL is not the problem. Distinguishing a tractable form that still has permits a universe with telios is. Even if we were done, the modality of elimitivism is a human one. There is heaven and those who do not like it. ∃ a translation?

Dec 28, 2018
If we believe that our World has started sometimes ago we are still in the position to decide which hypothesis, Lemaître's or Gamow's was closer to reality. There is an opinion that the problems in the standard cosmology could be solved by adjusting of details. Our suggestion is that we have to go back to the conceptions and use the observations accumulated since.
https://www.acade...osmology
https://www.acade...he_World

Dec 28, 2018
Its true that Universe is a bubble. But to my mind it is a balloon i.e bubble which has mass and energy. The expansion is the attraction of Antimatter. In Hindu philosophy it is called ego.

Dec 28, 2018
After reading the paper, with great difficulty, it does make a prediction, and that is that physics as we know it should vanish in the very distant future. So we don't have a scenario in which the universe undergoes an accelerating expansion forever. What replaces it is not clear. It isn't clear where or how an early inflationary period fits, although they have an explanation for what we see today. It isn't clear that the processes they describe are necessarily uniform at any scale, so it seems there must still be some mechanism to produce the CMB as we see it. But the ideas are very interesting. An interesting approach. And very hard to understand! I probably didn't.

Dec 28, 2018
More imaginary conjecture from the plasma ignoramuses. This tripe isn't even worthy to be published in a scifi comic book, yet there it is in Phys Rev. Says much about the relevance of this trash journal.

Dec 28, 2018
I watched a science documentary many years ago that had a leading scientist (a real scientist, not a media scientist) who denounced string theory for wasting the creative years of many, many talented young cosmologists and mathematicians. Apparently, string theory is like mathematic 'crack'.


The issue with string theory is that it's a mathematical framework that covers too much - it's a set of tools that allows one to approach the problem rather than narrow down to specific answers. In that sense, it's like giving the prospective cosmologist a chisel and telling them to chisel out Michaelangelo's David out of marble - of course it is possible, but almost infinitely unlikely.

But that's the allure. You are handed this tool, and the solution to the question which is the observable universe, and the answer seems obvious: just chip off anything that doesn't look like it. It's so simple - yet the devil is in the details.

Dec 28, 2018
@Eikka, then explain the correct predictions of the AdS/CFT correspondence.

Dec 28, 2018
More imaginary conjecture from the plasma ignoramuses. This tripe isn't even worthy to be published in a scifi comic book, yet there it is in Phys Rev. Says much about the relevance of this trash journal.
says CD85

J.K.Rowling was one of the coauthors and contributed greatly to the hyperscience element of the Universe expanding in a bubble that is expanding into another bubble that is expanding into another bubble - ad infinitum - all with the wave of a wand.

Dec 28, 2018
@Da Schneib, first list some correct predictions of the AdS/CFT correspondence.

Dec 28, 2018
By applying the AdS/CFT correspondence, Sơn and his collaborators were able to describe the quark gluon plasma in terms of black holes in five-dimensional spacetime. The calculation showed that the ratio of two quantities associated with the quark–gluon plasma, the shear viscosity {\displaystyle \eta } \eta and volume density of entropy {\displaystyle s} s, should be approximately equal to a certain universal constant....

In 2008, the predicted value of this ratio for the quark–gluon plasma was confirmed at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven National Laboratory.
Now it's your turn.

Dec 28, 2018
Oh, and Susskind won the bet with Hawking. Maybe you didn't hear about that.

And Maldacena's founding paper on AdS/CFT correspondence is one of the most cited papers in nuclear physics ever, with over 10,000 citations.

Now, are we done here?

Dec 28, 2018
Now, are we done here?
......you'e one of the Moderators on this website, and you don't know?

Dec 28, 2018
LOL

@LenniTheLiarAndButthurtPlagiarist thinks I'm a moderator.

Take your meds and go sweep some toilets, @LenniTheLiarAndButthurtPlagiarist.

I'm not a mind-reading lizard alien or a rape machine either. Get over it.

Dec 28, 2018
Here is a down to earth explanation
https://www.youtu...D4T6Xgdk

Dec 28, 2018
If it was that easy we'd already know.

Dec 28, 2018
What is wrong with the premise? I would like to know if that is not the case.

Dec 28, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Dec 28, 2018
Ok here is the idea: consolidation of matter caused by gravity is dilating space time which then transforms into red shift of electro-magnetic waves traversing the dynamic space time. Think of it dynamically as a photon traverses dilating regions. I think a lot of astronomers talk about static models.

Dec 28, 2018
LOL

@LenniTheLiarAndButthurtPlagiarist thinks I'm a moderator.

Take your meds and go sweep some toilets, @LenniTheLiarAndButthurtPlagiarist.

I'm not a mind-reading lizard alien or a rape machine either. Get over it.


Once again, Da Scheide projects his own mental aberrations onto innocent bystanders such as this person Lenni and others. Mind-reading alien LIZARDS seems to be weighing on Da Scheide's fevered brain of late, and Da Scheide has probably seen those lizards that have been a big source of worry for him since he first mentioned alien lizards in other physorg forums/threads.
As Da Scheide continues referring to alien mind reading lizards that he seems to fear are coming after him - there is a chance that he may also imagine himself to be a "rape machine", since Da Scheide has been seen talking of such things elsewhere - and now here.

Physorg really does attract some loony bugs such as Da Scheide.

Dec 29, 2018
Sorry, I can't make anything out of "matter caused by gravity is dilating space time which then transforms into red shift of electro-magnetic waves"

You might be saying something that makes sense but from this I can't tell.


Dec 29, 2018
Notice how Da Scheide has left out the word "consolidation" of matter that was offered by evropej's comment above? This is to make the comment made by evropej seem to be unfathomable nonsense that Da Scheide can't make out. But by omitting even ONE word, Da Scheide has changed what evropej had been trying to say.
This is a deliberate attempt to make Da Scheide feel superior over all others - except for his master, Captain Beelzebub, that is.

Dec 29, 2018
Sorry, I can't make anything out of "matter caused by gravity is dilating space time which then transforms into red shift of electro-magnetic waves"

You might be saying something that makes sense but from this I can't tell.



You have a fabric stretched evenly as they do to illustrate gravity bending space -with no matter on it. Its flat and the distance across say is 1 meter. Now place a 1Kg mass on it. What will be the distance between the same two points? It will be more than 1 meter. If a wave was traversing the fabric and you placed the mass on it, the wave would be distorted or dilated by the stretching fabric. The universe is getting bigger because space time is being stretched by gravity. If that makes sense.

Dec 29, 2018
But I don't see how that "causes matter."

Dec 29, 2018
The simplest way I can put it is like this: matter combining into local groups causes those local groups to be farther apart from other groups because of space being dilated or stretched between them.

Dec 29, 2018
But where does the matter come from?

Dec 29, 2018
Position is three coordinates, that's all, three. Any suggestion of more dimensions in position is not reality.

Dec 29, 2018
Its true that Universe is a bubble. But to my mind it is a balloon i.e bubble which has mass and energy. The expansion is the attraction of Antimatter. In Hindu philosophy it is called ego.


Perhaps the Hindu philosophy, like all philosophy has been such a spectacular failure.

Dec 29, 2018
Your faith in your own ignorance makes me laugh.

Position is three coordinates, that's all, three. Any suggestion of more dimensions in position is not reality.


Can you prove that?

Nope!


Dec 29, 2018
But where does the matter come from?


From the negative energy of the vacuum.

Dec 29, 2018
But I don't see how that "causes matter."


If you create space then you create potential to fall through that space, and hence you create potential energy which is negative. In order for the energy of the universe to remain static, an amount of matter equal to the negative of this energy, through mass energy equivalence, must be created at the same time.

Dec 29, 2018
The universe is getting bigger because space time is being stretched by gravity. If that makes sense.


Sorry that makes no sense. the stretch isn't dynamic. space doesn't continue to deform for a static mass.

If you wish to create more space, then you have to create more matter to "stretch" it.

Space doesn't stretch by the way. Curvature in space, or the compaction of space most probably results from the modification of vacuum energy. These vacuum fields constitute space.

Dec 29, 2018
This is my alma mater, and I have had the opportunity to listen to Ulf Danielsson - he is an engaging speaker.

Else this is some progress for the intended application of string theory as basic physics since it has forced its cosmological models into a more constrained set (with a nice time symmetry). But not of any interest for applied cosmology.

more academic blather bloat and fluff, disgusting


Ironic: more disgusting witless bloat-and-fluff trolling.

Dec 29, 2018
Now it's your turn.


Well, not really in this case. String theory as physics math can usefully simplify some extreme systems that has nothing to do with cosmology as such.

I believe that the question was if its cosmological use is worthwhile, and I have not seen much of anything string published by theoretical physicists that has use at the current state of knowledge. Already deSitter and anti deSitter spaces are approximations to cosmological FRLW spaces (especially for their deSitter like inflationary and dark energy dominated eras), so we are talking toy models as is. And even so they are still, as other comments say, chopping off *theoretical* bits of possibilities.

Dec 29, 2018
In order for the energy of the universe to remain static, an amount of matter equal to the negative of this energy, through mass energy equivalence, must be created at the same time. ... vacuum fields constitute space.


Sounds like a recast of Hoyle's cosmology. You are not wrong that vacuum fields *permeate* space and gives it vacuum "dark energy" or that the potential energy from the inflation field *gave* the local universe matter [perhaps best explained in Susskind's cosmology lectures on Stanford edu site]. But famously there is no global energy condition on general relativity which is what describes space and its scale (contraction or expansion), so we don't expect and we don't see matter creation caused by it.

To add hurt to harm on your recast idea, our inflationary universe is flat space with average zero energy density, the positive and negative energy contributions perfectly canceling. So even if there was such a generic mechanism it could not operate here.

Dec 29, 2018
So this day of trolling is going to be anti-string theory and pro-nut word-salad-instead-of-science anti-science? Okay, my before-coffee responses:

a leading scientist (a real scientist, not a media scientist) who denounced string theory


Anti-string theory. Anecdote, and since Ulf is a real scientist he supplies the contrary example.

an absolute domain, insanity

Pro-nut word-salad-instead-of-science anti-science. You seem to display some self reflection. Use the insight into your other trait wisely.

the plasma ignoramuses


EU pro-nut word-salad-instead-of-science anti-science.

J.K.Rowling


Religious pro-nut word-salad-instead-of-science anti-science. (We all know they hate that Harry Potter is a - more successful - analog to their own magical ideas.)

Here is a down to earth explanation


Not a reference on the paper. Looks like pro-nut word-salad-instead-of-science anti-science and that may be confirmed in later comments.

Dec 29, 2018
Now it's your turn.


Well, not really in this case. String theory as physics math can usefully simplify some extreme systems that has nothing to do with cosmology as such.
I wasn't asked about cosmology. I was asked for a prediction AdS/CFT correspondence had made and I gave one.

I could go into the black hole information paradox, but it's not really necessary to prove the point. String physics isn't only cosmology; it's also nuclear physics which is where this prediction emerged.

Dec 29, 2018
Considering that the Hindu religion has outlived the culture that initiated it, going so far back into pre-history, and is still alive, active and doing well today means that the Hindu religion, as it is, is not at all a failed philosophy: if it was, it would have no adherents and would not have lasted this long, so it Must have a logical, solid core to it somewhere.

I am not Hindi, so I could not tell you what that is, but they do have the basic idea through their lives that all of this has happened before; that they have seen flying machines before, wrote about them, described nuclear war in their writings.

And their civilization fell, but they kept the base culture alive in word, at least.

Doing better than Christianity with it's thousands of factions that do not agree on much that has only been around for less than 2k yrs, or Islam at 1200 yrs.

Remember, we came up from wood and steel tech to today's tech in less than 200 years.

Dec 29, 2018
Position is three coordinates, x,y,z, ... the proof is simple logic. To PRETEND there's more because math has higher dimensions is INSANE.

Dec 29, 2018
I'm not a mind-reading lizard alien or a rape machine either. Get over it.
,,,,,,what you are is Physorg's trolling Moderator who has frequently seen fit to to edit Comments of others, as well as those of your own just to suit your self serving ego. This because you can't otherwise compete in the arena of ideas in one on one confrontations when your Pop-Cosmology fantasies are bounced off the IMMUTABLE LAWS OF PHYSICS.

Hey, old man schneibo, maybe you can find an Immutable Law of Physics that explains how a finite stellar mass can have a force of infinite gravity at it's surface, or it's center? How about you proving your claims that gravity is not mass dependent?

I could go into the black hole information paradox, but it's not really necessary to prove the point. String physics isn't only cosmology; it's also nuclear physics which is where this prediction emerged.
It's ONLY Pop-Cosmology, it has nothing to do with nuclear physics.


Dec 29, 2018
@Benni Nobody edited your comments. You are just embarrassed by your comments and are trying to distance yourself from them. The stupid is there and unmodified for the world to see.

I would normally feel bad for someone like you. It's OK to not understand things. There is no shame in not understanding something.

What is not OK is to come into this forum and pollute it with nonsense and instead of admitting you are wrong you accuse others of changing your posts and flat out lie about what others have posted.

Dec 29, 2018
Position is three coordinates, x,y,z, ... the proof is simple logic. To PRETEND there's more because math has higher dimensions is INSANE.
How do you describe the motion of even a single particle without using a fourth t coordinate, x,y,z,t, mr. normal 4 real dude?

Dec 29, 2018
@Benni Nobody edited your comments. You are just embarrassed by your comments and are trying to distance yourself from them. The stupid is there and unmodified for the world to see.

I would normally feel bad for someone like you. It's OK to not understand things. There is no shame in not understanding something.

What is not OK is to come into this forum and pollute it with nonsense and instead of admitting you are wrong you accuse others of changing your posts and flat out lie about what others have posted.


The stupid is there and unmodified for the world to see.
......right, you're now talking about your inability to write equations. Maybe you'd like to impress us with another sampling of that kind of gibberish again?


Dec 29, 2018
why must you guys always feed the trolls and loons on these discussions? just ignore the religionists and pseudoscientists. the more you respond the more multiple accounts they create and pollute these pages.

Dec 29, 2018
why must you guys always feed the trolls and loons on these discussions? just ignore the religionists and pseudoscientists. the more you respond the more multiple accounts they create and pollute these pages.


OK, then YOU identify for us the trolls & tell the chatroom why they are trolls using other than generic terms such as, " religionists and pseudoscientists".

Dec 29, 2018
@Benni It's clear you are the troll and I am the one enabling you because I keep responding to you.

Dec 29, 2018
But where does the matter come from?


The assumption is that the matter is already there.

Dec 29, 2018
@Beethoven
why must you guys always feed the trolls and loons on these discussions?
Actually, that can be answered with this video
https://www.youtu...EwjBXlZE

Some people come here to learn their science. When they read the comments, they get misdirected into a religious or pseudoscience rabbit hole that appeals to their belief

Children and schools glean data from these type news aggregates, but they've not always learned how to differentiate between fact and bullsh*t

also note: there are studies into the trolls in various forms as well in the comments

Dec 29, 2018
@Benni It's clear you are the troll and I am the one enabling you because I keep responding to you.


.....and that is why you're just so much entertainment for all of us. You stumble & mumble through the simplest of gravity equations, go so far as to say:

@Benni Single body gravitational equation! You do realize by the very definition of gravity its between multiple bodies you idiot. If it were a single body there would be no gravity.


Read more at: https://phys.org/...html#jCp

......and you expect to be taken seriously? You're under serious delusions.

Dec 29, 2018
To amplify the question "Why enable & encourage the trolls & woobots such as benni & his clown posse of crazies?

To provide thesis material for the Mental Health & Social Sciences students monitoring these commentaries.

Why do I participate? I'm a sadist & take great pleasure flogging the masochist submissives who infest phys.org.

An additional rational for permitting the looms this stage to prance upon?
It keeps the creatures off the vReal Science forums, where they would interrupt researchers with a constant cacophony of raving nonsense.

Perhaps phys.org should be renamed bedlam.disorg?

SNAP!
WHACK!
SCREETCH!

Oh, Yeah! Was it as good for you nemni? As it was for me?

& I'm just getting warmed up! My stable of woobois get restive when I am slow to apply the discipline.

Dec 29, 2018
Position is three coordinates, x,y,z, ... the proof is simple logic.


Except that their intersection point is ALSO a coordinate embedded in a larger 3 coordinate vector system...
To PRETEND there's more because math has higher dimensions is INSANE.

The "math" just a way of showing that....

Dec 29, 2018
"Except that their intersection point is ALSO a coordinate embedded "


Not sanity... sorry. The embedded "thing" still has an x,y,z, position.

Dec 29, 2018
"Except that their intersection point is ALSO a coordinate embedded "


Not sanity... sorry. The embedded "thing" still has an x,y,z, position.

NOt actually arguing that...
By putting that "thing" in another vector array, you cube their "position" availability...
That's the thing with "gyres"... :-)

Dec 29, 2018
If it ain't Popper falsifiable then it ain't science
'God is dead' - popper

-But he can't prove it because uh hes also dead.

Dec 29, 2018
But where does the matter come from?


The assumption is that the matter is already there.
Ah. Somehow we got our wires crossed.
Maybe it was my fault.

OK, here's the problem with it: gravity blue-shifts. It doesn't red-shift. A photon falling down a gravity well appears to observers inside the gravity well to be blue-shifted.

However, your idea is indeed being investigated; there are several astrophysicists looking into ideas at least superficially like yours, but much more complex. I'll try to come up with some examples for you to review so you can say whether any of them fits yours.

Dec 29, 2018
@Old_C, physics is supposed to answer a simple question: where is what when?

Without time there is no "when" and nothing could happen.

There's some logic for ya.

To get a little more complicated, velocity is the first derivative of position with respect to time, and acceleration is the second derivative. So when you say

F = ma

you actually are making a statement about time twice. Pretending there's no time in that equation is ridiculous; it's there twice.

Dec 29, 2018
These guys need to do more lab work. Speculating on math is fantasy. No one discovered something after they understood how it worked. It goes the other way. You discover it, then understanding follows.

Dec 29, 2018
Snicker. Lab experiments have been done on F = ma for centuries.

Go take another bong hit.

Dec 29, 2018
@Protoplasmix.

From @Old_C_Code:
Position is three coordinates, x,y,z, ..
Reply from @Protoplasmix:
How do you describe the motion of even a single particle without using a fourth t coordinate, x,y,z,t,..
Careful @Protoplasmix; you are 'mixing' real AND UN-real dimensions.

The only REAL dimensions are SPATIAL (ie, universal phenomena/processes occur IN space as they happen. That's all the universe is about...events AS THEY HAPPEN....irrespective of 'when' or whether someone is looking/describing/analyzing them or not.

The 'further dimensions' used by/for HUMAN mathematical analysis/descriptions/predictions etc, are just UNREAL ABSTRACT ANALYTICAL 'overlays' by us humans on the observed REAL 'SPATIALLY CONTEXTUAL' phenomena in REAL dimensions.

Ie, 'time' is just humans NOTING COMPARATIVE POSITIONS/MOTIONS of observed events IN SPACE, occurring irrespective of any ABSTRACT/GRAPHICAL TIMING-COMPARATOR 'dimension' used to analyze serial/multiple events/motions. :)

Dec 29, 2018
@105LiarRC tries to swing its arrogant diick again.

Now it wants us to believe that time is imaginary when nothing can happen without time. If there is no time then why do things change over time?

More silliness from this idiot, in support of its arrogance.

Maybe you should have another bong hit too, @105LiarRC.

Dec 29, 2018
Stupid is defined as statements w/o logic; pretty sure, a collection of such is called nonsense. Juz a rule, description, premise, dunno,

I see the "conversatio-nal" set of nonsense filtering into fuzzy sets which eventually yields Formal Logic when reduced to .. and I defining a circular logic? No I'm defining what may best be dismissed at the moment. These we use to determine the size of the straight jacket.

Dec 29, 2018
@Da Schneib.
@105LiarRealityCheck tries to swing its arrogant diick again.

Now it wants us to believe that time is imaginary when nothing can happen without time. If there is no time then why do things change over time?

More silliness from this idiot, in support of its arrogance.
Were you born an insensible asshole, DS; or are you a 'self made ass'. Can't you be polite and arguing your case rather than just insulting and then baldly asserting things about 'time' which I just pointed out are Un-real/abstract for the reasons stated?

Anyhow, you have the horse before the cart, DS. It's because things DO CHANGE, that COMPARATIVE 'time'/'timing' analytical measures/quantities/parameters etc CAN be used to predict etc.

Get the point I just finished stressing: TIME is NOT NEEDED for events to HAPPEN per se.

It's only US 'timing' things that DO HAPPEN whether we're 'timing', 'comparing', 'analyzing' CHANGE events or not.

DS, try to read and understand in context. :)

Dec 29, 2018
These guys need to do more lab work. Speculating on math is fantasy. No one discovered something after they understood how it worked. It goes the other way. You discover it, then understanding follows.
says Bongstar

Math equations are mere "projections" of an idea/concept that may be presented for discussion and experimentation IF found to have merit. If not, then it's "back to the drawing board". But math equations, of itself, is a fundamentalist assumption that wants to be taken into serious consideration, where the formulator of the equation will find that his/her formula MUST "hold water" so to speak, otherwise, the formula/equation falls flat.
The "Reality" should be followed by a proper math equation that gives Reality a stepped up expression. But instead and most often, it is the math equation that is formulated first to prove the Reality, and when it doesn't, the equations are changed to whatever fits best to prove that it conforms best to the Reality itself.

Dec 29, 2018
@RealityCheck
Your assertion that Time itself (whatever Time is) is not needed in equations other than the measurement of the Duration of one or more Events from the standpoint of a timepiece, such as the measurement of the Duration of how much Time it takes to travel; to run; to walk; to eat supper, etc.; or the timing of walking a Distance from one point to another - is quite correct.
TIME had been improperly included into Einstein's equations when only Space would have been sufficient - since it is Space that is reactive with all Mass, gravity, and EM. Space has abilities that transcends distance and duration.

Dec 29, 2018
I tried being polite with you, @105LiarRC.

It didn't work out well and I told you at the time that was a mistake.

Do you believe me now? Or do I have to press the point home further?

That number could get a lot larger than 105.

Dec 29, 2018
Gravity can't act if there's no time. For that matter neither can any force.

Maybe you forgot.

Velocity is the first derivative of position with respect to time. This is fact. It's not a "mathumetical ecuation thery by teh siensetis." Proven in labs for a couple hundred years. So much for the latest from the psychotic who thinks there's telepathic alien lizards in the guvmint and robot rape machines in the bushes.

Dec 29, 2018


Get the point I just finished stressing: TIME is NOT NEEDED for events to HAPPEN per se.

It's only US 'timing' things that DO HAPPEN whether we're 'timing', 'comparing', 'analyzing' CHANGE events or not.


I have also begun to notice that the passage of "time" is just an illusion our brain creates for us. Instead of time passing it could be that all things are happening in one all present "now", and rather, what we are measuring is just changes in entropy of things.

Consider a mechanical spring loaded clock. What changes the positions of the hands is a change in energy from the spring to the gear movements, all within a change in entropy of the whole clock. A passage of "time" is not required to change the hands of the clock. Consider what happens in a greater gravity field.

It can be difficult to describe these things without talking about the passage of time since our brains are configured to display it that way to us.

Dec 30, 2018
Bwahaha, @arc doesn't think time is required for entropy.

Dec 30, 2018
@arcmetal
CORRECT!! The passage of time is but a concept instilled into our brains when the only way to observe that passage was by the Sun and Moon's movements as daylight to nightfall when we would then go to sleep and wake at the new day. It's a great method. But then, as humans became mathematically inclined, there was an influence to give that passage of Time a place in equations as "Spacetime" to try to EXPLAIN that which was unexplainable for so long.
The problem was that the passage of Time itself is really UNQUANTIFIABLE when it is no longer defined by the movements of the Sun and Moon as to the human sleep-wake duration cycle as a conventional standard, or to the duration between the seasons and other measurements.
When scientists use Time in an equation as a part of Space, the math equation is relating to an unquantified, undefinable and incomprehensible "thing" that is not even an object, but STILL only a concept which really is meaningless, except as "flow".

Dec 30, 2018
Describe the 2LOT without time. For that matter try the 1LOT.

Good luck. This is lunacy.

Dec 30, 2018
-contd-
@arcmetal
The "flow" of Time itself has still yet to be defined and quantified - but such a true definition of it escapes us every time that a figure or number or even an image of what Time really is has been proposed. We know that the Flow of Time is continuous going forward. There are some who have proposed that Time could be made to reverse or stop, not realising that if such a thing were possible, then EVERYTHING would reverse - not just the few - as well as EVERYTHING would stop, if the flow of Time was made to stop. There would be repercussions that are unimaginable if such a thing were possible.
So Spacetime is actually just plain old SPACE - nothing more, no matter how much scientists would like Time to be subjective.

Dec 30, 2018
The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system can never decrease over time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

Oops.

Dec 30, 2018
Looks like your college edumacation included Advanced Underwater Basket Weaving, Meating Management 404 (inciting confusion to cover your azz), Master Bation of Bidness (milking it for all it's worth), and Advanced Addition.

My wife is still chuckling over you trying to formulate thermodynamics without time, and she's a molecular biology major.

Dec 30, 2018
How do you describe the motion of even a single particle without using a fourth t coordinate, x,y,z,t,..


Time is the parametric dependent variable.

Dec 30, 2018
That's meaningless. a in F = ma means acceleration, which is the second derivative of position with respect to time. In fact, acceleration is dependent upon time, not the other way around.

This is why programmers with no formal education should stay out of physics. Nothing they do is based on reality.

You got a bug... errr, code... generator you wanna show me?

This stuff is hilarious. Totally classic. A coder who doesn't know any computer science and a business administration candidate from Trump University who thinks telepathic alien lizards are running the gummint. You can't make this stuff up.

Dec 30, 2018
What's next, we gonna get a sociologist or a political science major up in here to talk about physics? Maybe a lawyer. Or a barber. After all, we already got a janitor.

Dec 30, 2018
What's next, we gonna get a sociologist or a political science major up in here to talk about physics? Maybe a lawyer. Or a barber. After all, we already got a janitor.
says Da pussy

So Da pussy has a wife. Hmmm - 2 lesbians got together - one being a janitor. The question now is: who is the janitor - DaScheide or her wife?

Dec 30, 2018
Snicker. The risks of being a n00b.

Dec 30, 2018
What's next, we gonna get a sociologist or a political science major up in here to talk about physics? Maybe a lawyer. Or a barber. After all, we already got a janitor.
says Da pussy

So Da pussy has a wife. Hmmm - 2 lesbians got together - one being a janitor. The question now is: who is the janitor - DaScheide or her wife?


Hmmmm this gets better. So there's Da Scheide and her wife, Da Scheiss. Da Pussy1 and Da Pussy2
Excellent lesbian couple here in physorg. Not that there's anything wrong with lesbians like Da Scheide and Da Scheiss

Dec 30, 2018
So, how come you have all these fantasies about gay people?

How's that work out with the whole alien telepathic lizard thing?

Not to mention the rape machines.

Just askin'.

Dec 30, 2018
So, how come you have all these fantasies about gay people?

Just askin'.


No fantasy there. You are a self-admitted lesbian married to a lesbian. Are you gay also besides being lesbian?
Now which one is the janitor - you or the other lesbian?

Dec 30, 2018
Looks like a fantasy to me. Looks like you're making stuff up. That make you hard?

Especially since you're a n00b and don't know who the janitor is.

How's that class in Advanced Addition working out for you?

Dec 30, 2018
So, how come you have all these fantasies about gay people?

How's that work out with the whole alien telepathic lizard thing?

Not to mention the rape machines.

Just askin'.


How many alien lizards are you seeing? You've been talking with them?

Just askin'

Dec 30, 2018
ROFLOL
So Da Scheide aka Da Pussy and her wife, Da Scheiss have been seeing and talking to alien lizards. You can't make this stuff up. Your wife is a rape machine? wow

Dec 30, 2018
Me? I don't see any alien lizards. You're the one with the alien lizards. I just keep bringing it up at inconvenient times and you keep lying about your own words.

Do you repudiate your words?

https://phys.org/...ins.html

-If you talk to aliens telepathically then ...THEY ARE TELEPATHS


We done here?

Best get used to seeing that link and quote a lot.

Dec 30, 2018
AND you're a physorg Moderator too? Well, why not?
Is your lesbian wife here in physorg too? Just one big happy family, eh? Time off from her job as a janitor? Does she get to clean toilets like you do?

Dec 30, 2018
https://phys.org/...ins.html

-If you talk to aliens telepathically then ...THEY ARE TELEPATHS


I ask again, we done here?

Dec 30, 2018
Nope. Not me. I've never seen alien lizards or machines that rape. Those are YOUR fantasies. not mine.
I have never said anything about LIZARDS. Them's YOUR words.

Dec 30, 2018
-If you talk to aliens telepathically then ...THEY ARE TELEPATHS


https://phys.org/...ins.html

You said it. Now you're lying about it and won't face up to what you said.

Simple as that.

Next come the nice large men in white suits when you get violent.

What's your "Unit?" The violent ward?

Do the doctors know you're posting here?

Dec 30, 2018
Nothing about lizards in your link either. Ok you're done here. Now git.

Dec 30, 2018
Incidentally, since I took such a strong moral stance earlier, I have observed this troll and decided it's only trolling to try and cause confusion, it's not actually insane. It merely apes the insane for tactical trolling advantage.

Dec 30, 2018
Still nothing about lizards in your link - obviously you (and maybe your lesbian wife) are suffering from Cognitive Dissonance, which prevents you from comprehending what I said the first time. So I'll say it again.
There is no talk of lizards in that link

Dec 30, 2018
I think telepathic aliens is enough to go on with.

Next?

Dec 30, 2018
ROFLOL You should get ready for your janitor job. Or is it your lesbian wife that has a job as janitor? Where does she work - at a correction facility probably. Pussy1 and Pussy2 sitting in a tree k-i-s-s-i-n-g

Dec 30, 2018
I think telepathic aliens is enough to go on with.

Next?


So you've been talking with telepathic aliens now? Where did you see them? Does NASA know? But where are your alien lizards that you keep talking about? Oh I see, you are backing off that one, eh? ROFLOL

Dec 30, 2018
Still worming and squirming. I'm thinking I was wrong: it's a Scientologist.

Dec 30, 2018
Still worming and squirming. I'm thinking I was wrong: it's a Scientologist.


Why are you still worming and squirming? Perhaps you are still seeing alien lizards before your eyes? Shouldn't you get your eyes checked? There might be some kind of growth in there.
Who's a scientologist? So now you're seeing Tom Cruise? Lady, you're about ready for the mental ward in your favorite institution.
Now git.

Dec 30, 2018
Standard troll behavior: avoid an unpleasant truth and accuse the other side of the same thing.

Just like the Republican'ts always do, and the other destroyatives and confusionists.

Now, who does that sound like?

You gonna deny Elron and all that stuff? Or just try to bury it in the catbox?

Dec 30, 2018
Standard troll behavior: avoid an unpleasant truth and accuse the other side of the same thing.

Just like the Republican'ts always do, and the other destroyatives and confusionists.

Now, who does that sound like?

You gonna deny Elron and all that stuff? Or just try to bury it in the catbox?
says Da Pussy1

ROFLOL
So where's your alien lizards that you keep seeing, Pussytard?

Dec 30, 2018
You said it:

-If you talk to aliens telepathically then ...THEY ARE TELEPATHS


https://phys.org/...ins.html

I'm going with you talking about telepathic aliens as if they're real.

Now what were you arguing about again? Whining about being trolled? After David Icke anyone talking about telepathic aliens is either a total nutjob or a Scientologist. Which are you?

Dec 30, 2018
You said it:

-If you talk to aliens telepathically then ...THEY ARE TELEPATHS


https://phys.org/...ins.html

I'm going with you talking about telepathic aliens as if they're real.

Now what were you arguing about again? Whining about being trolled? After David Icke anyone talking about telepathic aliens is either a total nutjob or a Scientologist. Which are you?


Yessah, dems aliens be talking in dat telepathic talkings like you done been sayin'.
So when did you start talking telepathically to aliens. Did they come across the border with Mexico? I KNEW we should Build that Wall.
Trolled? Dat be you, eh? I knew it. I KNEW IT. Da Pussytard be trolling, worming and squirming all nighty long.

Dec 30, 2018
They're your words.

Do you deny them?

Dec 30, 2018
How do you describe the motion of even a single particle without using a fourth t coordinate, x,y,z,t,..
Time is the parametric dependent variable.
No, the location of the particle at some time t is what's being measured so its position is the dependent variable. You're free to parameterize n-dimensional motion as n one-dimensional algebraic equations if you like, but Einstein and many others since have had much success describing reality using four dimensions rather than three. In physics "dimension" can mean any physical measurement like length, position, time, mass, etc. Can't help wondering what your simple 3-d logic says about the success physicists have using imaginary (complex) numbers in quantum mechanics...

Dec 30, 2018
@RC


The 'further dimensions' used by/for HUMAN mathematical analysis/descriptions/predictions etc, are just UNREAL ABSTRACT ANALYTICAL 'overlays' by us humans on the observed REAL 'SPATIALLY CONTEXTUAL' phenomena in REAL dimensions.

Ie, 'time' is just humans NOTING COMPARATIVE POSITIONS/MOTIONS of observed events IN SPACE, occurring irrespective of any ABSTRACT/GRAPHICAL TIMING-COMPARATOR 'dimension' used to analyze serial/multiple events/motions. :)

I never thought you would agree with me on the nature of TIME. The obvious conclusion is that TIME is merely the expansion of matter, as per expansion theory (see The Situation of Gravity). All matter (including us) is expanding, and that expansion is TIME.

Dec 30, 2018
The only REAL dimensions are SPATIAL (ie, universal phenomena/processes occur IN space as they happen. That's all the universe is about...events AS THEY HAPPEN....irrespective of 'when' or whether someone is looking/describing/analyzing them or not.
...
Ie, 'time' is just humans NOTING COMPARATIVE POSITIONS/MOTIONS of observed events IN SPACE, occurring irrespective of any ABSTRACT/GRAPHICAL TIMING-COMPARATOR 'dimension' used to analyze serial/multiple events/motions. :)

Actually... "Time" is a name we've give to the Universes property that ALLOWS that change to occur in the first place...
Which is essentially, the three physical dimensions -
In a space that allows them to exist.

Dec 30, 2018
The obvious conclusion is that TIME is merely the expansion of matter, as per expansion theory (see The Situation of Gravity). All matter (including us) is expanding, and that expansion is TIME.


......or that things are MOVING, they can be expanding or contracting it doesn't matter.

Dec 30, 2018
I watched a science documentary many years ago that had a leading scientist (a real scientist, not a media scientist) who denounced string theory for wasting the creative years of many, many talented young cosmologists and mathematicians. Apparently, string theory is like mathematic 'crack'.


The issue with string theory is that it's a mathematical framework that covers too much - it's a set of tools that allows one to approach the problem rather than narrow down to specific answers. In that sense, it's like giving the prospective cosmologist a chisel and telling them to chisel out Michaelangelo's David out of marble - of course it is possible, but almost infinitely unlikely.


It's a lot more possible than singularities.

Dec 30, 2018
Careful @Protoplasmix; you are 'mixing' real AND UN-real dimensions.
I'll dare to do whatever the math allows, thank you RC, and an example of 'mixing' would be plugging the equations for Fermi-Dirac statistics and Bose-Einstein statistics into Newton's equation for the force of gravity to produce a curve the looks just like the strong force...

Dec 30, 2018
"the looks" --> "that looks"

It's getting harder to tell if tablet software still has too many features or not quite enough yet...

Dec 30, 2018
'time' is just humans NOTING COMPARATIVE POSITIONS/MOTIONS of observed events IN SPACE


"Time" is a name we've give to the Universes property that ALLOWS that change to occur


......peripheral observations that are apt descriptions of what happens within the properties of KINETIC ENERGY.

TIME is all about the RATE at which KINETIC ENERGY creates ALL the MOTION we observe.

Mechanical clocks ONLY run based on the expenditure of kinetic energy to create WORK. Electronic clocks the same thing, it's the movement of electrons that makes them run, movement of electrons is kinetic energy. Atomic "clocks"are no different, as they too require movement of electrons into new & subsequent return to previous orbital positions within the electron shell of an atom.

TIME therefore simply being a rate of expenditure of kinetic energy cannot be a separate parameter, it is 100% dependent on expenditure of kinetic energy or TIME does not exist.

Dec 30, 2018
If it ain't Popper falsifiable then it ain't science.

I agree; however, instead of sayinging falsifiable; say provable True or False via the use of the defined Modus Ponens; In this case the Formal Logic, i.e. You Universe of "Discourse", IE. THE $HIT YA SAY!

Try Charge Exist! make it an Axiom, ...

Dec 30, 2018
Stupid is defined as statements w/o logic; pretty sure, a collection of such is called nonsense. Juz a rule, description, premise, dunno,

I see the "conversatio-nal" set of nonsense filtering into fuzzy sets which eventually yields Formal Logic when reduced to .. and I defining a circular logic? No I'm defining what may best be dismissed at the moment. These we use to determine the size of the straight jacket.

In other words, we are stupid!

Dec 30, 2018
Hot topic ! Who's qualified to make a judgment ? Alot of interesting thoughts, going to have to read all.

Dec 30, 2018
Nope. Not me. I've never seen alien lizards or machines that rape
You've never seen Barbarella then. Or Saturn 3.

Haha pussytard calls da scheide 'da pussy'. Falsify THAT haha

Dec 30, 2018
@Da Schneib.
I tried being polite with you, @105LiarRC.

It didn't work out well and I told you at the time that was a mistake.
And you immediately reverted to your insulting-nincompoop self when proven wrong, DS. :)

You are an insensible, unheeding, ego-driven asshole, DS; that much is clear to any intelligent reader of your litany of faux pas and insults while wrong.

Here's three New Year Resolutions for you, DS:

(1) stop being a self-made insulting asshole;

(2) start reading and understanding properly in context.

(3) learn from your all too many faux pas.:)
Do you believe me now?
DS, think what I tried to point out for you when I said you were "putting the cart before the horse".

Let's try again, DS:

Only motions/changes are real EFFECTIVE dynamical entities/factors; while 'timing' is a maths DERIVATIVE in abstract ANALYSIS by humans trying to describe/predict etc said real EFFECTIVE motions/changes.

Said 'timing' is NOT a cause/facilitator. :)

Dec 30, 2018
@Da Scchneib.
Bwahaha, @arcmetal doesn't think time is required for entropy.
DS, seriously, before again laughing at @arcmetal, you should try to properly read/understand what is being said to you. :)

Eg, in my above post I explained to you how 'timing' is an abstract analytical 'output'; and NOT any sort of real effective 'a-priori' causal/facilitating factor.

Try to 'get' that before you again go into kneejerking/insulting mode. :)

Dec 30, 2018
@Reg Mundy.
@RC
...'time' is just humans NOTING COMPARATIVE POSITIONS/MOTIONS of observed events IN SPACE, occurring irrespective of any ABSTRACT/GRAPHICAL TIMING-COMPARATOR 'dimension' used to analyze serial/multiple events/motions. :)
I never thought you would agree with me on the nature of TIME. The obvious conclusion is that TIME is merely the expansion of matter, as per expansion theory (see The Situation of Gravity). All matter (including us) is expanding, and that expansion is TIME.
Hi Reg! Long time no 'see'. All the best for the New Year, mate. :)

Re the 'time'/'timing' aspect, it doesn't matter what kind of change/motion is involved as 'a priori' in the universal cause-effect system/dynamics, it remains that 'time'/'timing' is a derivative in abstract maths analysis of whatever motions/changes is under 'comparative study'.

BTW, mate; I never asked: what is your 'expanding matter' expanding 'into'. Is it anything like (now falsified) BB 'expansion'?

Dec 30, 2018
@Whydening Gyre.
Actually... "Time" is a name we've give to the Universes property that ALLOWS that change to occur in the first place...
Which is essentially, the three physical dimensions -
In a space that allows them to exist.
Your getting closer, mate! But you need to define what "allows" means in real, effective, universal entities/dynamics terms, otherwise it's just a metaphysical notion having no causal/facilitative effectiveness in real physical energy-space context per se.

What should be remembered at all times is, energy-space IS the ONLY REAL PHYSICALLY EFFECTIVE 'a-priori' source, substance and motive (cause-effect) of the universal dynamics/entities. The universal motions/changes occur (ie, as in "shit happens") whether or not we humans exist to use maths for analyzing/describing/predicting etc whatever we do observe.

In short: 'time'/'timing' is INFORMATION 'dimension' derivation in analysis of comparative motions/changes/positions under study. :)


Dec 30, 2018
@Protoplasmix.
Careful @Protoplasmix; you are 'mixing' real AND UN-real dimensions.
I'll dare to do whatever the math allows, thank you RC,.....
No problem, mate. However, if while doing so one/many may be misled into unwittingly reifying an abstract mathematical thing into a real physical thing, then that is when my caution as above is a 'timely' necessity now and then. Perhaps then we would not get all these 'publish-or-perish' hacks writing papers that clutter up the scientific literature with GIGO-dependent fantasy 'dimensions' like the above (and like all those which BB-hacks have been perpetrating for too many decades now).

Anyhow, mate, best wishes for the New Year! Stay safe; stay well. :)

Dec 30, 2018
How do you describe the motion of even a single particle without using a fourth t coordinate, x,y,z,t,..
Time is the parametric dependent variable.
No, the location of the particle at some time t is what's being measured so its position is the dependent variable. You're free to parameterize n-dimensional motion as n one-dimensional algebraic equations if you like, but Einstein and many others since have had much success describing reality using four dimensions rather than three. In physics "dimension" can mean any physical measurement like length, position, time, mass, etc. Can't help wondering what your simple 3-d logic says about the success physicists have using imaginary (complex) numbers in quantum mechanics...

says protoplasmx

Time is not, and should not be a part of Spatially-derived equations such as x,y,z. It is a common mistake in science to add a NON-PHYSICAL "ENTITY" to equations unless it signifies duration and distance.

Dec 30, 2018
-contd-
Time is NOT a location, nor is Time a Dimension as are the 3 dimensions of height, width and length. When you add Time into the equation, you have added nothing, and when you add Spacetime, all you have added is Space - whether or not you have factored in Duration and Distance.
Scientists could go so much further and be more productive if they understood the fallacy that they have attached to their maths by included Time as a factor.
Time is not even an entity, in Truth. Only a measurement of Duration and Distance with the use of clock mechanisms.

Dec 30, 2018
Nope. Not me. I've never seen alien lizards or machines that rape
You've never seen Barbarella then. Or Saturn 3.

Haha pussytard calls da scheide 'da pussy'. Falsify THAT haha
says PussyOtto

Nope. Never saw your Barbarella. Must have been before my time.
Never saw any alien lizards either - especially telepathic ones that talk to Da Scheidebo telepathically.
Nothing to falsify, PussyOtto - I have seen and talked with Extraterrestrials who live and work on this planet. There is nothing wrong with getting to know and understand them. They have changed their appearance to look more human. Nothing wrong with that either.
So what is your complaint, Pussyturd? Did one of Da Scheide's alien lizards crawl up your arse?

Dec 30, 2018
@RC


The 'further dimensions' used by/for HUMAN mathematical analysis/descriptions/predictions etc, are just UNREAL ABSTRACT ANALYTICAL 'overlays' by us humans on the observed REAL 'SPATIALLY CONTEXTUAL' phenomena in REAL dimensions.

Ie, 'time' is just humans NOTING COMPARATIVE POSITIONS/MOTIONS of observed events IN SPACE, occurring irrespective of any ABSTRACT/GRAPHICAL TIMING-COMPARATOR 'dimension' used to analyze serial/multiple events/motions. :)

I never thought you would agree with me on the nature of TIME. The obvious conclusion is that TIME is merely the expansion of matter, as per expansion theory (see The Situation of Gravity). All matter (including us) is expanding, and that expansion is TIME.
says Reg Mundy

No. Mass/Matter and Space have the capability of expanding. TIME, not being a physical form (such as Matter and Space or such forms of Energy as Motion, Gravity, EM, etc.) has NO CAPABILITY to expand, contract, reverse, stop or slow down.

Dec 30, 2018
Whether or not time is a physical dimension such as the x, y, z coordinates or whether time is just a measure of change is currently unknown.

We can traverse physical dimensions, like travel forward and back along the x axis. It is currently unknown whether time can be traversed in a similar manner, but should it be found one day that time can be traveled forward as well as backwards it would be proven that time is a real physical dimension just as the 3 spatial dimensions.

This is absolutely unimportant when it comes to the study of physical systems. Mathematically I can calculate the Earth's motion through space as well as calculate the inverse (time reversed motion). When it comes to the study of physical systems time is a useful dimension to work with regardless of whether time turns out to be a real world dimension or not.

Dec 30, 2018
-contd-
@RegMundy
The CONCEPT of TIME ITSELF has no bearing on the physical properties of Mass/Energies and Space except in the use of physical tools ONLY for measurement of Distance and Duration.

Time is ONLY a CONCEPT that was dreamed up by humans to understand better their place in the realities of their existence and why/how things work. It is most certainly NOT a Dimension, physical or otherwise. I cannot stress this enough.

Considering Time as a Dimension in addition to the 3 already known is ridiculous and shows that mankind is still liable to fall for the imaginings of Philosophers who give names and abilities to the Undefinable properties of Time.

Dec 30, 2018


TIME is all about the RATE at which KINETIC ENERGY creates ALL the MOTION we observe.

Mechanical clocks ONLY run based on the expenditure of kinetic energy to create WORK. Electronic clocks the same thing, it's the movement of electrons that makes them run...
...


This is close to what I was imagining. What seems more fundamental is the shift in energy from one form to another, or a change in entropy of a system. Time is irrelevant.

Imagine a simple desktop experiment where we wish to measure a change in its temp, or entropy, or whatever. We can use a spring loaded clock to measure the rates of changes in the experiment.

But notice, we are using a spring loaded with energy to move the clock hands, which then shifts the energy from the spring to the gears. That is, we are using a change in entropy in one device to measure another change in entropy in the experiment's mechanism.

What if instead we used a similar clock that was near a black hole?

Dec 30, 2018
@Surveillance_Egg_Unit
-contd-
@RegMundy
The CONCEPT of TIME ITSELF has no bearing on the physical properties of Mass/Energies and Space except in the use of physical tools ONLY for measurement of Distance and Duration.

Time is ONLY a CONCEPT that was dreamed up by humans to understand better their place in the realities of their existence and why/how things work. ...

Very well said. :)

It goes along with what I just described.

The passage of time seems to be an illusion our brain has created for us. Just like how we see mostly in black and white, but it only looks like our complete field of view is color. We only have a tiny sliver of color detectors in our eyes, the brain fills in the rest of the color we only think we see.

Our brains are always creating illusions for us to make life easier to navigate.

Dec 30, 2018
@Surveillance_Egg_Unit
-contd-
@RegMundy
The CONCEPT of TIME ITSELF has no bearing on the physical properties of Mass/Energies and Space except in the use of physical tools ONLY for measurement of Distance and Duration.

Time is ONLY a CONCEPT that was dreamed up by humans to understand better their place in the realities of their existence and why/how things work. ...

Very well said. :)

It goes along with what I just described.

The passage of time seems to be an illusion our brain has created for us. Just like how we see mostly in black and white, but it only looks like our complete field of view is color. We only have a tiny sliver of color detectors in our eyes, the brain fills in the rest of the color we only think we see.

Our brains are always creating illusions for us to make life easier to navigate.

Received light has directional vector Pointing to center of the last fie

Dec 30, 2018
It also may have a direction in Time, i.e. space and time are conceptual; however, given the curvature, measurable, look at the direction of your input signal, i.e. +/- Normal to the lens is the signal then ... physics!

Dec 30, 2018
...

This is absolutely unimportant when it comes to the study of physical systems. Mathematically I can calculate the Earth's motion through space as well as calculate the inverse (time reversed motion). When it comes to the study of physical systems time is a useful dimension to work with regardless of whether time turns out to be a real world dimension or not.

Using time in the equations sure does make a lot of things easier to calculate, but like you say, it is difficult to say if its a real thing or not.

Its similar to what I've noticed when trying to describe electromagnetic fields. Using only 3 spacial coordinates: x, y, z, it is very complicated to describe the fields, but using 4 spacial coordinates like: x, y, z, w, the fields become much easier to describe.

Even though, no one has been able to point me in the direction of "w".

Dec 30, 2018
@SEU

The CONCEPT of TIME ITSELF has no bearing on the physical properties of Mass/Energies and Space except in the use of physical tools ONLY for measurement of Distance and Duration.
Time is ONLY a CONCEPT that was dreamed up by humans to understand better their place in the realities of their existence and why/how things work. It is most certainly NOT a Dimension, physical or otherwise. I cannot stress this enough.
Considering Time as a Dimension in addition to the 3 already known is ridiculous and shows that mankind is still liable to fall for the imaginings of Philosophers who give names and abilities to the Undefinable properties of Time.

Seems you totally misunderstand me. I never said time is a dimension or anything like that. I said that what we subjectively perceive as TIME is actually the expansion of matter which is a product of our following the "laws" of physics to guide our path thru the primordial particle chaos. TIME is thus quantum and non-repeating.

Dec 30, 2018
Set c=1; T=Lambda; use logic it's an isomorphic sampling space onto reality! You can define anything within the universe; w/ logic and recursion; all elements; combinations; ...

Go ahead be God, Space and time are equal in magnitude; every point has a defined set of attributes; better it's Object Memory:

You define the clock

Dec 30, 2018
It is most certainly NOT a Dimension, physical or otherwise. I cannot stress this enough.
.......right, because it is always coincident to an event of kinetic energy, therefore inseparable from the event itself & any repeat occurrence of that event.


Dec 30, 2018
@SEU

The CONCEPT of TIME ITSELF has no bearing on the physical properties of Mass/Energies and Space except in the use of physical tools ONLY for measurement of Distance and Duration.
Time is ONLY a CONCEPT....

Seems you totally misunderstand me. I never said time is a dimension or anything like that. I said that what we subjectively perceive as TIME is actually the expansion of matter which is a product of our following the "laws" of physics to guide our path thru the primordial particle chaos. TIME is thus quantum and non-repeating.
says RegM

I wasn't implying that you were considering Time to be a Dimension. Up on my platform, I was just clarifying my OWN stance on the reality of "STAND ALONE" Time. I understood you perfectly, Reg, but I really just wanted to clear up any possibility of others reading my post having a misconception of my own beliefs. I try to put my ideas across clearly and concisely.
-contd-

Dec 30, 2018
-contd-
@RegM
I agree that Time can be used "in lieu" of a better name for the expansion of Matter. Hopefully, a more fitting name will be forthcoming for the misconception of Time as a physical "thing".
I don't know that there ever was a "primordial particle chaos", since if there was such a chaos, then why is that chaos no longer evident "out there". Everything seems to be flowing smoothly in a Natural Order with very few chaotic events - unless you want to consider that the merging of galaxies is a form of Chaos. As I had mentioned to JaxPavan in my monologue, the galaxies out in front moving away from the spaceman and his spacecraft may seem like redshift, and the galaxies behind him may seem like blueshift, but there is neither red or blueshift due to ALL of the galaxies/traffic flowing in only ONE direction - forward. So that the red/blueshift theory should be scrapped. If the flow/traffic were chaotic, all the galaxies would be flying helter-skelter w/o any order.

Dec 30, 2018
In other words, it all depends on which direction you are looking - forward or backward - when attempting to understand/discover the ebb and flow of material bodies such as galaxies/clusters and Stars
I reject Chaos in the Universe, and so does that in which I believe.

Dec 30, 2018
I reject Chaos in the Universe
......and lack of "chaos" is the resultant outcome of an ENTROPIC UNIVERSE in which the random distribution of energy results in the monolithic environment we see any direction we point our telescopes. Galaxy clusters in perfect barycenters of motion within their local groupings never requiring something even bigger to explain their movements through the cosmos.

Dec 30, 2018
Oh, look, a titch of brolls.

Dec 30, 2018
Dare I say that time exists and is a dimension per Einstein.

Dec 30, 2018
I reject Chaos
......and lack of "chaos" is the resultant outcome of an ENTROPIC UNIVERSE in which the random distribution of energy results in the monolithic environment we see any direction we point our telescopes. Galaxy clusters in perfect barycenters of motion within their local groupings never requiring something even bigger to explain their movements through the cosmos.
says Benni

Benni, are you certain that entropy applies?

entropy | ˈentrəpē |
noun
1 Physics a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system. (Symbol: S)
2 lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into

I will need to think this definition over a tad bit. Will get back to you.
"2 lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into" For some reason, that is bothering me. A lack of chaos should not be defined as "a lack of order".

Dec 30, 2018
Ok Benni this is your quote. Nobody has changed it.
"Galaxy clusters in perfect barycenters of motion within their local groupings never requiring something even bigger to explain their movements through the cosmos"
Your words. Discuss.

Dec 30, 2018
If the other dimensions that is hypothesized within string theory is effectively compressed by gravity but in a much more aggravated way then the known three spacial dimensions that we live in then as space expands due to the expanding force of the big bang when pockets between galaxies begins to appear where there is very little mass, effect of gravity becomes negligible as well in which the other dimensions hypothesized in string theory that was hiding may unfold resulting to a larger expansion force that we now observe known as dark energy.
It also solves various other questions involving dark energy like why it does not grow weaker as space expands and so on.
This has been my pet theory concerning dark energy for the last ten years or so.


You simply cannot call that a theory, unless of course you have no idea what the word means.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni
I have copied over 100 Q & A regarding Laws of Thermodynamics to study further at my leisure. Some are from Quora. All very interesting.
I have read that "they" in your field of interest have moved away from "order" and "disorder" - now defining it as "Energy Dispersion". . I really must purchase that book at the University store on Laws of Thermodynamics. Getting highly motivated.

Dec 31, 2018
Ok Benni this is your quote. Nobody has changed it.
"Galaxy clusters in perfect barycenters of motion within their local groupings never requiring something even bigger to explain their movements through the cosmos"
Your words. Discuss.
says jimmy bobber

I see nothing wrong with Benni's quote. The galaxy clusters are either leading in front of, or following behind other galaxies - whether clustered or single. Their motion is set by the galaxies out in front, which are pulling (gravitationally, I think), and the ones behind are "pushing" the ones in front. It isn't size that is causing the motion/movement through the Cosmos. The pushing/pulling effect may be caused by "due to ALL of the galaxies/traffic flowing in only ONE direction - forward." This has been discussed before in at least one physorg article.
Similar to a parade of Mass that, depending on which direction the observer is looking - one cluster may seem to be going away from him while the other is coming

Dec 31, 2018
Dare I say that time exists and is a dimension per Einstein.
says jimmy bobber

LOL You can say it, but that doesn't make it true. In your own words, what does this "time as dimension" look like to you? Does it have height, weight, depth, length, a big nose? Does it absorb, emit, repulse, spin, attract, liquefy, harden, coagulate? Can you see it, feel it, play with it, step through it, take a photo of it? Can you make geometric patterns with it? Fractals?
Please explain.

Dec 31, 2018
Dare I say that time exists and is a dimension per Einstein.
says jimmy bobber

LOL You can say it, but that doesn't make it true. In your own words, what does this "time as dimension" look like to you? Does it have height, weight, depth, length, a big nose? Does it absorb, emit, repulse, spin, attract, liquefy, harden, coagulate? Can you see it, feel it, play with it, step through it, take a photo of it? Can you make geometric patterns with it? Fractals?
Please explain.

Without the concept of "time", you couldn't do any of those things.
You could say it is a collection of the 1st 3 plus the space to function in.
Ergo - timespace.
And it is not "manmade", inasmuch as body rotations and orbits throughout the universe are all cyclic "clocks" that were ticking way before we got here.
Those were the "clocks" that ancient man used long before we had anything resembling cuckoo clocks.
Hell, man. You even have a body clock which is tied into those I just mentioned.

Dec 31, 2018
Things only ever happen in the universal NOW frame. 'Time' is used by humans because of the way we function to record past events of NOW sequences (Memories) and use that history of sequential NOW moments to predict future NOW event sequences. The only thing that actually exists is the current physical configuration of NOW and the ability for energy to move to the next configuration of NOW in space.
?

Dec 31, 2018
@Surveillance_Egg_Unit, @beeds

I am liking you guys last comments. To add to it, since I've noticed that time is simply an illusion created by our brains, that instead what matters is the change in entropy of the system, and so therefore there is only this one instant of "now", it would mean there will never be time travel. The only pseudo time travel that would exist, is travel into the future. This would consist of freezing myself and waiting for a 1,000 years before waking.

But notice what I was forced to describe: I'd be stopping my entropy, but letting all other objects around me continue with the progress of their entropy.

Dec 31, 2018
Oh, look, a titch of brolls.


......and one of them is the Physorg Moderator schneibo Da Schneib.

Dec 31, 2018
Dare I say that time exists and is a dimension per Einstein.
.......wrong, Minkowski came up with Space & Time Continuum.

what does this "time as dimension" look like to you? Does it have height, weight, depth, length, a big nose? Does it absorb, emit, repulse, spin, attract, liquefy, harden, coagulate? Can you see it, feel it, play with it, step through it, take a photo of it? Can you make geometric patterns with it? Fractals?


Point well taken, TIME initiates nothing. Time cannot be input to a system resulting in system motion. It was a coordinate system that Minkowski overlapped to flat Euclidean geometry for the purpose of creating time dilating GRAVITY WELLS, a coordinate system that CURVED rather than remaining flat.


Dec 31, 2018
@Benni
I have copied over 100 Q & A regarding Laws of Thermodynamics to study further at my leisure. Some are from Quora. All very interesting.
I have read that "they" in your field of interest have moved away from "order" and "disorder" - now defining it as "Energy Dispersion". . I really must purchase that book at the University store on Laws of Thermodynamics. Getting highly motivated.


The point you make about Energy Dispersion" is exactly the same as the point I make that "entropy is the random distribution of energy".

Energy Dispersion => Energy Distribution..........ENTROPY.

I simply think of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as The Distribution of Energy. Substituting "dispersion" for "distribution" is just fine, it is the same end result, that end result being random orderly motion within a closed boundary system, it's why the Universe looks like it does, even distribution of galactic mass in any direction we point a telescope.


Dec 31, 2018
Time is a Perception

You have one planet completing one solar orbit
and
you have a second planet completing two orbits
both passing the completion line together

this is exactly what time is
it is not an entity
it is not substance
it does not exist

so
this completion line
where both planets pass
one in a single orbit
and
a second in two orbits
the x factor
we call time
then becomes a measure of distace/time L/T and 2L/T
The distance L the planets crossed is the vacuum
so
the vacuum is the spatial dimension
being
a vacuum
a vacuum is of no physical substance
so
not only does time not exist
the planets mass is moving from this spatial vacuum
to another spatial vacuum
a vacuum that is indistinguishable from one another
the only thing that actually exists
are the protons and their scrumptious electrons in the planets
Space and time do not exist

Dec 31, 2018
Things only ever happen in the universal NOW frame. 'Time' is used by humans because of the way we function to record past events of NOW sequence...
No, it can be demonstrated in a variety of ways that if you and I are moving in different directions then your "now" will be different from my "now" -- this is a good Wiki article, and a perfect example of using t as a coordinate and why it's helpful to have a t-axis for understanding the world (and universe) around you: Relativity of simultaneity...

Dec 31, 2018
Even though, no one has been able to point me in the direction of "w".
Just keep in mind that it's orthogonal to all the other axes, and to help visualize things (on a 2-d screen anyway) you can omit one of the spatial axes and think of (x,y,w) or (y,z,w). Best example I've seen for cramming the entire universe past present and future onto a 2-d sheet is a Penrose diagram.

Dec 31, 2018
and a perfect example of using t as a coordinate and why it's helpful to have a t-axis for understanding the world (and universe) around you: Relativity of simultaneity


What is happening on the t-axis when it goes negative? Or is that what you're talking about?
that if you and I are moving in different directions then your "now" will be different from my "now"



Dec 31, 2018
You said it:
-If you talk to aliens ...THEY ARE TELEPATHS

https://phys.org/...ins.html
I'm going with you talking about telepathic aliens as if they're real.
Now what were you arguing about again? Whining about being trolled? After David Icke anyone talking about telepathic aliens is either a total nutjob or a Scientologist. Which are you?

I will say it, who needs telepathy with the best things are derived by zero locally? :)
Locally displace self-energy works for a non-pertubative account. The problem is the lack of distinguishability. The isotropy does not prejudice forwards or backwards. General relativity is a timeless artifice, so what kind of holism leaves a degree of freedom, rather than making a duality to further the relation? A looper, that's who.
Also you the guys saying relativity makes time and space and illusion are right. A problem with both LQG and string theory. Space as ground or determinism.

Dec 31, 2018
*when the best things

*space an illusion are right.

Dec 31, 2018
GR, could argue as thermal time. The point is the thesis is singular. It makes divergent world lines an impossibility. Or rather highly improbable and operationally reversible.

There is a set of interpretations that elicit the problems of human understanding.

A string theory would curl fatalistically from gauge theory classically. A quantum gravity would have erasure. The utilization of configuration space is different. The operation is the same. A total mind bend.

Psychologically it is best to leave it as intrinsic awareness. Slightly new. Healthy model based realism between the primordial dualities of schizophrenia and depression. The new age higher cognitive functions are gratitude for both storytelling and meaning. The primitives remain and approximation or inscrutable for their local and structure, there is still much rigor to aggregating the incommensurable.

Dec 31, 2018
Times flows at it normal rate at absolute zero velocity
so
at C/2
Time flows at T = T(1/2)
Two bodies moving relative to each other
where their velocities relative to the zero velocity of the vacuum
they both cannot have time flowing slower relative to each other
as A is 149896229m/s
and B 149896228m/s
only A has its time running slow relative to B
as B has its time running faster relative to A
because
time runs slower
the faster the body moves
relative
to the stationary vacuum
till that body reach's 29979248m/s
where time ceases to flow
as
I would
like the flow of time
to
be properly stated
as time flows normally at zero velocity
where as
Time stops at 299792458m/s

Dec 31, 2018
Relativistic Time Thought Experiments

As this nonsense has gone on far too long
I do not believe in thought experiments
even
though I am quite adept at creating thought experiments from the quantum fluctuations
the reason I am adept is because I don't believe in thought experiments
so to the facts
Facts
Time is relative to absolute zero velocity of the vacuum
Time flows normally at absolute zero velocity
Time ceases to flow at the speed of light

So
What is this nonsense of time being relative to two bodies in motion
as it is nothing of the sort
it can be clearly seen to be absolute nonsense
as it clearly causes confusion and our favourite scientism
Obfuscation

As the facts speak for themselves

Fact:
Time is relative to absolute zero velocity of the vacuum:
Time flows normally at absolute zero velocity:
Time ceases to flow at the speed of light:

Dec 31, 2018
Gravity versus Velocity

For those who say gravity
velocity is L/T
where as
gravity g is acceleration is velocity/time L/T²
effectively gravity is varying velocity
as varying velocity is acceleration
velocity and gravity are the same beasts
because
in the infinite vacuous vacuum of space
there is no such entity as continuous motion
all motion is varying
as
it can be clearly seen there is no distinction
between
Velocity and acceleration

Dec 31, 2018
Thamks Proto, for the wiki article.

It was "a drink of cool water" after all the blathering superstitions of the woomongers!

Dec 31, 2018
Never saw any alien lizards either - especially telepathic ones that talk to Da Scheidebo telepathically.
Nothing to falsify, PussyOtto - I have seen and talked with Extraterrestrials
Here is a repeat (always good for a laugh) of you posting as pirouette about martians in NASA pics, from 2013

"pictures providing proof of large life forms that are semi-transparent. Those are NOT geology and are not a trick of light and shadow. Mars has life... semi-transparent, not translucent. We also have independent, PROFESSIONAL verification as to the existence of the humanoids in the Mars pictures. You and your "people" need to either get your eyes checked out and possibly purchase reading glasses... Have a magnifying glass available, please. The humanoid life forms are semi-transparent and they are huge, with human-like faces. It is possible that they live underground which is why they are not readily seen by the HiRise cameras Same fruit, different cake.

Dec 31, 2018
-And someone pointed out at one point that, because of the scale and the angle of the photos, these martians would have been at least 900ft tall and lying down.

You're like dr who only each iteration is stupider.

Dec 31, 2018
"Fact:
Time is relative to absolute zero velocity of the vacuum:
Time flows normally at absolute zero velocity:
Time ceases to flow at the speed of light:"

.......thus marking the end of Comments for this thread. This thread is now closed for Comments, granDy.

Dec 31, 2018
@Protoplasmix.
@beeds.
Things only ever happen in the universal NOW frame. 'Time' is used by humans because of the way we function to record past events of NOW sequence
No, it can be demonstrated in a variety of ways that if you and I are moving in different directions then your "now" will be different from my "now" --this is a good Wiki article, and a perfect example of using t as a coordinate and why it's helpful to have a t-axis for understanding the world (and universe) around you: https://en.m.wiki...ltaneity
Again, timely caution is necessary to stop misleading 'mixing' of effectively separate concepts/things; namely:

- SIMULTANEITY is LOCAL 'events analysis' issue;

- UNIVERSAL 'NOW' is GLOBAL concept, recognizing that 'events' DO occur 'simultaneously' all over the universal extent REGARDLESS of WHICH observer/frame is 'analyzing' REMOTELY RECEIVED INFORMATION (via light/gravity/sound) from any 'event of interest'.

Cheers.


Dec 31, 2018
@Protoplasmix.
@arcmetal.
Even though, no one has been able to point me in the direction of "w".
Just keep in mind that it's orthogonal to all the other axes, and to help visualize things (on a 2-d screen anyway) you can omit one of the spatial axes and think of (x,y,w) or (y,z,w). Best example I've seen for cramming the entire universe past present and future onto a 2-d sheet is a https://en.m.wiki...diagram.
That's just 'maths mapping techniques' for 'representing' the REAL 'territory' in LIMITED-INFO 'formats' which leave out a LOT of the REALITY attaching to that real territory.

While limited info 'maps' are useful for certain type/depth of 'analyzing', 'visualizing' etc, they should NOT be used to 'justify' FULL REALITY claims (due to limited-info-map 'perspective').

Ie: a REAL map should treat ALL REAL dimensions/properties FIRST; only THEN do timing/location/quantity etc INFORMATION/ANALYTICAL 'overlays' make COMPLETE sense.

Cheers.

Dec 31, 2018
@rrwillsj.
Thanks Proto, for the wiki article.
Before accepting everything 'at face value' like that, mate, you would be well advised to read both 'caution'/'reminder' posts I made to @Proto just above; as it may help you avoid the usual 'mixing up' of different things/concepts/understandings which many are still suffering from at all levels.

Good luck and good thinking to you and yours for the New Year, @rrwillsj/everyone! :)

Dec 31, 2018
I was asked for a prediction AdS/CFT correspondence had made and I gave one.


That's great, but the correspondence amounts to the equivalent of "Michaelangelo's David is about yee high" so you can cut the block approximately the right size.

Still got to chisel out the shape though. The string theory and M-theory have narrowed the universe down to 10 or 11 dimensions but it still hasn't gone any further in describing how the universe actually works to the point of creating predictions that go beyond Einstein. There's still the gap between the quantum effects on the small scale, and the large scale universe.


Dec 31, 2018
https://en.wikipe...riticism

With many physicists turning towards string-based methods to attack problems in nuclear and condensed matter physics, some theorists working in these areas have expressed doubts about whether the AdS/CFT correspondence can provide the tools needed to realistically model real-world systems.


I have no competence in saying whether the criticism further in the article is warranted, so I can merely take their word for it. However, it seems like the correspondence has a caveat of assuming certain properties for matter and space which are in contradiction with Einstein's relativity:

Condensed-matter problems are, in general, neither relativistic nor conformal. Near a quantum critical point, both time and space may be scaling, but even there we still have a preferred coordinate system and, usually, a lattice.


In other words, it's the old problem of requiring a fixed "background" of space.

Dec 31, 2018
The issue is, string theory allows for a myriad of different formulations which cover different contradictory versions of the universe. There are so many of these variants possible within the mathematical framework that if you pick any one at random, it will almost surely be false (like the Monty Hall problem).

The difficulty is that with such a huge number of possibilities comes a great number of alternate formulations that give correct predictions for some things, but wrong predictions for other things (like opening one of the empty boxes in the Monty Hall problem).

If I recall correctly, string theory can describe 10 to the power of 500 different universes. Your task is to pick the right one.

Dec 31, 2018
@Eikka, so your arguments amount to "not yet." They're about as good as the sailors on Columbus' ships claiming the world is flat.

Particularly when you avoid addressing the detection of the prediction of AdS/CFT correspondence; that makes it a theory, not a conjecture or hypothesis which you're trying desperately to pretend it is in the face of hard evidence.

You should just admit that and move on.

Dec 31, 2018
@Eikka, so your arguments amount to "not yet."


Yes.

that makes it a theory, not a conjecture or hypothesis


Depends on what in particular you are calling a theory. String theory itself is still more of a mathematical framework - I believe it is too general to be called a theory, while you may call it what you wish. That doesn't change its predictive powers; there are theories that predict less, and theories that predict more. For example, for a theory of gravity, it suffices to say "Things fall down".

Dec 31, 2018
Let me repeat the evidence:

By applying the AdS/CFT correspondence, Sơn and his collaborators were able to describe the quark gluon plasma in terms of black holes in five-dimensional spacetime. The calculation showed that the ratio of two quantities associated with the quark–gluon plasma, the shear viscosity {\displaystyle \eta } \eta and volume density of entropy {\displaystyle s} s, should be approximately equal to a certain universal constant....

In 2008, the predicted value of this ratio for the quark–gluon plasma was confirmed at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven National Laboratory.
What I didn't also point out was that the heavy ion run at the LHC repeated the results. That's a confirmed prediction, which makes AdS/CFT correspondence a theory.

You really should have admitted it and moved on.

Dec 31, 2018
They're about as good as the sailors on Columbus' ships claiming the world is flat.


On the philosophy of science point of view, it's more like the geocentric vs. heliocentric world views in Galileo's time. Galileo claimed heliocentricism, but backed it up with a false theory that got some predictions right and some predictions wrong (he used the tides for an argument). According to the observable facts, the particular claims that Galileo made were wrong, so by reason his argument should have been rejected.

That does not disprove the point, but the particular arguments being made, and that is the case with string theory as well, and the point that I am making: it may be possible to formulate a theory through string theory that correctly describes the universe, yet any particular formulation is likely to be bullcrap just like Galileo's version of heliocentricism.

(Mind you; heliocentricism wasn't strictly correct either because the sun isn't the center of the universe)

Dec 31, 2018
And what precise predictions of AdS/CFT correspondence are you claiming are "bullcrap?"

Dec 31, 2018
What I didn't also point out was that the heavy ion run at the LHC repeated the results. That's a confirmed prediction, which makes AdS/CFT correspondence a theory.

You really should have admitted it and moved on.


Do not overlook the fact: proving this correspondence does not "prove" string theory in general because string theory encompasses multiple different and contradictory variants.

You're simply being eristic.

And what precise predictions of AdS/CFT correspondence are you claiming are "bullcrap?"


None. I'm talking about string theory.

Dec 31, 2018
@Protoplasmix.
@arcmetal.
Even though, no one has been able to point me in the direction of "w".
Just keep in mind that it's orthogonal to all the other axes, and to help visualize things (on a 2-d screen anyway) you can omit one of the spatial axes and think of (x,y,w) or (y,z,w). ...

What you've described is interesting but academic. The fourth spacial w direction is orthogonal to the other 3 directions x, y, z like in a hyper cube. Instead, the point I was trying others to see is that our brains cannot tell where that "w" direction is in reality. We have no sense of its direction, just like a 2d being would have no sense of a 3rd dimension. We have not needed to evolve any sense of it. On the inverse, our brains have evolved a sense of a flow of time to help us make sense of the world even if the flow of time may not exist.


Dec 31, 2018
None. I'm talking about string theory.
So you screwed up.

And don't have the balls to admit it.

Dec 31, 2018
What you've described is interesting but academic. The fourth spacial w direction is orthogonal to the other 3 directions x, y, z like in a hyper cube. Instead, the point I was trying others to see is that our brains cannot tell where that "w" direction is in reality. We have no sense of its direction, just like a 2d being would have no sense of a 3rd dimension.
We can measure it. We have. The first time was the halflife extension of the muon, and that was, you know, back in like the 1960s or so.

Maybe you forgot: human senses are not our only means of collecting information.

Dec 31, 2018
None. I'm talking about string theory.
So you screwed up.

And don't have the balls to admit it.


The case here is that you're confusing string theory in general with the particular correspondence. It's rather a case of you don't know what you're talking about.

Dec 31, 2018
@Eikka


You're simply being eristic.
...

Thank you for that new word. It does seem to describe some people I have had the displeasure of meeting lately.

I like Plato's thoughts on that:

"Plato believed that the eristic style, did not constitute a method of argument, believing that to argue eristically is to consciously use fallacious arguments therefore weakening one's position."

Dec 31, 2018
You're just trolling again, @Eikka. Complete waste of time. If you don't know enough about AdS/CFT correspondence to admit you're wrong, you're not worth talking to. If you want to talk serious physics, lose the 'tude, dude.

Nothing here any different than you constantly claiming wind and solar power won't work, and denigrating battery technology. You never change.

Dec 31, 2018
@arc, noticed you didn't have anything to say about measurement, or about muons.

Avoid avoid avoid deny deny deny. Standard troll tactics.

Dec 31, 2018
In theoretical physics, the anti-de Sitter/conformal field theory correspondence, sometimes called Maldacena duality or gauge/gravity duality, is a conjectured relationship between two kinds of physical theories. On one side are anti-de Sitter spaces (AdS) which are used in theories of quantum gravity, formulated in terms of string theory or M-theory.


In physics, string theory is a theoretical framework in which the point-like particles of particle physics are replaced by one-dimensional objects called strings.


My original comment was about string theory. The rest of this debate is simply about trying to (not) equate string theory with this particular derivation of it. String theory itself is conceptually different, and thus cannot be proven in the same sense. What you are trying to do Da Schneib, is like trying to prove calculus by showing an example of a successful application.

Point being, the framework can be used to create models which are incorrect.

Dec 31, 2018
You're just trolling again, @Eikka. Complete waste of time.


Not trolling. You're just trying to sound smart, so I wanted to put you down a notch. I'm no expert on QM or string theory, but I can smell buzzwords like bullshit.

Nothing here any different than you constantly claiming wind and solar power won't work, and denigrating battery technology. You never change.


Completely irrelevant.

Dec 31, 2018
Sure; you can create models from the framework of relativity that are incorrect too. What you have to do is constrain them by observation. This is standard stuff. Like I said, you're just trolling.

Dec 31, 2018
Y'know what really pisses me off?

You guys whine and cavil and bitch and moan that "string theory doesn't make any predictions." So someone comes up with predictions and you claim it's "not string theory." Speaking of eristic.

This is bullshit, and you're a troll. Now go away.

Dec 31, 2018
@Da Schneib
@arc, noticed you didn't have anything to say about measurement, or about muons.

Avoid avoid avoid deny deny deny. Standard troll tactics.

Your comment is a bit confusing, since all of my comments in this thread have been about the existence, or non of time. Maybe it was meant for someone else?

Although, I am building a small muon detector during these holidays for fun. But I don't think that's what you meant.

Dec 31, 2018
Dare I say that time exists and is a dimension per Einstein.
says jimmy bobber

LOL You can say it, but that doesn't make it true. In your own words, what does this "time as dimension" look like to you? Does it have height, weight, depth, length, a big nose? Does it absorb, emit, repulse, spin, attract, liquefy, harden, coagulate? Can you see it, feel it, play with it, step through it, take a photo of it? Can you make geometric patterns with it? Fractals?
Please explain.

Without the concept of "time", you couldn't do any of those things.
You could say it is a collection of the 1st 3 plus the space to function in.
Ergo - timespace.
says Whyde

Was hoping for an answer from jimmyb also.
Whyde, are you saying that if humans had never made up the concept of "TIME", that the Universe and everything would have disappeared?
Time is STRICTLY ONLY A CONCEPT - it is Philosophy that was related ONLY to the DURATION of the Sun's path in the heavens.

Dec 31, 2018
-contd-
@Whyde
What we call TIME is ONLY a means to MEASURE the duration of an event, such as how much Time it takes for you to drive the distance to the market and back. A TV show is approx. 20 minutes long, plus commercials. And it's not Timespace - it is Spacetime.
The 3 dimensional Universe is sufficient for events to take place, such as the events that I asked of jimmybobber if Time could do any of it.
What we call TIME is not even a mere shadow - not even a "thing" or "object". Einstein dropped the ball on that one, Whyde. HOW CAN YOU SEE A CONCEPT - AN IDEA - A THOUGHT - A PHILOSOPHICAL NOTION? You can see the Sunrise and Sunset. And we measure those 2 EVENTS by the timepieces that humans have conceived and built.
It is like the LAW, Whyde. It looks good on paper - but it is only when it is put INTO ACTION, that the Law has "teeth", Whyde.

If you are able to SEE Time, please let me know.

Dec 31, 2018
Sure; you can create models from the framework of relativity that are incorrect too.


Once in a great while you accidentally make a TRUE statement. The biggest blunder Pop-Cosmology has ever made was detested by Einstein so vehemently that in 1939 he had to write:

"On Stationary Systems with Spherical Symmetry consisting of many Gravitating Masses"

http://www.cscamm...hild.pdf

What you have to do is constrain them by observation. This is standard stuff.


Ha, "standard stuff" you say mister Physorg Moderator.........then why after all these decades you stalwarts living in the fantasyland of Pop-Cosmology never produced observational evidence of a black hole, you know, pictures?


Dec 31, 2018
Was hoping for an answer from jimmyb also.
......me too Egg. I guess he discovered he first needs to learn who it was that come up with Space & Time Continuum after I corrected jimbo's assertion that it was not Einstein, but was Minkowski. Next he needs to learn how to write equations & that'll be the hardest part for him, he's taking so long to get back because he's probably been away practicing.

Dec 31, 2018
-contd-
@Whyde
And it is not "manmade", inasmuch as body rotations and orbits throughout the universe are all cyclic "clocks" that were ticking way before we got here.
Those were the "clocks" that ancient man used long before we had anything resembling cuckoo clocks.
Hell, man. You even have a body clock which is tied into those I just mentioned.

says Whyde

Yes, there are cycles for almost all Mass - without clocks. Those are NATURAL cycles that are a part of the NATURAL ORDER. Without those natural cycles, there would be Chaos and uncertainty - amongst other disrupting forces.
Clocks/timepieces are manmade - Concepts are manmade that occur in the human brain - Philosophy is manmade - which humans have depended on to PRODUCE Concepts such as Time and the 4 Seasons.
Yes, natural cycles were what ancient man observed to tell them when it was time to plant/sow, to reap/harvest, and to watch for the Sun and Moon to tell WHEN to do those things.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni
"In mathematical physics, Minkowski space (or Minkowski spacetime) is a combination of three-dimensional Euclidean space and time into a four-dimensional manifold where the spacetime interval between any two events is independent of the inertial frame of reference in which they are recorded. Although initially developed by mathematician Hermann Minkowski for Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism, the mathematical structure of Minkowski spacetime was shown to be an immediate consequence of the postulates of special relativity.[1]"
https://en.wikipe...ki_space

I don't see the problem here.


Dec 31, 2018
"the vacuum is the spatial dimension
being
a vacuum
a vacuum is of no physical substance
so
not only does time not exist
the planets mass is moving from this spatial vacuum
to another spatial vacuum
a vacuum that is indistinguishable from one another
the only thing that actually exists
are the protons and their scrumptious electrons in the planets
Space and time do not exist"
says granville

Happy New Year to you, granville
Time is only a concept - a product of the human brain that is dependent on events, distance and their recording of - nothing more. Cycles are repeating EVENTS.
Space is only the distance between one Mass/Energy and another Mass/Energy, in whichever proximity, such as the Gravity Well in which Mass has found a place.

Dec 31, 2018
-contd-
@granville, Benni et al

Space/vacuum is the Medium that separates Mass/Energy from others like or similar to it. The concept of Time is not a product of that Medium - IOW, Space/vacuum is not a creator of Time, nor is it a creator of Mass/Energy. That Medium exists only as a "humble servant" to support and enable Mass/Energy. But the 3 Dimensions of Mass/Energy are able to operate within the Medium of Space/vacuum - and those 3 Dimensions of height, length, and depth are what gives us REALITY.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni
"In mathematical physics, Minkowski space (or Minkowski spacetime) is a combination of three-dimensional Euclidean space and time into a four-dimensional manifold where the spacetime interval between any two events is independent of the inertial frame of reference in which they are recorded. Although initially developed by mathematician Hermann Minkowski for Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism, the mathematical structure of Minkowski spacetime was shown to be an immediate consequence of the postulates of special relativity.[1]"
https://en.wikipe...ki_space

I don't see the problem here.

says jimmybobber

TRY to understand that the official books and the Wiki definitions are WRONG with regard to the conception of "Spacetime", Space/vacuum exists. Time is ONLY a conceptual TOOL that was decided on to include in those math equations to pretend that Time, other than a measurement of Duration and Distance, had some kind of bearing on SR/GR.

Dec 31, 2018
@SEU Not going to argue with you.
You think the "Official books and the Wiki definitions are WRONG."

It's impossible to argue with someone who thinks time doesn't exist.
I assume you will respond to me in my future, not yours because you don't experience time.


Dec 31, 2018
@Benni
"In mathematical physics, Minkowski space (or Minkowski spacetime) is a combination of three-dimensional Euclidean space and time into a four-dimensional manifold where the spacetime interval between any two events is independent of the inertial frame of reference in which they are recorded. Although initially developed by mathematician Hermann Minkowski for Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism, the mathematical structure of Minkowski spacetime was shown to be an immediate consequence of the postulates of special relativity.[1]"
https://en.wikipe...ki_space

I don't see the problem here.


But of course you don't see the problem. You also don't think your concept of writing equations is so ridiculous that those too are as laughable as a lot of stuff written in those WkiPedia articles. I learned my nuclear physics from spending a lot of time studying this material in a college classroom, but all you can do is quote WikiPedia.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni you never pointed out what was wrong with my equations. Please do.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni you never pointed out what was wrong with my equations. Please do.


Jimbo, make a new years resolution......learn to write readable equations.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni So you can't point out anything wrong with my equations but that you can't read them. That kind of sounds like your problem guy man dude.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni I assume you have a problem with me using the Caret to represent an exponent.
https://www.compu...aret.htm
If you can't understand that it's your issue not mine.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni I assume you have a problem with me using the Caret to represent an exponent.
https://www.compu...aret.htm
If you can't understand that it's your issue not mine.


.....among other expressions as well. Again, in short, get to work on that new year's resolution I suggested & learn to get rid of the chicken scratching.

Dec 31, 2018
@SEU Not going to argue with you.
You think the "Official books and the Wiki definitions are WRONG."

It's impossible to argue with someone who thinks time doesn't exist.
I assume you will respond to me in my future, not yours because you don't experience time.

says jimmybobber

You have no clearcut argument to refute what I have said in my comments above. IF you truly THINK that Time itself exists other than as a Conceptual product of the human mind, and other than merely as a measurement of Distance and Duration of Events as I have already presented - then please present your evidence herewith. Math equations of the past and present that include Time as Spacetime will require that you provide Time as a PRODUCT that is equal to the other 3 Dimensions, rather than as a concept which I have already related.

Dec 31, 2018
@Benni show me one example of an incorrect equation I wrote. If it is incorrect I will admit to it.
I have no problem admitting to my mistakes. I actually like admitting my mistakes. It reminds me I am human.

Dec 31, 2018
@SEU As I predicted you have responded to me in my future. About 45 minutes after my response to you. Thank you for proving time exists.