[dleviwing]

Steven;
Like many others, you seem to be thinking with your pure human senses. Yes it is difficult for our minds to relate to the term "infinity" or "eternity". My view only states that it may be possible that existence has always been around in a form that implies substance within an infinite void. The view is to say that the place where the universe is today has always been there. The substance that the universe is comprised of, has always existed.
The main problem with your suggestion is that you have not reduced your terms to the absolute fundamentals. You seem to be accepting time, mass, energy and so on as it is hyped to sell books and not in the terms of absolute definitions.

Absolute Space (n) There was a time in mans ancient history that the vacuum of space provoked the image of some location or volume devoid of all physical entities. Throughout the past century, science has come to recognize the physical nature of this vacuum and evolved it to be denoted as an entity called spacetime by Relativity Theory. The original notion of an absolutely empty and devoid of all physical entities concept is however, still valid and we can call this "Absolute Space". To prevent further confusion however, let's just call it "the Void" or "a Void". Within this universe we do not seem to be able to produce a true void condition.

Time (n) a nonspatial continuum in which events occur in irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.

Absolute Matter (n) The fundamental substance of which all physical entities acquire form and existence. Only the Void exists as a separate entity within the infinite cosmos.

[subversion]

dleviwing,

I see that your desire to use absolute definitions is a good one. This reminds me much of the theory of definition, which can be used for creating a/the TOE. I have a few questions. In your post you say that uniform motion must convert to angular motion, in order to cause the big bang. Did you mention specifically why it is that the uniform must convert to the angular? Also, did I catch you correctly when you essentially said that our universe was caused by colliding neutrinos?

ps. I would agree with all of your definitions, except I would maybe argue with your definition of time just depending on how you define the terms "future" and "past"

-sub

[baudrunner]

Time (n) a nonspatial continuum in which events occur in irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.

That is certainly a very secure definition, and is bound to find acceptance, but there is no absolute in this website. It isn't entirely incorrect of course because that definition describes what time provides reality with, although I would be tempted to remove the word non-spatial.

Now hear me out...

I maintain that time did not exist until energy produced it as a byproduct along with mass, and that energy did not exist until it was created by the product of a massive creation wave front which had a beginning, the First String. Note how extra particles are produced in neutron Beta "decay". Note how extra particles are produced when quark and gluon separate. Creation. The creation of energy, and space as an encapsulation of the energy that defines it. It is the one great thing we have learned that is of value from spending billions of dollars on particle colliders.

Is it not logical to assume that the non-static nature of atomic particles must have some product related to the mass they retain because of their velocities and that time also must be one of those products? At light speed a particle has infinite mass and exists in a place where time stands still. If that particle were completely static it would cease to exist. It makes sense. Dangerous sense.

[dleviwing]

Originally Posted by subversion

dleviwing,
I see that your desire to use absolute definitions is a good one. This reminds me much of the theory of definition, which can be used for creating a/the TOE. I have a few questions. In your post you say that uniform motion must convert to angular motion, in order to cause the big bang. Did you mention specifically why it is that the uniform must convert to the angular? Also, did I catch you correctly when you essentially said that our universe was caused by colliding neutrinos?

ps. I would agree with all of your definitions, except I would maybe argue with your definition of time just depending on how you define the terms "future" and "past"

-sub

Sub;
You should read more closely. I did not say uniform motion converts to angular motion for angular motion is also uniform. It is stated that the linear velocity (linear uniform motion or linear momenta if the object has mass) is converted to the chaotic motion of randomized vibrational waves that create interference of summation and difference wave patterns. This leads to expansion. Among this chaos are volumes of matter that have angular uniform motion and thus confines that volume to its own chaos or even symmetry wave function.
Your comment of colliding neutrinos also indicates poor speed-reading methods.
The statement simply indicates that with all the neutrinos whizzing around in all different directions, how often do they collide with each other. Now relate that scenario with the one of objects with great quantities of substance whizzing around with velocities of several billion times that of light in an infinite void. Collisions do not cause this stuff of the universe to break in pieces, but to simply convert the velocity motion to chaotic wave motions due to the fact that the bonding property cannot be broken in this manner. At least not in a short time period.
In another post, I suggested that one may view expansion as the beginnings of an explosion that has yet to become fragmented parts and thus still in the expansion phase of the explosion.
The time definition is for "Absolute Time". No device can duplicate this in reality and thus all time is referenced to a standard of motion that forces us to use Relativity when discussing the nature of high velocity motions.

[dleviwing]

Steven;(baudrunner)
If you feel that the definition of time is in error, please inform "American Heritage" and "Webster" so they can correct their dictionaries.
The time definition you are seeking is that of a measuring device called a clock. This device is as subject to the phenomena produced by motion as any other object is.

In today's science there are many ideas that reflect conjecture, brainstorming, hypothetical theories, and so on that are often viewed by the general population (laymen) to be factual or proven; they are not.

Classical physics, as I've said before, is objective without the intervention of observer influence. Relativity and QM are both subjective in nature and take into account the influence and interpretations of the observer performing the measure. (wysiwyg)

Dimensions are terms of quantitative measurements. (Time, length, width, height, mass, energy, voltage, permeability, velocity, and so on)

Science is based on our ability to perform measurements and once this FACT is understood, the science terminology becomes much easier to comprehend. Every equation represents this fundamental principle of science.

I ask only that you think much deeper into your views and realize you have yet to complete your journey of understanding. If you are in doubt, then go to your local collage and present your views to the professor of physics.

A good starting point would be an in depth study of the conservation laws of physics. Don't just read the definitions, study the experiments and review the raw data.

[Guille]

Baud and Sub:

None is the product of each other, energy to time or time to energy. It's:
Force<--Energy<--Matter-->Space-->Time

Matter exists if and only if there are the other four, and the other four exist if and only if there is matter. As you can see, whiles Energy and space are inhered in matter directly, these two inhere force-time, which by the way are more essential than energy-space. But energy-space is previous to existence than force-time, although not ethat existence is not if there are not 1 single of the 5. What I mean by all this is that energy of level 2 (with space), whiles time is of level 3 (with force).

[dleviwing]

There seems to be some confusion on how to interpret this scenario.
There are only two fundamental existences:
1… The void of pure emptiness. (This should not be interpretive as pure nothing) The void is the place of existence.
2… The fundamental substance that exists within the void.
Time is not a true fundamental. It is the concept needed to communicate the fundamental properties of the fundamental substance.
Properties of Matter:
1… Volume (occupies a portion of the void, similar to particles occupying space)
2… Motion (Absolute Motion: The quantitative amount of motion of the velocity of the substance prior to collision.)
3.. Bonding (The simple property that fundament matter sticks to itself – Self-affinity)

Space of the universe: The state of matter when its absolute motion is randomized wave function. Waves have momentary uniform directional motion and thus allows matter to condense forming a greater spatial density and producing electromagnetic properties. (another topic)

Particles: Quantities and structures with absolute motion distributed as both uniform motion (angular momenta) confining a quantity of fundamental matter to a volume of symmetrical wave interference producing a standing wave surface. This surface will interact with spatial state matter when these wavelengths are harmonics of the primary wave of the particle structure.

Mass: A measure of the quantity of uniform motion of an object or structure referred to as inertia.
Linear velocity causes increase in the mass value of objects due to this motion allowing the bonding property of matter to increase and thereby increasing the spatial density of the object while collapsing the object to shorter wavelength symmetry (less chaotic wave function motions).

If you all get this, then maybe we can go on to provide a fundamental interpretation of the scientific terminology in a classical physics view. This is still only a philosophical paradigm; we will still need all the terms of measurement to perform experiments and design video games

[baudrunner]

said:

energy cannot produce something if time does not exist

Michelle started a thread about the ordering of Time etc. You should read all of it.

Again, you are obsessed with the idea that something can exist without reason. eg. time exists before anything; gravity is an 'invisible' force; space is empty nothingness. It is your mind that is empty sub, empty of the ability to accept what is physically real. One sure fact is that everything that exists has dependencies in some thing or things that also exist. Energy is the ability to do work, that is all. What matter and force particles do are move very fast, ie. they are doing work. In moving very fast matter particles are slowing down time, thereby providing the continuum for existence, and they also gain mass, giving what exists substance. Once you wrap your head around the idea that space is also a construct of energy then you will see that time exists because of it and the matter that occupies it.

That's it. I know that you'll just argue those facts, that's just the way you are.

[dleviwing]

I came across this site during a browsing of various wave types. It seems there is a Frenchman with similar views to my own.

http://www.glafreniere.com/matter.htm

[dleviwing]

The use of Relativity as the support for absurdity is second only to the use of Quantum Mechanics. Interpretation of gauge theories require a sound understanding of the science and the terminology.

A person moving at a velocity near the speed of light cannot process information since the speed of light is considered the ultimate communications speed. Also at that velocity the degree of freedom would be restricted and thus no biological or physical change could occur. To that person (assuming they survived), once he reduces his velocity to a more normal speed, he would experience a jump forward in time and without aging. Time is only a term of the equations to reflect this phenomena of observation. By accelerating a particle, one is able to delay any decay phenomena.

In QM (and M-theory), the idea of extra dimensions comes from the concept of something being able to occur within the uncertainty realm that cannot be measured or detected. This is a hypotheses that promises new understanding of various symmetry problems among other errors. This should not be interpreted as extra dimensions of reality but only extra dimensions of possible measurement phenomena.