The Quantum leap or Maybe it is just a recording

[everymansmedium]

John, do you believe that space is expanding and time is contracting simultaneously??

Hi Dipayanker:
This is a copy of an earler post that answers your question.

The quantum leap.
The ability to travel from one place to another without the need of a medium of propagation.

This is the same as recreation of a item from one place to another place.

This is not so impossible as it sounds. When you examine the basics. We are reasonably sure that time itself does not flow as a smooth process but as a series of quantum ticks. These ticks of time create a new dimension making it possible for two or more items to occupy the same space, as long as it is in a different time. Think about what movement is when you consider that time is not a smooth flow but a series of ticks. Space must also be quantified as well, or you end up with questions relative to “What happens between the ticks?” If space also is quantified, then there is nothing between the ticks.

If space is quantified and time is quantified then a movement is from one space quantum to the next in a quantum of time. This kind of movement is like a recreation process at every tick of the eternal creation clock. Therefore all motion is a quantum leap. If you will also note, this is also the device that results with the limit for the maximum speed C.

We know what the limit speed C equals. We then also know that the minimum quantum of space times the minimum quantum of time = C

Space does not expand, nothing in space moves. All movement is in time.
The movement in space is an illusion of movement as it is in a movie.
each frame of space is without movement of any kind.
Also the contraction of time is not real, I think it is due to our motion into time.
It seems all the finite numbers that we result with when examining these principals are always the same. They do not change. They are infinitely finite.

John

[dipayankar]

John,

So if we can divide time and space into quantum, is there any method of somehow express gravity in terms of quanta? Probably Gravitrons is a solution. Then if we can relate space time and gravity, then we would have progressed deep into ToE territory..

Hi Dipayanker:
This is a copy of an earler post that answers your question.

The quantum leap.
The ability to travel from one place to another without the need of a medium of propagation.

This is the same as recreation of a item from one place to another place.

This is not so impossible as it sounds. When you examine the basics. We are reasonably sure that time itself does not flow as a smooth process but as a series of quantum ticks. These ticks of time create a new dimension making it possible for two or more items to occupy the same space, as long as it is in a different time. Think about what movement is when you consider that time is not a smooth flow but a series of ticks. Space must also be quantified as well, or you end up with questions relative to “What happens between the ticks?” If space also is quantified, then there is nothing between the ticks.

If space is quantified and time is quantified then a movement is from one space quantum to the next in a quantum of time. This kind of movement is like a recreation process at every tick of the eternal creation clock. Therefore all motion is a quantum leap. If you will also note, this is also the device that results with the limit for the maximum speed C.

We know what the limit speed C equals. We then also know that the minimum quantum of space times the minimum quantum of time = C

Space does not expand, nothing in space moves. All movement is in time.
The movement in space is an illusion of movement as it is in a movie.
each frame of space is without movement of any kind.
Also the contraction of time is not real, I think it is due to our motion into time.
It seems all the finite numbers that we result with when examining these principals are always the same. They do not change. They are infinitely finite.

John

[everymansmedium]

John,

So if we can divide time and space into quantum, is there any method of somehow express gravity in terms of quanta? Probably Gravitrons is a solution. Then if we can relate space time and gravity, then we would have progressed deep into ToE territory..

Hi Dipayankar:
My thought on gravity (at this point) is that it might be the result of space accelerating into the time dimension. In this case gravity is not even a force that needs to be part of the TOE. It is simply the result of this acceleration. If the time dimension extends at right angles from every conceivable point in space. Then time is always flowing toward the macro event horizon. The matter that exists within space is where the reaction to this movement into time is realized as gravity.

In this case the primary force might be a field that results with space as one pole and time as the other. These thoughts are a recent development in my thoughts on the TOE. I do not yet feel totally secure with them I must play with the predicates that this results with for a while to see what changes must be made to my past work. It looks like it might not have a great effect
as it does not change gravity it simply eliminates it as a force and indicates that space is the direct result of a primary field instead of an indirect result of same field by way of gravity. This puts time and space on a more equal footing. Still thinking!
John.

[everymansmedium]

Hi friends:
Just to be sure that it is understood where I am in this post.
The ideas here are a recent development in my thinking, that is a result of interactions with people here at Toe Quest most directly RP and Nobody.
If you find my thoughts interesting you should also have a look at the work that they are doing. We are not all in agreement, but we are not all distant either. It does seem that we approach each other. I see this as a good sign.
John

[neutralino]

The main topic of discussion in this thread is not Quantum Physics, hence I am moving to General Physics for now. This may be more suited to philosophy, or consciousness, however. I'll leave it a few days and see where it goes.

[dipayankar]

I kind of agree with this definition of gravity. Gravity is a pseudo force and hence need not be considered in ToE. We just need to prove gravity as a pseudo force.

Hi Dipayankar:
My thought on gravity (at this point) is that it might be the result of space accelerating into the time dimension. In this case gravity is not even a force that needs to be part of the TOE. It is simply the result of this acceleration. If the time dimension extends at right angles from every conceivable point in space. Then time is always flowing toward the macro event horizon. The matter that exists within space is where the reaction to this movement into time is realized as gravity.

In this case the primary force might be a field that results with space as one pole and time as the other. These thoughts are a recent development in my thoughts on the TOE. I do not yet feel totally secure with them I must play with the predicates that this results with for a while to see what changes must be made to my past work. It looks like it might not have a great effect
as it does not change gravity it simply eliminates it as a force and indicates that space is the direct result of a primary field instead of an indirect result of same field by way of gravity. This puts time and space on a more equal footing. Still thinking!
John.

[everymansmedium]

I kind of agree with this definition of gravity. Gravity is a pseudo force and hence need not be considered in ToE. We just need to prove gravity as a pseudo force.

Hi Dipayankar:
I does seem at first to simplify the Toe. On further examination it is just as hard to prove that it is not a true prime cause as it is to determine what it is if it is a prime force. It does seem to make sense. including the very same effect of warping the fabric of space time as depicted by AE. Thus with it comes the very same effect of bending star light. It seems this thought does not cause any major change to existing ideas. I think this might be a good sign that we are on the right track.
John

[neutralino]

My thought on gravity (at this point) is that it might be the result of space accelerating into the time dimension.

I'm afraid I don't get this. What exactly does "accelerating in the time dimension" actually mean, physically? Note that acceleration is defined in space; that is, the second derivative of the position with respect to time. Thus, your "acceleration" is a completely different quantity, and thus needs its own definition in order to have any chance of making sense.

[everymansmedium]

I'm afraid I don't get this. What exactly does "accelerating in the time dimension" actually mean, physically? Note that acceleration is defined in space; that is, the second derivative of the position with respect to time. Thus, your "acceleration" is a completely different quantity, and thus needs its own definition in order to have any chance of making sense.

Hello Neutralino:
Yes I am aware that there are some new words needed here. However I can not communicate anything if I give you new words that nobody else knows.
I used the word acceleration as it is the best word that I had to describe the concept that was sparked in my mind. In this instance I did visualize the time dimension as being somewhat like space. " a platform for existence " or "A place for something to be". We know that to see time as the 4th dimension is to see it as extending at right angles to every conceivable point in space. In this case it might be a medium that space exists within. We know that more than one object can occupy the same space as long as it has extended into the time dimension. This is not the same space as before it is a new place. If I can even use the word place
To describe it. In this picture I see space existing within time. Then time has many of the same spaces that can be occupied by as many objects as there are times. Yes I am aware that new words are needed to depict this concept. I do hope that I am getting a picture of this in your mind without us having the language that would simplify the transfer of these thoughts. Shall we create an extension to our language here and now?
John

[dipayankar]

Can we answer this question? Why does mass attract another mass? Is it because of some inherent property in mass or because of the curvature in space time?

Hello Neutralino:
Yes I am aware that there are some new words needed here. However I can not communicate anything if I give you new words that nobody else knows.
I used the word acceleration as it is the best word that I had to describe the concept that was sparked in my mind. In this instance I did visualize the time dimension as being somewhat like space. " a platform for existence " or "A place for something to be". We know that to see time as the 4th dimension is to see it as extending at right angles to every conceivable point in space. In this case it might be a medium that space exists within. We know that more than one object can occupy the same space as long as it has extended into the time dimension. This is not the same space as before it is a new place. If I can even use the word place
To describe it. In this picture I see space existing within time. Then time has many of the same spaces that can be occupied by as many objects as there are times. Yes I am aware that new words are needed to depict this concept. I do hope that I am getting a picture of this in your mind without us having the language that would simplify the transfer of these thoughts. Shall we create an extension to our language here and now?
John