[everymansmedium]

Hello friends:
I do not normally talk about the basics because I feel that there is something about our basics that is misleading us, or we would have already found the truth. I will do this under the heading of “Growing_block_universe”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growing_block_universe
Note IMO: I feel the rebuttal that is also at this document is quite lame.

In this situation I will begin a thought that will lead to some thinking about the basics. Then I hope there will be some communication relative to the thought.

My thought on time is that the point of creation is NOW. This is the divine moment of existence within a single thread of time. The very beginning that continues to happen creating a frame of existence that must be quantified by QM as everything else is. This generates an absolute time frame. That keeps repeating.

This quantum of time is as if all motion of the body of an individual can happen within the quantum time frame NOW. To understand the need to define this frame is to think about putting your hand about 1 foot from your eyes. When you look at your hand it is about 1.0 nano second in the past as you observe it. This would indicate that your hand is not at the same now as your eyes. To define a quantum state for time so that all parts of ones body are within the same frame of existance/now as the point of consciousness.
One might say a 10 nano second frame would be enough to solve some of the unsolvable problems encountered with relative time. This then can be used as relative time is used, but would set a limit on the dividing of time beyond the single quantum frame that is established.

This will also put a new spin on the idea of the uncertainty principal.
It will say that we are trying to break up a quantum event beyond what is possible to observe.
This would be the defining of the quantum event to be large enough to solve the problems encountered when looking at the concept of being. Then using this same size quantum block of time to look at other smaller systems. It simply puts them out of our reach. There is no ability of a quantum being to observe directly the underlying construction of our universe. When doing so it will result with information that is flawed in one way or another. Because of breaking up time beyond its single quantum state.
There are events that we believe happen in a period of time that is less than a single quantum/creation/frame. These events can be measured by relative time devices. However these relative time devices are not absolute and what is being measured may not exist separately beyond the single quantum block. Though it is possible for us to measure a single nano second it does not have an existence that is separate from the very next nano second. In all reality there must be a quantum block that defines the limit of real measurement as opposed to relative measurement.

However to look at the system of understanding that this generates, it results with a new defined observation point for our existence medium. This is the observation point that I have been observing for more than 35 years.
I have tried to explain this observation point from many perspectives, this is but one more look.
This appears to be more inline with what is the type of data exchange that I have been observing here at toe-quest.
This also might give you a better look at my reasons for feeling that QM is very misleading as an observation point for the basic building blocks of our existence medium.

Talk to me!

note 1.0 nano second = 1 second divided by 1,000,000,000

John.

[mkirkpatrick]

John,like what you are saying here,the eternal forever NOW is ever present,(how could it be otherwise)we look out with our through our temporal eyes at what "appears" to be a
changing world and become confused.

Outwardly things change,but we know deep within us that there is an eternal now,so,
looking without causes confusion,looking within restores the balance.



regards michael.

[everymansmedium]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick John,like what you are saying here,the eternal forever NOW is ever present,(how could it be otherwise)we look out with our through our temporal eyes at what "appears" to be a changing world and become confused. Outwardly things change,but we know deep within us that there is an eternal now,so, looking without causes confusion,looking within restores the balance. regards michael.

I appreciate the approval Michael.
I would like to hear about the thoughts relative to a minimum quanta of time as defined for the being, used as a standard of measurement for observations of our existence medium. Before answering think about the implications of the very small time measurements that are used in QM as being made non rational because the measurements are made in a frame that is smaller than we have just defined for the existence of a being. The being needs a frame that is much larger than what is being used to make measurements in QM. This is why I feel QM may be useful but misleading.
It may be that the quantum being / quantum time
defines a minimum size slice of time that is much larger than what we are trying to define in QM. This may be the reason that we see a breakdown in our normal common sense method of understanding our universe.

To simplify still more:

Maybe QM is breaking up time into smaller slices than it should be.

When we measure 1 nano second. We measure it with relative methods. We do not know if 1 nano second exists within the same existence frame as the last. maybe an existence frame is 10 nano seconds. This would put us as a being into a frame that is always just NOW. It does however make it impossible for us to examine the building blocks of our existence medium that require us to determine a frame of existence smaller than the 10 nano seconds.
John.

[RascalPuff]

Not sure if this is germane to the ongoing discussion or not, but, with regard to the human perception of fluid motion, it's been determined in moving pictures, that sixteen frames per second fullfills the human perception of motion as we experientially see it.

Does this connect in any way to what you gentlemen are addressing?

Regards,
- RP

[everymansmedium]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Not sure if this is germane to the ongoing discussion or not, but, with regard to the human perception of fluid motion, it's been determined in moving pictures, that sixteen frames per second fullfills the human perception of motion as we experientially see it. Does this connect in any way to what you gentlemen are addressing? Regards, - RP

Hi RP:
In a way it is. What I am saying is that I think that time itself might have a minimum point of division. That time itself does not come in a stream that it might come in a packet or quantum event. This results in a frame of existence. The frame of existence is based on what is needed by a consciousness in a human body. Example: If you move your hand in a circle at the length of your arm, then you bring it in to touch your nose. The point that you touch your nose you may call NOW. However this now is not one single time frame it is a continuum as we see it presently. The finger that touches your nose just traveled 6 or more feet that your head and eyes did not travel. The distance traveled is the equivalence of the distance that light travels in about 6 nano seconds. So your finger has just experienced that much less time than the rest of your body. Thus you end up with 2 clocks to keep track of one existence. What I am saying is that we exist within a single frame. If that is true then a quantum of time to define a single frame for a human consciousness must be close to 10 nano seconds. If this is true then to break time up into smaller packets than this will result with unexpected experiences of events. The events then are not cumulative but are started as a new creation every 10 nano seconds. This creation takes place at every point that there is a being. The being is always at the center of the universe that has only a center for the observer. The observer can only see a finite distance, beyond that is the event horizon where it appears that the expansion of space has this edge moving away from us at the speed of light. This edge is the same distance from every observer no matter what position in the universe they are in. Thus every observer is at the center of a universe that has no center or edge. The expansion does not generate a larger universe as it is a new creation in every frame. Every frame of now might be 10 nano seconds but requires all the time in the universe to traverse all the space in the universe. The space and the time are equal and define each other as finite. But they do so on an infinite membrane. So they are infinitely finite, with many centers but no center the expansion indicates the edge is traveling away from a center that does not exist but there is no edge and it does not get any larger. This can only be quantum time frames that define a universe that is continuously being created in a packet large enough to contain a human being with only one clock within one single frame that repeats for every frame period.
John

[RascalPuff]

Thanks for the response, emm
(if you don't mind the abbreviation?):

I forget what source but I learned a while back that electrochemical impulses are conducted by the nervous system through the human body, at about 700 foot seconds. If that be the case it may have some bearing on this issue, and the points you are establishing - which I do not dispute.

I read all of your posts.

Thought provoking.

Evocative.

Well spoken.

Astute.

A lot to think about.

Lemme think about this.

Best regards,

- RP

[everymansmedium]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Thanks for the response, emm (if you don't mind the abbreviation?): I forget what source but I learned a while back that electrochemical impulses are conducted by the nervous system through the human body, at about 700 foot seconds. If that be the case it may have some bearing on this issue, and the points you are establishing - which I do not dispute. I read all of your posts. Thought provoking. Evocative. Well spoken. Astute. A lot to think about. Lemme think about this. Best regards, - RP

Thank you for the kind words RP. EMM is ok, or you could call me John. Take your time It is time for me to get some sleep. I will try to get on again in the morn. I like to read the many ideas here. I try very hard to give things for other to think about also.
John

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by everymansmedium Thank you for the kind words RP. EMM is ok, or you could call me John. Take your time It is time for me to get some sleep. I will try to get on again in the morn. I like to read the many ideas here. I try very hard to give things for other to think about also. John

Dear John:
It seems that some of your inspiration is derived from Special Relativity.
I've never seen it conveyed this way before, but, whether you consciously realize it or not, you're presenting, imo, new avenues of understanding it.

Best regards,
- RP

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by everymansmedium click on the arrow for a cool post

John ... I usually get myself into trouble whenever I mix time and QM ... and so I steer clear of it. But I do like your post ... very well thought out.

cool bananas ... greg

[everymansmedium]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Dear John: It seems that some of your inspiration is derived from Special Relativity. I've never seen it conveyed this way before, but, whether you consciously realize it or not, you're presenting, imo, new avenues of understanding it. Best regards, - RP

Hi RP:
Yes it is SR that I am thinking about. I would be very surprised to find that this is a new avenue of thought as I have been considering these ideas since I first read the “time space and the new relativity” When I was maybe just 20. The idea that every spatial measurement also has a time that it takes light to traverse this distance. If it takes light a period of time to traverse the distance this is also indication of lost time in accordance with SR. This is just not of much interest to people that do not function in a world that is constantly dealing with time measured in nano seconds. My work before I retired was metrology. I still have a room full of my own test equipment for my own work. I buy broken test equipment on Ebay and fix it. I learned metrology from the ground up. Started by learning to calibrate and repair commercial test equipment in the metrology lab at Honeywell CCD during the SA program 1969.
I still own counter timers that I can patch to NBS. 2, 7904 Tek storage mainframes with all plugins including spectrum analyzer and sampling units. Also 2 portables Tek 464’s plus a multitude of generators and specialty devices. I wish I had the money that these things cost when they were new. One 7904 loaded was about $50,000. I also have others still waiting to be fixed.
John.