[Benedict Broere]

Aireal,
Einstein was someone who very much thought in images, and Edison, and Faraday, and Tesla, and da Vinci, lots. I think it's a great source of invention. I can't judge your model of the atom. I hope others will give you good feedback.

[Stephen]

AntonioLau,

Time is simply the measure of duration. It's abstractionist paradigm physics which treats time as an independent dimension. As a measure of the duration of a day and a year, time is not uniform over time. The length of a day and a year was longer in the past than it is at present, and will be shorter in the future than it is now. This is due to the rotation of the Earth and its orbitting of the Sun increasing with the increase in the density of the emission impacting upon the solar system. This increase density of impacting emission is the result of the solar system being subject to attraction within the Milky Way galaxy. Unlike abstractionist paradigm physics, materialist paradigm physics specifies the totally connected nature of everything.

Stephen

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Stephen Time is simply the measure of duration.

Are you implying that time as a physical parameter is not an absolute thing which could suggest no motion for its measure?

[Stephen]

Time varies with the variation of that which is used to measure time. If the rotation of the Earth is used to measure time (one day), then a variation in the rotation of the Earth sees a variation in the length of a day. If an atomic clock is used to the measure time, then a variation in the rate of atomic decay sees a variation in the measure of time. With the materialist paradigm, these two means for measuring time are variable. The point is that time is not a “thing-in-itself”. Time is a measure of the duration of some real material thing. To see time as a “thing-in-itself” is to commit the fallacy of reification or misplaced concreteness.

Stephen

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Stephen Time is a measure of the duration of some real material thing.

Could time be an axis of rotation?

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao Could time be an axis of rotation?

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

stephen

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Stephen I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Could there exists a time axis?

[Stephen]

Time is a measure of duration of real material things, and as real material things are variable time is variable.

The true relativity of the Universe is related to the variability of the density of impacting emission. When an atomic clock is placed in a context of decrease density of impacting emission it rums more slowly. More slowly is relative to when its place in a context of increased density of impacting emission. If you use the term "space" for the context of emission, then you can say that time (as a measure of the rate of process of the atomic clock) is relative to space.

As the density of "space" impacting upon a star increases it's rate of rotation increases. And the same applies to a solar system and a planet. I assume that it also applies to a particle. Afterall, a particle is a process of absorption and emission and is dependant upon the context if impacting emission in which it exists.

Establishment physics is an abstractionist paradigm (AP) and is limited in its capacity to represent the process that is the Universe. The materialist paradigm, on the other hand, specifies the process that is the Universe from the micro-scale of the groundstate to the explosion of galaxies.

Closer to home is the matter of global warming. The process that is the Earth involves global warming through the increasing density of the emission/gravitational field of the Earth. This sees more of the carbon emissions of the Earth being held in the atmosphere over time and constituting a greenhouse effect. Carbon emissions from human activity are not the sole cause of global warming.

But, let me conclude with a quote from the future: "He identified the problem, and invented the solution, before anyone even realized that there was a problem".

Stephen Mooney

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Stephen Time is a measure of duration of real material things

If we don't exist then time don't exist? Could there are living things that have practically no sense of time? These primitive creatures only sense the changes in the surrounding temperature. Could time be related to temperature then?

[Stephen]

I’m sure there are living things that do not have a sense of time. Single cell organisms, for example.

You ask if time is related to temperature. The time that it takes to boil my kettle is certainly related to the temperature of the water.

You appear to be trying to drawn a general principle from something which, by it’s very nature, is individual and not general.

Time is not a thing-in-itself. Time is a measure of the duration of the process of real material things.

Abstractionist paradigm physics assumes that time in relation to the duration of the process of the Earth, (the length of a day and a year), remains constant over time.

However, this time is not constant over time.

Time is relative to space, and space is composed of emission that varies and is the context within which time is measured.

Stephen