[michellemfry]

Originally Posted by apuasua Then, the answer could be the time; the disposition to entropy is the time. According to big bang, the entropy was so low, maybe just before the big bang, it was zero, so time is zero too. After the big bang, like the entropy of the universe increasing the time is also enlarges. Looks to silly?

No, you are close to something. I suspect that the universe was capable of experiencing physics that we might not recognize. Yet, settled into the laws we understand today. A sort of pre-physics might be considered. Could the laws that exist be there because they are stabilizing to the whole? And the more that there is movement against the laws, the more the laws are strenthened and upheld as true. The process sustains itself and the result is physics, but the initial conditions are pre-physics.

[michellemfry]

Originally Posted by <<>> But time is already disorder: entropy. In the case that entropy was a force, then would it be made of entropyons? I guess so. And I also believe that it would be translated through spacetime as any other force, and would constitude it's structure. In fact, I believe the entropyons would make up time in spacetime. The other three dimensions would be defined one each by: gravitons, electrons and magnetic monopoles. I see however that the most important thing in this hypothetical universe woudl be to determine what relationhip woudl entropy as force ahve with the other forces? Maybe actually, Michelle, entropy is a force! It may sound quite strange to believe it, but it does interconnect EM and gravity: the amount of entropyons in a system/body would be determined by it's size and the density, and the density is the relationship between size and mass... bang! mass, that means connection with gravity. So gravity and entropy are directly proportional, in a constant space. But of course space is not constant, therefore we need to look at EM. DAMN! I was just about to say the part where EM enters but I've come to a problem: entropy and gravity can't be directly proportional because as mass-gravity grow, the time decreases... Therefore gravity and entropy are directly inverselly proportional. A further post will come about the place of EM in all of this, and how 'entropy as a force' might be the solution to physicists' problems!

You say the time decreases as mass-gravity grow, or could you also say the force of time is turned off as mass-gravity grow. Like a switch, turned on and off, time was turned on at some point. It can also be turned off as it slows. It's a good analogy, I think.

[michellemfry]

I define disorder as a notable alteration in the initial order to another order. Overall, this order could be summed up to be in the direction of less order, but the prevailing order always gets compared to less order arriving. Because the amount of order to draw from must be diminishing over time if a finite amount of order is established in the beginning, one gets a continuum of prevailing orders that slowly exhausts itself of the original order. Until finally, the entire order of the beginning is converted and there a finale(sp?) to the process or disposition.

[baudrunner]

This discussion continues to hover around the very thing that we should stop to have a deep think about. The operative word here is "order". In order to have order we must have direction. That direction must come from somewhere, an idea perhaps. Where we have direction we have continuity. Continuity as I see it isn't necessarily part of the plan, it is a product, like mass is a product. In fact, mass and time are inextricably linked through motion. If you were travelling at light speed you would have infinite mass and time would stand still. Therefore mass and time are inversely proportional.

m=1/T and T=1/m

Mass and time are both products of motion. We exist in time because we have mass, and we have mass because all the paticles that make up the atoms that make up the molecules that make up the cells that make up our being are in motion, motion that actually approaches light speed. If these particles were moving any faster we would have more mass and live for a longer time. If they didn't move at all we would have no mass and no time, we simply wouldn't be.

In the beginning, when energy was first created in the form of space and matter, mass and time were 'spun off' as a product. They continue to do so. Duration and history are relative to our context, being that the universe is so great and we are so tiny. If we were large enough to put the universe on the head of a pin it would exist as a momentary spark of short duration. Such is the nature of reality.

Okay, bad analogy, because the Universe continues to create and expand and exist for infinity, but you get the picture. Actually we might see a spreading 3d halo if we were so big, come to think of it, and tiny hollow carbonized shells within shells that we could crush between thumb and forefinger.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by michellemfry You say the time decreases as mass-gravity grow, or could you also say the force of time is turned off as mass-gravity grow. Like a switch, turned on and off, time was turned on at some point. It can also be turned off as it slows. It's a good analogy, I think.

I don't want to be negative but I thik it's not a good analogy. It gives the idea that there is either force F which is a constant, or NO-F. Whiles actually force is a variable dependent on the energy correstpondant to the force (for EM it's light, for gravity it's mass...). So it's not on and off. What I wan to identify is what is this type of energy for this entropy-disorder-time force?

[baudrunner]

I think that perhaps Michelle is giving analogy to wave motion, which has an up and down 2-dimensional representation. Someone must have informed her that switching circuits operate the same way, and that binary one's and zero's are essentially the on-off states of a logic circuit, and that the square edges of the pulses can be rounded when passed through a filter, etc so their sequential streams are also waves of a sort, except that they are intelligent waves. It's not a far progression to think that the Universe is an intelligent entity with all those converging/reinforcing waves expressing some kind of logical blueprint for reality. Someone's putting ideas in her head. If she could spare sub a piece of her mind...

[subversion]

Originally Posted by harmonygirl I don't think time is linear or sequential for that matter, I just think that we need to perceive it as such to make sense of our own existence.

I agree with this statement. I think I tend to agree with the girls more than the guys.

[jim barlow]

Times-R-Us

I agree that what we think of as time has a bit of illusion in it. I think it is because we take it too seriously. For example:
What time is it? Has nothing to do with time. It is a dance started when they invented the clocks. The important thing, as in language, is that everyone involved says the same thing. Calendars, clocks, aging has nothing to do with “time” in its real sense.

How can we say that we are standing still instead of moving from a known past toward as unknown future? That’s the biggest con of them all because the future is moving with the exact same speed toward the past as the past is toward the future.

Future stuff is genetic, it is consequence, reaction and many other kind of force already implemented when the “past” began.

So when we see somebody age, his hair turn while, his teeth fall out
and collapsing in a heap what we see is not time that is passing. I think what we see is a future playing through a past. The guy’s life stays forever probably in a frozen chain of days and nights which had always been there to begin with. He may have thought he was hacking through the days and that was his illusion.

[pagan3142]

As the speed of light is supposed to be a constant , I cant quite seem to get my head around the speed if light as being constant. For instance light is a particle (Photon) and yet a wave.WE know friction , even in a vacume slows things down , so I dont believe Time is a constant.
Time must be in a constant state of flux as it passes by gravity well's and especially black holes where it supposedly dissapears. AS you know energy cannot be destroyed only changed. So as it "Dissapears" into a blck hole where do'es it go ?.
This is the reason I do not believe Time to be constant or for that matter anything in the known universe ( as we know it ).
What if corners didn't exist ? what if we live in a multi-universe , not just 3 dimentions +time (or change). we may live in a universe that has so many dimentions , that we are looking in the wrong direction.
Infinity raises it's head here, using Occams Razor and various other theories, I find that time has no existence ,JUST CHANGE.
OH and for the holistic and religious amongt us ,be aware that god was asked the question.
"CAN YOU MAKE SOMETHING SO HEAVY THAT EVEN YOU CANNOT LIFT IT ?."
He answerd YES
Then he said "Then I would lift it "
What a paradox ?

[pagan3142]

Originally Posted by <<<GUILLE>>> Hummm..... 'Probabilistic forces' what could it mean? That if there is such X in Y that disposites, sort of impplies a force F, there might or might not be F, in respect to each case? This is reasoble, it would be sort of like if there is mass in 3 objects, depending on the probability, in one of them it could be that no gravity occurs... But of course, nto with the other 4 forces, just with entropy as force. So there might be entropy or not, if there is such thing as a disposition to entropy. The distposition to gravity is mass, to EM is light...etz, but what is the disposition to entropy?

you have left Infinity out of the equation