[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by zeroca Let’s assume that we can find some mechanism (some locomotive force) to accelerate solid body close to the speed of light. What can we do with attractive forces among bodies? (I definitely emphasize that solid heavenly bodies don’t attract each-other and I’m preparing an article about it, but that’s another matter and about that later…) For now let’s assume that existing physics is right and solid matters attract each-other according to the formula F=γMm/r2, where γ is gravitational constant, M and m are masses of objects an r – distance between them, i.e. attractive gravitational force between objects is directly proportional to masses of objects, and inversely proportional to distance between them. When mass of any randomly taken body within universe is increasing infinitely because of its speed-increase up to the speed of light (m~V), gravitational attractive forces among it and the rest bodies increase (F~m) infinitely! (I.e. increase of mass of body infinitely will surely increase gravitational binding forces among mentioned body and the other heavenly bodies of universe infinitely), so that would become insuperable, inhibitory obstacle for subsequent increase of mass (as well as of speed) of mentioned body… But as for light, because of absence of mass it doesn’t experience the same attractive, binding influence from bodies of universe when traveling at such high speed… Regards, zeroca

Merab,thank you foryour most detailed and interesting post,when I build my time machine
I shall offer you a ride of a life time!

regards michael.

[dipayankar]

Hi Fortean. Thanks for the lovely thought. Just to take it further, some of our basic notions of Physiscs would be reduced to nought if we ignore time. So how would you replace something say velocity if we eliminate time??

Originally Posted by Fortean This is because it's an abstract concept created by any intelligent being that makes use of technology. Nowhere in the natural world is time required. The natural world is no more than a series of events, movement through space and the conversion of energy to matter and matter to energy. We may apply the measurement of time to these things but it is not required. Where we do measure time we do it with devices that actually just count events for us. The clock counts rotations of a wheel, the digital watch counts vibrations in a crystal and the atomic clock counts vibrations in a caesium atom. All time measurement devices we have count events or movement through space. Some argue that as you travel closer to the speed of light, time slows down. They attempt to prove this by measuring the difference that occurs in recorded time by two atomic clocks; one moving faster than the other. All they have achieved is to slow down the vibrations of the caesium atom. This could just as easily have been accomplished by cooling the clock. The cooler something is the slower it is at a quantum level. Einstein predicts that as an object gets closer to the speed of light its mass increases. This increase in mass causes a slowing at the quantum level and so appears to effect time. All it really does is effect the properties of the element whose events we are counting. Those who believe time travel is possible, specifically the ability to travel back in time, miss a very important fact. At any given point in the past all the elements in the universe were in a particular state and in a particular place. This includes the matter and energy that the time traveller is made of. If all these elements were returned to their original location for a particular time in the past then this would also include the components that make up the traveller. The traveller could not possibly know that they had travelled under these circumstances. How much energy would be required to put everything in the universe back to where it was? And where would this energy come from? The fuel you needed to create the energy would itself have to be returned to its original location in space. So there it is. Time is an abstract system of measurement. It is required to make use of technology but not to grow food or reproduce. It may take 9 months to create a child but what it really takes is a vast series of events and conversions of matter to energy and energy to matter. Once theses events have completed the child is born. It will still be born even if you do not know what time is.

[mkirkpatrick]

Dipayankar,you asked an interesting question in the last post,how would you account
for velocity if time did not exist?Well in an absolute reference you would not,because
velocity does not exist either?But in the relative sense it does!You just have to remember
the difference,in the relative universe time,space,and distance exist,but they are really
illusions,and are not absolutely real,only relatively real,there is a huge difference!

Energy,consciousness,are universally ominipresent,filling absolutely all with its ubiquious
presence,in that understanding,velocity would have nowhere to travel too,where it was not
already there?we experience time,and space,and imagine quite wrongly that theyare real,
but they are in fact shadows cast by the absolute reality,onto the temporal reality.


regards michael.

[5589]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Dipayankar,you asked an interesting question in the last post,how would you account for velocity if time did not exist?Well in an absolute reference you would not,because velocity does not exist either?But in the relative sense it does!You just have to remember the difference,in the relative universe time,space,and distance exist,but they are really illusions,and are not absolutely real,only relatively real,there is a huge difference!

I had a dream last night where I was driving at 55 miles per hour.

What was my velocity? Any takers?

Personally, I think that velocity is one of those grand illusions of the senses.

[dleviwing]

Unless you fell asleep on an airplane, bus, car, train, or some other vehicle, your velocity relative to the Earth is ZERO. Your velocity through the universe however, is a tougher calculation.

[mkirkpatrick]

In our everyday dealings with external life,and within the relative framework that it
inhabits,we all have the illusion of time,and we all play the game,I wait at the bus stop
for the 9am bus to take me home from work,I check my watch,and if the bus arrives
after 9am,I may ask the driver why he is late?Now I abide by these relative illusions
because my body is anchored here and so I need to comply with the situation as it
is within this temporal reality zone,But I know that these are illusions,time,space,
distance,are all shadows cast by the glow of the eternal now!Within the absolute
itself they do not exist.


regards michael.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Mk, facts and proofs exist here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_science

[dipayankar]

I somehow have strated to believe that time is a relative field. But I would really like to know if we revome time from the universe.... how will the universe be affected???

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by dipayankar I somehow have strated to believe that time is a relative field. But I would really like to know if we revome time from the universe.... how will the universe be affected???

It would not be affected at all,as time is an illusion cast by the shadow from the flame
of the absolute,which is reality-absolute,what we think we see and respond to,is reality
relative?

Outwardly we live in a relative world,"where things change and grow"where there "seems"
to be a thing called "time" and an expance which is called "space"and the idea of "distance" to reach these "apparent things"now they all "appear" real,the operative word
here is ("APPEAR")they "seem" real,but they are not!We live "outwordly" in the relative
universe and therebye pay the dues of the laws that "appear" there,but inwardly we exist
in the absolute,where all the relatives fade from memory!


regards michael.

[quanta07]

This is a theory of everything site. We have to differentiate ‘everything’ in the observations we make. Everything outside us includes all but the human in our environment. Everything inside is us, including concept of mind, soul, spark of life. This inward view should not be projected outward on observations of our environment.
Some have stated their views/observations of the outside world as an illusion, that reality lies within the mind, an inward view with many fallacies. A question for this philosophy, while playing sports, you are struck in the knee with a cricket bat, do you still question the reality of the bat?
There are others who promote the ‘everything’ outside view. I am one of them.
For me, the environment is very real, the outside view, materialism, what ever you wish to call it.
Mixing these two views/lines of thought promotes/projects doubt. It will not matter what is stated, the inward biased views generate doubt, argumentation, and projects confusion. Doubt in the reality of your environment, doubt in ones own self, and doubt in all forms of input information.
Discussion is great, but there will be no forward progress if the two views are not distinguished.
This is a time forum, so I will state my views of time.
I am convinced that time is very real, that within nature time exists as a vector space, and within cosmic expansion, as a MacLaurin Series.
Expansion as a function of time is depicted here,
http://www.toequest.com/forum/mathematics-articles/427-pure-mathematics-space-time.html

more views on TIME and the possibility of time travel are found here,
http://www.toequest.com/forum/time-travel/

Happy Thoughts.........Q7