Temporal Physics

[greenbug]

What about temporal physics? A dimension of time with intervals that group together due to their position and relation to each other. Much like Newton’s cradle. So a natural formation of this dimension is a single point with two other points in relation to it, the point before and the point after. With this standard grouping a single dimension of time gives rise to space. So what about mass and matter? A mass is represented by a point in the dimension that has a slow rate. What dose this mean? A slower rate exchanges values or information slower. So with this matter then is represented by a rate that does not change due to inter-relations of the dimension. Ok so with points of intervals keeping place due to relation they also fit along side other relational points better than some others this gives rise to particles and chemistry.
So moving on at a fast pace here gravity is simply slower rates tend to stay with slower rates. Gravity pulls in groups of intervals being mass matter till a singularity becomes probable. What happens next? Well its like entropy the groups hold together so tightly that eventually they wiggle their way out. This would state that black holes radiate space.
Strange and more complex is the nature of the relational intervals in times dimension. I prefer to use the word coagulation as the groups of intervals change their values due to slight differences. This coagulation in a large void space creates radiation of the smallest particles leptons, quarks and so on till they all group together to for dust clouds. Then so on to create planets stars then back to singularities.
OK so in a nut shell that’s the cycle of temporal physics. No big bang just a brewing pot of coagulation intervals. Let me know what you think .. Have fun you awesome Physics nuts

[dleviwing]

I believe you need to separate the mathematical definition of “DIMENSION” and the physics definition of “DIMENSION”. In physics a dimension is any quantitative measurement. When you mix the two definitions and call it science, you end up with your head up your math. We already have that problem with “M-theory”.

BTW: Welcome to ToeQuest.

[G_burnett]

What about temporal physics? ...
......OK so in a nut shell that’s the cycle of temporal physics. No big bang just a brewing pot of coagulation intervals. Let me know what you think .. Have fun you awesome Physics nuts

Welcome to the ToE greenbug,

... interesting post, i am all for the cyclic universe, hope to read more of your ponder in here,

...and when ever you have nuts the squirrels are sure to be arround..., makes it a fun playground in the park for sure.

kind regards g.

[greenbug]

“I believe you need to separate the mathematical definition of “DIMENSIONâ€� and the physics definition of “DIMENSIONâ€�. In physics a dimension is any quantitative measurement. When you mix the two definitions and call it science, you end up with your head up your math.”

I’m not sure I understand your point. I guess I use a lot of words based on the principle of the word rather than their direct definition. Yet I believe that a dimension has been made mathematical to measure our physical world. So I didn’t make that mistake it was already done a long time ago. How the word has evolved since then, isn’t my fault either .

Thanks for the welcome.

“and when ever you have nuts the squirrels are sure to be arround..., makes it a fun playground in the park for sure. “

He he he, thanks. I agree a cycle universe is much more agreeable to our existence.

[Graybeard]

What about temporal physics? A dimension of time with intervals that group together due to there position and relation to each other. Much like Newton’s cradle. So a natural formation of this dimension is a single point with two other points in relation to it, the point before and the point after.

With this standard grouping a single dimension of time gives rise to space. So what about mass and matter? A mass is represented by a point in the dimension that has a slow rate. What dose this mean? A slower rate exchanges values or information slower. So with this matter then is represented by a rate that dose not change due to inter-relations of the dimension. Ok so with points of intervals keeping place due to relation they also fit along side other relational points better then some others this gives rise to particles and chemistry.

So moving on at a fast pace here gravity is simply slower rates tend to stay with slower rates. Gravity pulls in groups of intervals being mass matter till a singularity becomes probable. What happens next? Well its like entropy the groups hold together so tightly that eventually they wiggle there way out. This would state that black holes radiate space.

Strange and more complex is the nature of the relational intervals in times dimension. I prefer to use the word coagulation as the groups of intervals change their values due to slight differences. This coagulation in a large void space creates radiation of the smallest particles leptons, quarks and so on till they all group together to for dust clouds. Then so on to create planets stars then back to singularities.

OK so in a nut shell that’s the cycle of temporal physics. No big bang just a brewing pot of coagulation intervals. Let me know what you think .. Have fun you awesome Physics nuts

Welcome to the forum Greenbug, I sorta like your theory. All you have to do now is work each bit out in a bit more detail.

cool bananas ... greg

[greenbug]

Welcome to the forum Greenbug, I sorta like your theory. All you have to do now is work each bit out in a bit more detail.

cool bananas ... greg

lol thanks greg. Ahh details.. Yes well lets see where time takes this .. btw dont you mean cool beans? I'm not complaining I like bananas better and cool pizza just wouldn't fit any how love the saying.. Thanks for the comment and welcome.

[dleviwing]

I’m not sure I understand your point. I guess I use a lot of words based on the principle of the word rather then their direct definition. Yet I believe that a dimension has been made mathematical to measure our physical world.

That’s quite all right greenbug, that will be one of the things you find either enjoyable or frustrating here on ToeQuest. There are even a few members that still believe “Intelligent Design” is science; they’re a lot of fun at times! The quest is for knowledge and understanding; I find though the dictionary is not a book one would enjoy reading cover to cover (at lease not many would), it does come in handy at times even when one may feel one knows the definition of these very commonly used words.

[greenbug]

Ok so I was reading timeparticles theory on his particles. I don’t entirely agree but his theory is remarkable a lot like my own. Part of the reason I came to the idea that there maybe a single dimension is the way energy works. We have potential and kinetics energy types but something always bothered me about how they worked. I realized it was direction that bothered me. The question raised in my head was how does energy “know” (or retain the information) of direction. I realized the simplest solution was that the information must be retained in time. That being the case then energy had a lot to do with time.
Another problem in physics that was often on my mind was spooky action at a distance. I feel as if it has a lot to do with relation and how quantum particles react. To me what seemed to be happening was single dimension “transfers of information” (hence the relational part) that disregarded space. Gravity also seemed to make more sense for a single dimensional universe. This would call for a more Relational, rather then Relative look at physics. Stating that some how aspects of physics influence their state on other aspects of physics rather then just purely existing in a system of their own. This is what mostly gives rise to the whole “free will” and “random events” parts of physics. The missing veritable or the influence that causes quantum physics to appear so wacky is in information retained by particles with in intervals. Which is why we feel particles are making choices of “free will“. The rules of just how a particle influences another across a single dimension seems to be based on similarities. This is when I thought of Newton’s cradle and how a single dimension could retain information across seemingly several dimensions. To me this linked space and time together.

So I told some people about this theory and the first thing they asked for was predications. At the time I couldn’t think of any. But the more I thought about it radiation seemed to be the number one key to making a prediction because with a universe existing like this space could be a form or radiation from a single dimension to a multiple dimension. The best place to find a single dimension reacting is a place where the laws of physics break down and to me that was a singularity. Not knowing much about them I started reading on the subject finding that there was no answer for what happens to information that a singularity seems to be devoured. That’s when one and one came together for me.

That’s when I realized that because of this relational rule to physics not only could time create space by just simple orders or relation but that space could then also make odd ball relations causing radiation of particles. This is where the idea of “coagulated” or a “coagulation” of space came from. This would account for the high levels of radiation in space but it might also do away with an idea that there may have been a big bang. However the rate at which space coagulates may have a cool down. At that it may speed up when particles are introduced. Relational physics may have another face to it in creating practical just by pure influence. I guess this would be like, if you pulled the sheets on your bed you wouldn’t get one wrinkle, just as particles move in space they may tug on the dimension creating particles. I guess this goes back to quantum physics and why we see suck strange things happening. Any how just adding some more of my perspective. Thanks for reading.

[dleviwing]

Hi greenbug;
If you’re going to say that space is the fundamental entity that forms all other entities then space becomes synonymous with energy and matter. Now you need to ask yourself what is the mechanism that allows us to detect the difference of each of these states of space as if they were actually different entities of the universe? What are the properties of this space that allows it to coagulate or interact with itself?

You are taking a common approach by making an assumption that there exists only a single entity that accounts for all that is observed. Unfortunately there is more empirical evidence that everything was at one time coagulated into a single point and thus we need a better term for the place where this universe started or we need to accept the “something from nothing” scenario. Either everything has always existed or everything came into being from an absolute nothingness. Where would you like to start?

[greenbug]

If you’re going to say that space is the fundamental entity that forms all other entities then space becomes synonymous with energy and matter. Now you need to ask yourself what is the mechanism that allows us to detect the difference of each of these states of space as if they were actually different entities of the universe? What are the properties of this space that allows it to coagulate or interact with itself?

Well your right and from what I can tell there is a “Relational” type of physics behind the coagulation. A question I’m wondering is capacity and the transition of information over large distances. There could be two sets of relational mechanisms if you will. One that transfers information across various intervals with several rates seamlessly and another that transfers information across near singular dimensional circumstances. If I can understand how this is done then I could explain more into this idea.

You are taking a common approach by making an assumption that there exists only a single entity that accounts for all that is observed. Unfortunately there is more empirical evidence that everything was at one time coagulated into a single point and thus we need a better term for the place where this universe started or we need to accept the “something from nothing� scenario. Either everything has always existed or everything came into being from an absolute nothingness. Where would you like to start?

I don’t mean to assume it just come easy to understanding, which is why its a common approach. I like the idea of something and nothing but it seems like a never ending debate ).. Thanks for the comments.