An Idea

[G_burnett]

the funny thing today is that they are cutting through the pipe like my idea lol saw the picture on line ... they have the cutter 5000 feet down and cutting like a chop saw ... well lets hope! g.

[leskey]

I have to disagree. Time is a rate of flow. Time denotes a difference in space but it is singular in dimension and can work two dimensionally with out space. If it was compositional would be too much for you to decipher? That time is in three, or four parts of your hyper volume does not signify to you it is more then just differential to the structure is silly.

Space is not a difference of time it is constructed of time and incompatible with times quantified definition. As space is not a rate of flow, but three rates of flow. That time can be extrapolated from space but space not of time, is directly obvious to me. Why its isn't to soo many others is a mystery in its own.

side note..
I also suggested that information is preserved in a BH via space-time correlation to mass or matter. That is a BH releases space-time at a rate high then it has occupied. Hence expansional rates of the universe, spins of galaxies, gravitational anomalies and cosmic background radiation, due to natural coagulation of space-time into mass or matter.

I don't know, greenbug...space (something/beginning) could be defined as objective and time (magnitude/matter) as subjective......frustratingly, this is how designer's think: in the beginning is the objective intent and all manner subjective potentialities follow...

[G_burnett]

there is different rates of flow and this is much apparent in the small if the energy expands in it own time dimension of state to be in all places at once in symmetry release ... inversion or BB yada yada ..

each has it own relativity indeed greenbug but with it all said and put in perspective there is then the next dimension of platform. Thus where we are in relativity is very important to be stated prior to the declare of observation.

IMHO ? graham

[labelwench]

there is different rates of flow and this is much apparent in the small if the energy expands in it own time dimension of state to be in all places at once in symmetry release ... inversion or BB yada yada ..

each has it own relativity indeed greenbug but with it all said and put in perspective there is then the next dimension of platform. Thus where we are in relativity is very important to be stated prior to the declare of observation.

IMHO ? graham

Where we are in relativity......

My horse comments that from the perspective of each, we are always 'here'.

All else is ever 'there'.

It is ever 'now'.

An examination of the past is the perspective of 'then'.

To contemplate that which has not yet transpired is 'when'.

To hold all of the above in mind, in conjoin, may be somewhat akin to Zen.

[SteveA]

(Quick note regarding a few comments - I think there exists a predetermined time less space of all possibilities. Individuals move through this in a manner that connects these into a sequence of experiences in which there is fundamentally just a single largest/fastest unit of time, though different properties in experience can then be seen to possess ratios of this individual rate of time. The equivalent "velocity" or rate of time of that effectively preexisting space would be faster than infinite to an observer, if it preexists and ones own fundamental units of time are equivalent in influence to an infinitely fast velocity, though there is a serial ordering to the dependencies of observed relationships that maintains cause and effect, so you have the equivalent of a single infinitely fast photon constructing space between observations and then within those observations we have the wave function of light, which is constructed from a collection of such photon events, moving at light speed (~300,000km/sec on statistical average, which is a key point), so there are layers of velocities involve (of course that's just how I've been assuming it works)).

The link that you gave, Leskey appears to not be working, but I found this page and it might be what you were referring to: http://www.cham.co.uk/phoenics/d_pol...eral/maths.htm

I'm still working on having a good understanding of scalar motion, but the simplest way to describe it is that it's actually the observer's "ruler" that's expanding, in which case it makes an expanding space appear to remain constant sized and particle motions in some direction tend to figuratively gravitate toward an attractor point that is dependent upon its velocity (or manner of motion). That's how these systems treat it anyway, it's a continual rescaling distances between objects into smaller distances as the scale expands and then an object moving at a constant velocity appears to approach a fixed point in this space that is dependent upon its velocity.

If we look at how physics treats velocity as constant, then is similar to that view by the mind. For example, if a ball flew by in space at some velocity, even if it passed beyond our ability to see it, we could still mentally imagine that the ball is still travelling away from us at the same velocity. If we kept rescaling space, this would give us a similar view.

Though I believe things are actually more complex than this (sorry, here goes the technical stuff again ... ... I just can't resist, but I think it's good stuff) and what we actually have are various functions determining rates of growth and, for example, all objects experiencing a constant acceleration would grow in distance proportional to the square of time, a*(t^2), and we'd need a continuous description of functions, similar to irrational numbers that would sort various manners of motion into a "linear" ordering very much like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation, for example, as t->infinity, a few examples would be log(log(t))<log(t)<log^2(t)<t^.1<t^.5<t/log(t)<t<t*log(t)<t^2<t^t<t! etc. and then we'd have over time, various forms of these layers accelerating and decelerating relative to each other and interacting over time at different planes/surfaces of this and these should be similar to different mental processes (for example, if we're thinking about a pair of objects in space, this space grows as t*(t-1) or t^2-t, but the "density" of its realizations is inversely proportional to the possibilities and so the realizations "move outward" from the origin at a velocity 1/(t^2-t), or if we're thinking of an asymmetrical pairing, there would be twice as many combinations possible and the space of possible realizations would then grow at half the rate or 1/(2t^2-2t) or for n objects we have combinatorial/permutative (I think a related subject in physics is called Grassmann's numbers).

Now these forms of growth are quite possibly associated not with time or quantities, but the qualities of experience and, for example, visual colors likely arise from a specific layer of interaction within this space and sound or taste etc., so that could be the next "orthogonal" layer in a model (and these layers or spaces should have features of interaction over time similar to this http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-t...tml#post120345, and then for the super bonus challenge (), there could also be a way to multiplex all of these forms together into a single linear process - a time line that encompasses all those (although there are many possible ways of doing this interleaving and I'd say if there's a source of values directing logic, that's where those come into the picture as the rest should be rather predetermined - in other words, there's a single infinite space of all possible conscious experiences and it's fixed, but these points are not inherently connected together, they simple exist as fixed relationships in space and in a sense, everything's already happened, but hasn't been experienced in time with individual qualities and that's where a time line can be interleaved through these spaces in a manner that is not predetermined(!) and because these are nested infinite structures and not a single pathway, there are infinite possible biases and weightings etc. and you can always, sort of, loop back to the beginning (though I think with some inertia - which could be made infinitesimally small in influence over time), by embedding the previous time lines similar to a new quanta to build upon (it's not exact, but I think that's where the concept of a soul comes from), but there are many other factors involved and perceptions and knowledge are what determine the precision and efficiency of the direction.

I'm rather certain you don't have to go anywhere or anywhen either, we're already in this type of structure, though learning how to coordinate things isn't too easy, but then again there's a lot of built in safety nets too ... coincidence? Well, I'd have wanted a few safety nets, but of course too many can be annoying, so as usually, it's a mix of options and that's one of the beauties of it, though it's less of a matter of safety nets really and more of a matter of knowledge - if there's a conflict in ones desires or actions, then the results are conflicted. Untangling those, allows greater coordination, though in a complimentary sense, it's the tangles that allow for growth - so the decision regarding that is really over what relative ratio or density of learning versus direction does one want, though similar to turbulence, without feedback and adapting, an inertial motion or straight line ends up becoming chaotic and that's where learning and growth occur, but similar to some "block" algorithms, there are ways of taking a large quantity of information and processing it very efficiently compared to small amounts at a time (much like physical exercise - you don't gain muscle mass unless you do some actual work - a little bit of aerobics on occasion can help keep the body toned, but when you push the limits for a while you gain quite a bit more), so its important to develop perceptions to gain the information and intelligence to compress it into something manageable and memory to store it and then apply desires and creativity across all this to look for the most efficient forms of (inter)action).

(Yes, I know, I probably swam a few thousand feet past the deep end of the pool and I admit it can be a bit nerve wracking, but overall the waters pretty nice and I think there are a few directions that could be worth checking out . I can't complain because I know I've wanted to try diving in ... would have regretted it if I hadn't and I think in the end, that's most important part).

Have fun, Leskey.
Steve

[austintorn@aol.com]

Review, and Some New

The one and only
Eternal, steady-state,
And infinite universe
Must sum to zero,
And is therefore
A distributed form of zero,
With no net change,
Frozen in an ultrastasis
On the largest scale.

Why is the universe so large and endless?

It is because the Planck size
And that within it is so small.

Also, the universe is infinitely old
And so it already exists
In a state of maximum entropy.

[austintorn@aol.com]

The Stars

Stars have been burning hydrogen forever
And so they require an endless
And renewable supply.

So, the energy in the light released
By the fusion of compound nuclei
Must eventually be used
To break them apart.


Photon Decay

[A photon’s polarization
Is the result of the asymmetry
Of its spacial footprint.]

Red-shift is due to photon energy loss,
The photons being stretched, as well,
The photon loss being gradual
Over immense distances.

A weak gravitational field
Is the only possible source
Of the intergalactic red-shift,
For, any collisions would only cause
The loss of energy in individual photons
And wouldn’t increase the distance between them.

Space is not perfectly rectilinear,
But has a slight fourth-dimensional curvature,
And so it is that curved space
Simulates spatial expansion.

Gravity’s universal curvature
Creates a differential velocity per unit distance,
And so the energy distributed throughout
A photon’s substructure accrues differential velocity
At a steady pace;

A photon’s leading edge
Has traveled farther than its trailing edge
By it wavelength,
And this stretches photons,
Causing an expansion—
And so the universe isn’t expanding;
But intergalactic photons are—
Along their epic journey,
Which is predicted by Einstein’s
General Theory of Relativity
(Which he himself did not notice).

The difference between a billion light years now
And a billion years ago is not linear,
WHich gives the false impression
Of universal expansion.

When a photon expands over time,
It has to release energy,
And so it is forced to decay—
As a speed less than ‘c’
Is of an unstable, relativistic system.

It must reserve its Planck/energy relationship
As its wavelength is distended by curved space.

And, by the way, this is a quantized,
Discrete change, very much unlike
The proposed continuous spacial expansion.

The decaying starlight fills deep space
To the CMB energy density.


The CMB

The CMB has significantly more energy
Per cubic meter than any bandwidth in space—
And this is the product of energy
Lost by the intergalactic red-shift
Which is really photon decay.

The CMB must then lose energy
To maintain its equilibrium temperature,
And the only possible destination
For this energy loss is away from deep space,
Back into the galactic environment,
The eternal return, as electric current,
The only agent available.

So, lumetic photon decay heats the CMB,
While cosmic current cool it down;
Which is why the CMB has a thermal spectrum.

The only way to transfer power
Is through CMB temperature differentials,
Whose artifacts are its small-scale anisotrophies.

[austintorn@aol.com]

The Galactic Fountain
Of the Thunderous Cosmic Engine

Galactic halos convert the CMB microwave energy
Into electrical energy, which is then carried inward
To the galactic environment by massive currents.

There is unambiguous evidence of this current,
And that would be the banding of spiral galaxies,
Whose bands move independently
Of the galaxy’s disk material.

Some bandings, like those of NGC 4622,
Actually move in the opposite direction of disk rotation,
Which surely shows that galactic banding is electrical,
Not gravitational.

This energy is carried by currents to a galaxy’s core
To facilitate the disassociation of the compound nuclei
That its stars produce by fusion.

A galaxy is an electric furnace,
And this is why jets of hydrogen
Have been observed escaping,
As well as gamma rays and who know what,
With more hydrogen released
Up through a galaxy’s spiral arms,
All of this now being called the galactic fountain.

A galaxy’s newly minted and massive volumes
Of hydrogen gas rain down on the galactic disk
(seen as 21 cm radiation),
As such upon our very own Milky Way,
From both sides, north and south.

By the way, galaxies don’t explode and fly apart
Since the flux in equals the flux out;
They are steady-state systems.

The universe is about balance,
And so if nuclei are formed in heat
Then they must be dissolved in relative cold,
For a galaxy is an engine and heat is a waste product.

The gravitational expansion required
To disassociate nuclei at a relatively low temperature
Is why galaxies need massive black holes.

Universal equilibrium demands
The existence of black holes,
Another truth without proof.

Black holes are gravitational filters
That separate light from hot, ultra-expanded matter,
Facilitating nuclear disassociation
By providing an environment
That radically reduces nuclear binding energy.

Electrical current heats the galactic core;
The absorption of compound nuclei cools it.

[If a particle’s total energy
Exceeds its rest mass
It can escape a black hole’s pull
(Maxwell concept).]

[Light’s energy is not affected
By gravitational potential
(But they have gravitational fields)
Which reduces the rest mass
Of elementary particles,
As they in turn emit light of lower energy.]

[SteveA]

I was reading your posts, Austin and thinking ... does it have to be this complex? I'm certain models will improve over time, but ultimately it does seem like - yes, if it's big, it's complex and there's likely some minimum information required to describe space on different scales that can't be reduced further without things become approximations and blurring the edges.

In one aspect, the basic seed of growth for the universe could be/have been quite simple, but I believe if you add enough "empty" space, the appearance of a large quantity of anything, include empty space, implies a complexity, that may be overlooked in order that all those things remain unique and distinct. Luckily it's still easy to look up at the sky and just let the body do all the work for you in seeing some twinkling stars

[Profpat]

Hi Austin;

I'm fine. I am in self exile right now, due to a moderators lack of moderation. Keep up the excellent posts, I really have nothing new to offer but if I do I'll post it here.

Thanks for your concern buddy.

Best,

Pat