Theory of Space cannot afford Time. With equations.

[Yanborg]

Section 1. The Theory.

S.C.A.T Theory. Space Cannot Afford Time.

You can't keep a record of time in Light itself. So, no matter what scenario you use, there will only ever be a limited resource of physical matter, in the universe for which to keep a record of time. Even my words right now are expending many kinds of resources. So here is a theory. And you will see how clearly possible it is to Maroon the process of recording time, as though it were a ship on a deserted island. There it would consume all resources. I think this is a bit bigger than the Y2K bug people.

The universe is finite, but it is also unbounded. So...

Postulate 1. The Count Matters
For every unit of time that is dedicated to the count, and recorded into physical representation, that unit of time has been transformed from an imaginary dimension without physical matter, into a quantity of physical matter.

Postulate 2. The Inevitable Lack of Resource.
No matter what resource we use; Even if it were some indivisable unit of matter, if we continue to record time for eternity; at some point along the line before eternity, we would have expended all resources or have to reset the count.

Postulate 3. Providing Postulate 's 1 and Postulate 's 2 have come to pass. Time itself would become marooned.


Section 1. The Novels.

Optional Read - (Opportunistic Forever Clock)

What I mean by Marooned is that nothing would be able to count further years than a certain finite number. And, I can't think of anything more likely to continue eternally than the number of times Earth will revolve around the sun. But, then again, stars die and so will we.

Perhaps an opportunistic machine were invented. Lets call this foreverclock. Now forever clock, could devour everything in its path at any location of the universe to keep itself running if it needed to. Eventually foreverclock will run out of things to use as a medium to record time.


Another Short Story - (Yearly Acorn Harvest) Skip to equations if If required.

When we think of a Date, and how we've been collecting these numbers. What exactly are we collecting ? If i continued to use an abacus, I might have collected 2008 beads so far. Or if I had scribbled down on a piece of paper a line for every year, I might have 2008 lines. And of course, these are objects which can withstand a great distance travelled by our planet.

However, lets say that we were to count time using other objects.

Take for example, that each year, a baby on a certain date represents the birth of a New year. Of course the Christian model relies on a messiah that is no longer wth us, and we've had to resort back to our Abacus in order to collect years. But lets say this scenario is different, and that each year when the sun is highest in the North, one new born baby serves as a marker for the year/ and that at any given year, we must rely on the total number of awarded babies to count which year it is. Clearly, our Babycus would only collect according to the maximum life expactancy of human beings, and so after the first 70 years or so the Earth would always begin to be around 80-90 years old, rarley 100 or over.

In this case, as the babies became adults, then elderly, aged, and passed awaythe Babycus would fail to continue couting the numbers of Orbits of Earth around Sol. Of course, this is the problem with relying on life as a benchmark for counting quantities. Perhaps it is not just life. If we think of how long we have been on this planet, we need to make a distinction between our intellect, and the things we are made of. Afterall, we are what we eat.

Also there is a problem with the idea of collecting, since the word implies some kind of accumulation. The beads obviously did not come from no-where. Here is another scenario. Let us propose that the human race used a certain species of Acorn, a singular Acorn for every year, preserved in a special air tight plastic container for eternity. Lets also imagine that humans have the capity as a race to exist eternally. And, In so doing, certain men and women, have a certain special and very practical job. This is the job of collecting the singular Acorn from the yearly harvest, and placing it in an air tight plastic container. These same men and women also have the resoncibility of maintining the container to ensure eternal longevity of the Acorns. No-one is willing though to remember the total number of years passed. Lets say this is because so many years have passed that at some point the race had become tired of counting. The year...

10000000000000000000000000000000000005500000000000 000005

for example, had already become a very annoying date for us to use in which to verify one's own signature. And that this version of the world is far farther travelled from 2008, than say

10000000000000000000000000000000000005500000000000 000005

And so, this collection constitutes the only record (in the knowledge of humankind) for what the year actually is. And no-body really knows what year it is in day to day convention. The workers at the Acorn accumulation facility have a rough idea, but since the outside world has little need for the year, then neither do they appart from the fact that they are being paid to do this. If anyone ever needed to find out, they would have to re-count all those boxes with Acorns in them. However, in the sacrifice of daily convention regarding the year, it has become a certain cruicial practice, so as to maintain the record, (a practice preserved in tradition as well as legal obligation). The reason being was that some back down the track in the year 3000, the CEO of McDonalds Corporation, now reffered to as Old Macdonald, purchased the entire Southern Hemisphere as a Freehold farming lease, the contract of which was due to Expire in the year

99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 99999999999999999999.

This contract, was rather similarly worded and modelled from a contract some way back in the late 1800's which provided the United Kingdom with a 99 year freehold lease over Hong Kong. Anyway, the cruicial aspect of this esate and the main need for the collection was that B.King (the deed caveat of the Southern Hemisphere) well his ancestory which now represented the entire population of the Northern Hemisphere, and at some point were due to inherit the Earth. Oh, we might ask ? The things people do for money and power. But lets ask some other questions/

Now, while the acorn might decay inside the container, let us assume that no mass is lost from the initially placed Acorn. The oldest being a very basic carbon dust, and some of the earlier ones, not too dissimilar to what we've come to recognise as crude oil.

Surely, then, the task of growing accorns would become a tax on natural esources, so great that eventually, production would be be required to cease. Say, down to the last man standing pissing on his Acorn Bonzai, in the midst of a vast silica desert scattered with a shit load of Old Macdonald, Acorn filled plastic containers across the landscape.

Why is this so dissimilar to what we are already doing ? If I were to use a machine to record these numbers, for eternity, my resources would eventually expend before eternity, the same if the human race went back to collecting beads, or making pencil markings.

There is one thing that is not a story. The capacity to record time, or say simply the number of years passed, will eventually become impossible...

The End.

[Yanborg]

##################################################
The Equations.

Introduction

Let us assume then that we have limited our recording capaity using quantum computers and three new units have come into being. These units are almost already into being and at current our technology supports down to approx 3 Atoms per bit, or .333 bits per atom.

These units are - Bits/Atom Digit/Atom and Symbol/Atom

This means Bits per Atom, Digits per Atom and Symbol Per Atom. You see, just like our MP3 files which record music at 197Kilobits per Second, we must not forget that the MP3 file also has a mass. According to my Hard drive on a clunkier technology which weighs .6kg ang contains 2781197205504 bits a bit has a mass of 2.15 X 10^(-13)kgs.

As an architect, I am accustomed to the fact that my ruler, i.e. the thing I am measuring with has a mass. If we were to count seconds with a machine, we would also require a certain mass in order to keep count, just like our ancient abacus beads.

The Equation.

Eternity = Mass(universe) / Mass (Unit of record or the SI unit)



If quantum computers manages to utilise the atom, as a unitary recording device, where 1 bit, digit or symbol can be stored using a single atom. The total number of bits that can be used for any number. Which also means the total number of seconds countable

Eternity = Mass(universe) / Mass(atom)

Eternity = 1.59486 × 10^(55) kg / 1.660538782(83)×10(-27)kgs


Even if in the most effient of number representation such as. . .

9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9 etc etc. . .

And after that, we could resort to other symbols which gave meaning to numbers for example Where k=1000

K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K^K etc etc. . .

However there is a problem with this which I will provide in a following Example. You see, once you run out of numbers, you run out of numbers of
symbols. Beyond this, whatever it was that was recording will have
lost mathematical meaning. You will find examples of this after the following questions.

First then I will ask some very easy High School difficulty questions, and then I will provide examples. I have complied some short Questions, which are not too difficult to answer. The questions regard the concept of Eternity, where Eternity is not the stuff of the bible, but rather the stuff defined as a limit of count. (it is important to understand this definition before making any sense of the above.)


Question 1A. Difficulty Level (low)

What is the maximum recordable ammount of seconds in a 12 Atom universe, where

Eternity = mass(universe) / mass(unit of record)

Mass of Atom = 1.6 x 10^(-27)kg

Recording unit = 1 digit / atom

Question 1B.
How many times more than the mass of the 12 Atom universe was your answer to the last question, if one of your digits was measured to be 2.15 X 10^(-13)kg ?

(2.15 X 10^(-13)kg is the approx average mass of a digit on my computer's hard disk where I aquired this mass by

1. Measuring the weight of my hard drive
2. Dividing this mass by number of available bits on the Hard drive.
3. Multiplying by number bits required of the digits.

---------

Question 2. Difficulty Level (low)

What is the maximum recordable ammount of seconds in a 12 atom universe, where

Eternity = mass(universe) / mass(unit of record)

Mass of Atom = 1.6 x 10^(-27)kg

Recording unit = 1 bit / atom.

(just to clarify: a bit is considered as either 1 or 0. There will be a maximum number of bits for example on your PC's hard disk.) In this case, we would have already figured out that the mass of 1bit of information = the mass of the atom.


Question 2B.
How many times quicker or slower did the 12 Atom universe run out of time, if your answer took 35.5 years to complete. ?

---------

Question 3. Difficulty Level (medium)

What is the maximum recordable ammount of seconds in a 12 Atom
universe, where

Eternity = mass(universe) / mass(unit of record)

Mass of Atom = 1.6 x 10^(-27)

Recording unit = 1 symbol/atom.

Question 3B.

Providing they began at the same moment, How many seconds will have been recorded in our our own universe, at the same moment that the last integer was erased from the memory of the 12 atom universe ?

(this is a trick question, the answer will be the same as 3.)



EXAMPLES.

Now here is an example of a 10 atom universe.

Because this little universe is trying to survive counting seconds on
its parts, its life in seconds is as follows.

BINARY

Lets say this were binary bits per atom (bit/atom). . .i.e each second
needed to be 1 or 0

1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1 - it would now have run out of space to record
seconds. 10 seconds.

or

DIGIT

Lets say this were a Digit per atom universe. . .i.e each second
needed to be integer's 1 to 9

from begining

0000000001
to
9999999999 = maximum seconds


SYMBOL

Lets say this were Symbol per atom universe, (similar to our own) and when it got to 10 seconds it was unable to place a two digit integer on the storage medium. Therefore it had to invent a new symbol.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 R (where to us R = 10)

R 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 G (where to us G = 19)

R G 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Y (where to us Y = 27)

R G Y 1 2 3 4 5 6 B (where to us B = 34)

R G Y B 1 2 3 4 5 P (where to us P = 40)

R G Y B P 1 2 3 4 O (where to us O = 45)

R G Y B P O 1 2 3 C (where to us C = 49)

R G Y B P O C 1 2 M (where to us M = 52)

R G Y B P O C M 1 W (where to us W = 54)

R G Y B P O C M W N (where to us N = 55)

To us, we could continue counting at 56 seconds from here. We also wouldn't
need numbers because we have the space to write things like

Example of a rule.
(where to us R = 10)(where to us G = 19)(where to us Y = 27)(where to us B = 34)(where to us P = 40)(where to us O = 45)(where to us C = 49)(where to us M = 52)(where to us W = 54)(where to us N = 55)

But as you can see, by the end of this graph the 10 atom universe @ 1 Symbol/atom has gradually erased the digits to keep up with the count. Also, it did not maintain a correct record of its rules regarding the quantity of 10 seconds when it got to G. When it got to G, there only remained 8 digits to express the rule of R which required 9 other digits as well as itself. The theory of inevitable lack of resource for numbers would eventually be the same for a 10^80atoms universe (such as our own).

There are ways that this 10 atom (10symbol) universe could become more efficient. But only again by a finite amount before the rules fill up the space and begin to write over eachother and numbers will begin to lose meaning thereafter until altogether.

[austintorn@aol.com]

I give up. Maybe (science) fiction is indeed stranger than truth.

[Yanborg]

I give up. Maybe (science) fiction is indeed stranger than truth.

What do you think Austin ? Is the proposition intuitive ?

[austintorn@aol.com]

If movement runs out, then time will run out, except for photons, which may get tired, but never old or completely worn out, for time never passes at the speed of light.

So, anyway, I think that time is the movement of material, an interval rather than a duration or a depending on having enough counting things to count by.

[Yanborg]

How can we violate the terms of a sentence ? An equation is supposed to be a sentence that makes sense . . .

It is exactly the same problem as the 3 men in a hotel.

http://www.relativitychallenge.com/p...uzzleHotel.htm

[Yanborg]

If movement runs out, then time will run out, except for photons, which may get tired, but never old or completely worn out, for time never passes at the speed of light.

So, anyway, I think that time is the movement of material, an interval rather than a duration or a depending on having enough counting things to count by.

I agree. Although, if say we imagine a piece of string the length of the Earths orbit, approx 1 000 000 000kms (it is a little smaller than this), and we cut it into

12th's. Then cut a 12th in 1/4's and then cut one of those 1/4's into 7th's and one of those 7th's into 24th's and one of those 24ths into 60th's and one of thoe 60th's again by 60, we arrive at a piece of string which is

34.5km's long. (actually 29.885777kms long)

From this simply cutting up the piece of string, which is a length of string, and nothing else, the smallest distance of string on the table aquires three values.

velocity = 34.5km's/second (actually 29.9km's/second)

distance = 34.5 km's

and its new value 1 second.


Personally I'm not sure that things will ever stop moving. However I am slightly dubious that I can arrive at a quantity for speed, where all I have really done is cut up a piece of string in this way.

So really wouldn't the expression for velocity more appropriately read. . .

velocity = distance of the shortest piece of string / 1

What do we do when we take an observable and divide it by 1 ?

Rule of grammar
We call it typically (a) or (an) (something), or (1) something. (A) table, or (1) table. (An) apple or (1) apple. In this case we have 1 piece of string or (a) piece of string.

But we have skipped the rule of grammar, and immeditately applied an invisible entity to the smallest piece of string , rather than dividing it by itself. This is the reason for my skepticism.

[Yanborg]

For those reading, I will be in the chat room talking with Carly regularly over the next couple of days.

Actually I've decided not to. . .She's a very hard gal to teach math. I wonder why ?

[neutralino]

This isn't a theory, it's just words. What, for example, does "time is marooned" mean in terms of real physics?

[Yanborg]

This isn't a theory, it's just words. What, for example, does "time is marooned" mean in terms of real physics?

What I mean by Marooned is that nothing would be able to count further years, or seconds or whatever than a certain finite number. And, I can't think of anything more likely to continue eternally than the number of times Earth will
revolve around the sun. But, then again, stars die and so will we.

Perhaps an opportunistic machine were invented. Lets call this foreverclock. Now forever clock, could devour everything in its path at any location of the universe to keep itself running if it needed to. . .Eventually foreverclock will run out of things to record time on as a medium.