Proposed: Time is Not a Constant

I would like to field the postulation that time is not a constant; that "time" passes at a variable rate, based on unknown factors, but, due to physical limitations on measuring devices and the general lack of understanding of it's composition, we are unable to distinguish it's variation except through vague stimuli evidenced by, for example: Deja vous, periods of "time" seeming to pass more slowly/quickly, and/or intuitive flashes of immediate preknowledge.

Thoughts?

I think science has already established that time isn't a constant.
They have already stated that time slows down in the event horizon of a black hole when you get closer and closer to the center. The closer you get, the more gravity pull you get, the slower time passes.
This would bring to the conclusion that time is in a direct relation to the gravitational force at the point of measurement.

Next, the speed of time also depends on perception(as you already stated) time flies when your having fun, time is slow when your bored.

Time is indeed variable.
www.earthsky.com...

Would time exist if we didnt? As far as we know we are the only beings that actually perceive time.

A physiological explanation of the deja vu phenomenon may exist.
mb-soft.com...




[edit on 11/7/05 by The Block]

Thoughts? About a century too late. Einstein figured this out already at a time when everyone thought that Time was a constant and Light was a variable, he flipped that conventional wisdom upsidedown!

Originally posted by thematrix
I think science has already established that time isn't a constant.
They have already stated that time slows down in the event horizon of a black hole when you get closer and closer to the center. The closer you get, the more gravity pull you get, the slower time passes.
This would bring to the conclusion that time is in a direct relation to the gravitational force at the point of measurement.

Next, the speed of time also depends on perception(as you already stated) time flies when your having fun, time is slow when your bored.

Excellent! This is more the type of response I was looking for. However, my proposal discludes perception as an actual effect on, or guage for the measurement of elapsed time. Isn't the black hole example based on the theory of Special Relativity, and the surmisation that the behavior of light in it's vicinity, results in time dilation? Is this only true due to the application of "accepted theory"? I would like to challenge the belief that Time appears to be altered by perception only, that in fact It actually varies (perhaps chaotically) right here on this planet (for example), not just in the vicinity of a black hole. Although it would be intersting to correlate fluctuations in the Earth's gravitational field with periods of inconsistently perceived elapsed time. That would take a large scale coordination effort, lol!

It is utterly beyond our power to measure the changes of things by time. Quite the contrary, time is an abstraction, at which we arrive by means of the changes of things.
Ernst Mach 1883

Is it meaningful to say that one second today is equal to one second tomorrow? Is it meaningful to say that two events which are separated in space occurred at the same time?
Jules Henri Poincare' 1898

Is it meaningful to say that one second today is equal to one second tomorrow? Is it meaningful to say that two events which are separated in space occurred at the same time?
Jules Henri Poincare' 1898

Looks like Ol Jules and Mach never worked with GPS.

Originally posted by Lordling

However, my proposal discludes perception as an actual effect on, or guage for the measurement of elapsed time. I would like to challenge the belief that Time appears to be altered by perception only, that in fact It actually varies (perhaps chaotically) right here on this planet (for example), not just in the vicinity of a black hole.

I think the problem here is that your proposal statement (thesis) is never clearly given. Could you describe you exact theory, here? If you discount perception then what is your measuring unit and how are you proposing to validate the observations? What are you proposing as the cause of the variations and is it a standard variation across... err.. time (does it persist?)

We'd like something more concrete... math would be nice, but it would probably give me the blue gibbers. But since everyone's interested, could you give more details?

And some hint of the math?

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by Lordling

However, my proposal discludes perception as an actual effect on, or guage for the measurement of elapsed time. I would like to challenge the belief that Time appears to be altered by perception only, that in fact It actually varies (perhaps chaotically) right here on this planet (for example), not just in the vicinity of a black hole.

I think the problem here is that your proposal statement (thesis) is never clearly given. Could you describe you exact theory, here? If you discount perception then what is your measuring unit and how are you proposing to validate the observations? What are you proposing as the cause of the variations and is it a standard variation across... err.. time (does it persist?)

We'd like something more concrete... math would be nice, but it would probably give me the blue gibbers. But since everyone's interested, could you give more details?

And some hint of the math?

Yes....I was definitely becoming painfully aware of that. I don't have a thesis, as such. What I was looking for was some intelligent conjecture, brainstorming if you will. I am just not expressing the grounds for the proposal properly. Let me try again: Our currently accepted method of the measurement of time, is based solely on movement. Suppose for a moment, while disconnecting yourself from everything you've been fed from basic Physical Science on up (I know this is difficult to do), that time and motion/movement are not codependent. We use the perceived motion of our planet in orbit as a yardstick for the measurement of time, but it does not necessarily follow that the passage of time is dependent on the orbit of this (or any other) planet. Time can obviously be independent of motion; however, may the converse also be true, i.e. motion without time? Suppose that Time is, in and of itself, an element (not in the atomic sense), which depends on, as yet undetermined, sources for it's periodicity, or as Piancore' mused in paraphrase, "Is 1 second always 1 second in length?", and furthermore, if not, then how would we know, since our measurements are based solely on the physical qualities of our observable environment? This includes even such methods as the Cesium Clock. What provenance exists that Time is subject to the physical "laws" which we have spent so much time & energy forming the theories to support? Granted, if the Rate of Time varied too much, we, eventually, would probably all be driven mad, as the psychological implications of this are overwhelming. Therefore "something" must govern the actual Rate of Time, or if you prefer Speed of Time. Does Time pass at a constant rate, or does it vary (even if only slightly), based on, as yet undetermined influences, such as gravitational fields, etc.?
As for the mathematics involved, they are mainly based on my overview of the research of Jules Poincare' and Ernst Mach, in addition to the research and practical experiments of Dr. Vadim Chernobrov, and Prof. Alexander Abian. I am not a mathematician at their level, but I can follow advanced formulae. As Poincare' believed, deductive logic cannot be proven with mathematics, nor can inspiration.

Here are some links to the researchers:

For an example of some of the math:
www.galactic-server.com...

Practical experiments:
www.galactic-server.com...

[edit on 12-7-2005 by Lordling]

.
According to Einstein [and others] all motion is relative, length and time are relative, but the speed of light is the only constant.
And as a constant even it is under assault.

According to quantum many small aspects/particles of the Universe exist only as a potential [probability function] until observed so they are i believe outside of time [space-time?].

Time is i suppose the sequence we assign to a set of events. But at near light speed differentials the apparent sequence of events depends on your frame of reference.

Maybe light acts like spokes in the time-space gearing mechanism.
Where light is some super-Universal fulcrum and the time output of the mechanations is some kind of sequence structure that becomes/is the fixed order the spacial, length configurations.

Maybe if you can manipulate light in special ways you can manipulate time-space.
.

Time should have been based on the Human bodies ability to handle physical and mental intervals, meaning a landscaper, construction worker, carpenter..etc Can almost pinpoint morning, lunch and afternoon break without the "traditional clock to tell them" As a person with an office job can literally do the same depending on how mentally exhausting the position is. For example: "Weekends go faster than Weekdays, not because there is a 5 day diffrence, rather time speeds up while the body and mind are not working as much, as they do on the other 5 days, which time incoherently slows down".

Just an obvious observation by.


Justmytype

Time
1. An event controlled by attitude.
2. A condition of space resulting from the constant flip flop between universe and anti
Universe.
3. A dimension that enables two other wise identical events that occur at the same point in Space to be distinguished.
4. The base similarity of all field forces.
5. The base energy in the universe.
Time Stress
Is a term used when talking about the percent of potential difference of total time present in a field force.
Universe, Anti-Universe Time, Anti-time
Time is a condition of space due to the constant flip flop between universe and anti-universe and the resulting time stress that the area quantum's exhibit.
Universe has a forward time arrow.
Anti-Universe has a backward time arrow.
Our universe is in a constant flux at a set frequency. That frequency is about 137,036,000,000 oscillations per second which is related to the Fine Structure Constant. Time Stress is a term used when talking about the percent of potential difference of total time present in a field force. It’s like talking about the potential difference in an electric circuit. Total time = 100% of the forward and 100% of the backward cycle. Each side is represented as a whole 100%. Most of the universe operates on a stress of 3% or less. That is 3% of total time and is true on both sides of the cycle. (Figure 3) That 3% includes most electron interaction at shell distance from the nucleus. All chemical bonding. Normal gravity (Anything that won't crush

Figure 3. This graph shows the time stress curve on both sides of the zero stress center line. Most events operate at 0% to 3% stress. Time spent is dependent on particles involved and environment.

you) and sex.
Due to the design of the universe and ourselves, we are only aware of time passing in universe, and we call this arrow, forward time. There is no bias for forward time; time and anti-time are of equal overall duration.
Time on either side of the line appears to speed up or slow down depending on the degree of stress present at each event. This is due to the number of Action units that each stress percentage allows. Each action unit skips one area quantum in the direction of travel. This makes getting from one place to another much faster. So if we start at zero stress, which is the dividing line between time and anti-time. We have zero action units. The graph goes from zero to maximum following the I.S.L. curve. More on the curve later. The maximum number of action units is found at 100% of time stress. A moving object using this many action units per oscillation will appear to be at speed c. Unlike N+, N cannot flip fast enough to get close to c. N must skip to achieve near c speed. At near speed c, time passage would appear to be near zero to outside observers watching from a low time stress environment. This accounts for time dilation.
This info is from my theory, Filter Mechanics

Originally posted by brain page
Our universe is in a constant flux at a set frequency. That frequency is about 137,036,000,000 oscillations per second which is related to the Fine Structure Constant.

Extremely interesting sir! Am I then correct, in interpretation, that the substance of Time (capitalization used to distinguish from "perceived time") is inherently reliant upon the synchronistic vibratory qualities of elemental matter itself?

Also, as an aside, are you near completing your website on this theory? I noticed it referenced in several search areas.

Thank you for your interest. You’re partly right. The “substance” of time is manipulated by its environment. However, there is much more to it. For example! Movement and momentum is imposable without a two part universe. Time while being a condition of space as a result of the flip is what allows for movement. I will leave you with this. Area + Movement = Matter.

I’ll put the theory on the web before winter. (USA)