Edgar, Please specify the mathematical relationship between p-time and coordinate time. Richard
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Ghibbsa, > > Thanks for stepping in. And quite pleased to see you accept the obvious > fact that the twins DO share a common p-time present moment with different > clock times. > > OK, so it is agreed that there is a shared LOCAL p-time present moment, > but, as you note, we still need to prove there is a common universal p-time > present moment. > > The argument that demonstrates that is simple, clear and convincing. > > 1. The twins share a common p-time present moment BEFORE one starts his > trip. > 2. The twins share a common p-time present moment AFTER they meet up again > after the trip. > 3. DURING the trip each twin is always continually in his own local p-time > present moment. > 4. Local p-time flows continuously for both twins DURING the trip from the > time they part to the time they meet up again. There are no gaps in either > Twin's p-times. > 5. Therefore the other twin must ALWAYS be doing something in his p-time > present moment at the same time the other twin is also doing something in > his, because there is no time that each twin is not existing in their local > present moment. And that must be a one to one relationship, that is there > is always one and only one p-time present moment shared by the parted twins. > 6. Therefore there must be a common universal p-time present moment in > which every observer in the entire universe is currently doing something. > We may or may not be able to compute or measure what clock times correspond > to that shared common present moment but all observers will be doing > something in that common present moment. Just because some observers are > out there in various strong relativistic conditions doesn't mean they > aren't actually doing something at every moment of their existence. > Obviously they will always be doing something, no matter what their > relativistic situation, and they will obviously always be doing it in their > p-time present moment, which we have proved must have a one to one > correspondence with the p-time present moment of all other observers, no > matter what their clock times are. > > 7. This theory also allows us to have the necessary common background > present moment in which and only in which different clock time differences > can be compared by observers and relativity can work. The p-time present > moment is an absolutely necessary background for relativity to function > internal to. Without a common universal background present moment it would > be impossible TO COMPARE relativistic clock time results. Where or when > could different clock time results be compared if the different observers > were actually IN (at) those different clock times. > 8. It also provides the necessary mechanism for the universal processor > cycles that drive all of computational reality, and in which relativity and > clock times among every thing else is computed. The p-time present moment > exists first, and all clock times are computed WITHIN IT. > 9. Also in spite of what others here argue, SR itself requires there to be > a common present moment because it says everything is traveling at the > speed of light (actually the speed of time) in spacetime. For that to be > true everything simply MUST BE at one and only one location in time, and > that location is the common universal present moment of p-time. > 10. The theory also provides a simple, elegant and consistent cosmological > geometry in which the actual real extant universe is the SURFACE of a > 4-dimensional hypersphere in which the surface is the 3-dimensions of space > in the present moment, and the radial dimension back to the big bang is the > radial p-time dimension. However the actual real universe is only the > surface because the past radial dimension is the now NON-existent > computational trace of the past which no longer exists. > > One could say the universe is the surface of a 4-dimensional soap bubble, > and that our most fundamental experience of our lives, our existence in a > common present moment is in fact the direct experience of the most > fundamental phenomenon of the universe, namely the continual extension of > the radial p-time dimension of our universe, in which the universe > continually recomputes its current state of existence as that p-time > extension provides the happening, the motive force in the form of processor > cycles to do so. > > The p-time present moment theory results in a simple, convincing, > beautiful, elegant TOE (only part of which I've explained) which is in > solid accord with the most fundamental observation of our existence, that > of a present moment in which we exist and in which all happening and > reality occurs. > > The argument is clear, simple and convincing, and it is the ONLY theory > consistent with the basic experience of our existence from birth to death, > that of living in a present moment, that we now know is common and > universal across the entire universe. > > This common present moment is the ONLY locus of reality in which > everything that is real and actual exists. Only the common universal > present moment exists. The past is simply the now nonexistent previous > computational trace of the present, and the future doesn't exist at all. > > > Edgar > > > On Wednesday, January 29, 2014 11:11:45 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> On Wednesday, January 29, 2014 12:17:56 AM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >>> >>> Brent, >>> >>> But the twins DO AGREE on whose clock ran slower. >>> >>> So I don't see your point if you use the twins as evidence... >>> >>> Edgar >>> >> >> It may be a bad idea stepping in here, because I would rate my knowledge >> of Relativity about 'average to poor layperson'. >> >> But hey, if the experts aren't hitting your buttons, why not give the >> naïve a go? The experts will hopefully tell me if what I say is wrong. >> >> OK, so look, let's grant that when the twins arrive back at the same >> location, you are absolutely correct they share a p-time at least local to >> where they are, on the grounds they have different clock-times, yet still >> share the same moment. >> >> The question now is what other than that common termination location, if >> anything, is necessary for p-time to be more than a phenomenon local to >> where the twins meet up again, in fact be universal? >> >> Specifically, is there anything you can think of about the respective >> end-to-end journey of each twin, that would either have to be present for >> p-time to be universal, or have to not be present? >> >> I'm interested to hear your views, but will offer a candidate effect that >> I think must be near the boiler plate of what relativity theory says. >> >> If one twin travels extremely fast - I don't know how near, but a lot >> nearer the speed of light than the other twin. Do they not both have to >> experience the same like-for-like p-time at all points in their respective >> journeys? >> >> But Relativity says something like, the twin going very fast, might >> experience a passage of one week, correspondingly ageing one week, his >> clock reading one week elapsed. While the other twin moving slow, might >> experience a passage of 10 years, correspondingly ageing 10 years, his >> clock reading 10 years elapsed. >> >> Can we allow that the slow moving twin just stands still waiting for the >> fast moving twin to return? Not important but if that's acceptable it makes >> everything that little bit more simple. >> >> Either way, their respective journey's terminate back at the same >> location and time, such that they shake hands. We are supposing your p-time >> theory is correct at that location and time, for the reason you offer, >> which is the very different clock times, yet same place and time all the >> same. >> >> What are the senses in which p-time existed at all points for both twins? >> And what are the senses the twins experienced time very differently? >> >> One sense they experience a common p-time could be that both twins agree >> 10 years had passed on Earth, if say Earth was where their respective >> journey's began and terminated. From that we might say that the fast moving >> twin, and the standing still twin both experienced each instant of that 10 >> years in p-time. Just the fast moving twin zoomed through instants much >> more rapidly. If you agree this is a way p-time is universal, then we shall >> suppose you are correct here also, and consider implications of that. >> >> If they both experience each next instant of p-time, exactly >> synchronized, just one whizzing through while the other going through at >> the normal rate. Isn't the implication that their different experiences of >> the passage of time is non-fundamental, the fundamental being that p-time >> was synchronized and universal in every respect throughout? >> >> In which case, isn't the implication of that, the twin traveling much >> faster who thinks he experiences just a week, actually ages 10 years, given >> that each instant of p-time is universal and constant and synchronized? >> Thus both twins arrive at the same location, with different clock-times >> representing the different experiences, but p-time ultimately governing >> everything as both twins having aged 10 years? >> >> Otherwise, what sense is p-time universal? How can the twins experience a >> synchronized p-time throughout their journeys if one twin not only >> experiences one week not 10 years, but ages one week too? Surely the >> implication is that they did not experience every same instant of p-time. >> Or if they did, only in some non-fundamental sense? >> >> Or, if they don't have to experience a synchronized p-time each instant >> of their different journeys, what sense is p-time universal? If only the >> sense of where they meet, that's not universal, it's local. If someone >> stands still, while someone else goes in a big loop back to that position, >> it's pretty intuitive that they will meet up at the same place and time. >> This regardless of what laws of space and time are true? >> >> Sorry for the long windedness. And also, if I've missed the point or >> misconceived something. I would appreciate that being pointed out if >> possible though. >> >> On Monday, January 27, 2014 3:27:54 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >> >>> On 1/27/2014 7:48 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >>>> > Jesse, >>>> > >>>> > First this doesn't have anything to do with present moment theory, >>>> only with standard >>>> > physics. >>>> > >>>> > 2nd, hopefully it's just a matter of you using different semantics >>>> than me as to what is >>>> > meant by absolute and relative. I'll explain once more. >>>> > >>>> > In the case of time dilation effects caused by gravitation or >>>> acceleration the effects >>>> > are absolute in the sense that both observers agree on them. Take 2 >>>> observers A in a >>>> > gravitational well and B not. In this case B observes A's clock SLOW, >>>> and A observes B's >>>> > clock rate SPEED up. They AGREE as to this effect. >>>> >>>> They can't agree on that. They can only agree via signals the their >>>> clocks *appear* to >>>> run at different rates. Just like the twins in the SR twin paradox. >>>> >>>> > AND the clock time difference PERSISTS after A and B meet up >>>> afterwards when their >>>> > clocks are again running at the same rate. Therefore in my >>>> terminology it is an absolute >>>> > effect. It is a real and actual effect, that both observers agree >>>> upon. This is well >>>> > understood and confirmed because it's used in GPS calculation >>>> corrections all the time. >>>> >>>> Yes, it's real that they have traveled through different intervals of >>>> spacetime - just >>>> like the twins in the twin paradox. >>>> >>>> You seem determined to ignore the basic principle of GR, it is a >>>> *geometric theory of >>>> spacetime* Geometry doesn't make clocks change speed. >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
