Time is not linear

[The Sage of Main Street]

Here is Hawking's take:

Imaginary time - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Motto of Postmodern Science: "If It's Weird, It's Wise"

If Hawking looked like Brad Pitt, nerds would dismiss his fantasizing physics. These degenerates demand that goofiness be preached by someone who looks goofy.

 

[scruffy]

Thank you for your responses here ... please provide the proof that dt ≠ 0 ...

Very simple.

3 words: "speed of light"

Which nothing can exceed.

Therefore, conduction delays.

I would offer a simple epsilon/delta proof, when ∆e = 0, then ∆∂ = 0 ...

Entropy is defined in terms of information.

dt is required to "move" the information.

It all depends on how you define the closure of your system.

In real life, there's no such thing as a closed system. There's only varying degrees of openness.

I'm discussing mathematical dimensions ... these "synthetic dimensions" are just make-believe philosophical arguments ... now, your example of the cosine function is strictly two dimensional ... y = cos x ... you didn't define any third dimension, all functions in x and y will appear as straight lines when observed from the z-direction ... high school algebra ...

Except for the synthetic third dimension.

The mathematical term is "embedding". It's a topological term.

You should know better than to use dt in three dimensional equations: ∂y/∂x = sin x; ∂z/∂x = 0 ...

We said science doesn't define consciousness ... and neither have you ... at least no better than the Bible has ... 1 Corinthians 12:12-27:

Spoiler

12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14 For the body is not one member, but many.
15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?
20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:
25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

Assembly Theory ... ha ha ha ha ... that's rich ... you don't know what a scalar is do you? ... ha ha ha ha ha ha ...

Assembly theory quantifies the amount of MEMORY (therefore time) in a system.

You should review the basics of geometry. Lifting, folding, projection, and embedding.

Most of all, you need to understand what compactification means and why it's important.

These are not easy topics. They take time.

 

[scruffy]

God Plays With Loaded Dice

Just like the quantum outcomes, the future is dictated by outside forces limiting the results of our will.

Okay, that's a starting point.

Now quantify it.

The interesting thing about this exercise is, no matter where you start you always end up in the same place.

There is no "backwards view" in Kolmogorov's generators. You can't see the distributions from an outcome, you need lots and lots of outcomes to guess at and approximate the distribution.

Coincidentally, the only thing that resembles a quantum collapse is a choice.

 

[scruffy]

God Plays With Loaded Dice

Just like the quantum outcomes, the future is dictated by outside forces limiting the results of our will.

Food for thought:

How Our Reality May Be a Sum of All Possible Realities | Quanta Magazine

Richard Feynman’s path integral is both a powerful prediction machine and a philosophy about how the world is. But physicists are still struggling to figure out how to use it, and what it means.

www.quantamagazine.org

 

[ReinyDays]

Very simple.

3 words: "speed of light"

Which nothing can exceed.

Therefore, conduction delays.




Entropy is defined in terms of information.

dt is required to "move" the information.

It all depends on how you define the closure of your system.

In real life, there's no such thing as a closed system. There's only varying degrees of openness.



Except for the synthetic third dimension.

The mathematical term is "embedding". It's a topological term.



Assembly theory quantifies the amount of MEMORY (therefore time) in a system.

You should review the basics of geometry. Lifting, folding, projection, and embedding.

Most of all, you need to understand what compactification means and why it's important.

These are not easy topics. They take time.

Whoa ... you're wrong, under Classical Physics, we can travel faster than light ... we observe the M82 Jet is traveling at 7 times the speed of light in a vacuum ... if you're using Lorentz Transformations, then you should say "I'm using Lorentz Transformations" ... and not all this goobly-gook you're puking out here ...

Where did you find that definition of entropy? ... a Fruit Loops box or something ... I have dS = dQ/T [where S=entropy, Q=internal energy and T=temperature] ... these are all state variables ... no dt anywhere to be found ... shear or Lorentz ...

If you believe the entire universe is an open system, then our results will differ ... show me perpetual motion and I'll admit I'm wrong ...

 

[scruffy]

Whoa ... you're wrong, under Classical Physics, we can travel faster than light ...

Yeah really? Got a link for that?

(Phase velocity doesn't qualify).

we observe the M82 Jet is traveling at 7 times the speed of light in a vacuum ...

Horseshit.

if you're using Lorentz Transformations, then you should say "I'm using Lorentz Transformations" ... and not all this goobly-gook you're puking out here ...

Where did you learn physics?

Do you have any idea why there are 10 and 12 dimensional theories?

Where did you find that definition of entropy? ... a Fruit Loops box or something ... I have dS = dQ/T [where S=entropy, Q=internal energy and T=temperature] ... these are all state variables ... no dt anywhere to be found ... shear or Lorentz ...

Entropy is defined in terms of information.

Information theory 101.

Shannon and Weaver, and von Neumann.

What you are citing is the ensemble. We understand that too.

If you believe the entire universe is an open system, then our results will differ ...

Entire is a big word

So far we have proven quantum entanglement over a distance of approximately 240,000 miles

show me perpetual motion and I'll admit I'm wrong ...

Simple. The expansion of the universe, for all we know, is perpetual.

 

[ReinyDays]

Yeah really? Got a link for that?
(Phase velocity doesn't qualify).
Horseshit.

My bad ... it's M87 ... "In pictures taken by the Hubble Space Telescope in 1999, the motion of M87's jet was measured at four to six times the speed of light." -- Wikipedia ...

Where did you learn physics?
Do you have any idea why there are 10 and 12 dimensional theories?

I've seen Naviar/Stokes in 75 dimensions ... but here's one in 10 dimensions ... f (x,y,z,w,v,u,t,s,r,q) ... but I'll challenge you on this ... post a 10-dimensional theory that has any use ... the general form of N/S is usually expressed as a 6-dimensional space, the three linear dimensions and the three rotational dimension everyone is familiar with as the six degrees of freedom ... and this 6-dimensional perception is quite useful for pilots ... airplanes spin all kinds of different ways without effecting linear momentum ...

But go ahead, post a 10-dimensional theory and show how this is demonstrated ...

Entropy is defined in terms of information.
Information theory 101.

There's your problem ... in the context of physics, both entropy and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics are defined in terms of "energy,
frequency and vibration." ... where did you take physics? ...

Simple. The expansion of the universe, for all we know, is perpetual.

Apparently information doesn't follow the 3rd Law of Thermodynamics ...

Do you know what a scalar is? ... you never answered me on that, I gave you the citation you asked for, now it's time you started posting citations ...

=====

The OP's title is correct ... time is profound NOT linear ... it's not a circle either, the obscure term is "polychoron", more common would be "polytope" ... a geometric shape in 4-dimensions ... and the algebraic equations for this shape are called the Lorenz Transformations ...

Yeah ... profoundly non-linear ... but not a hypersphere ... the 4-dimensional analogue of your circle ... more of a surface all twisted and distorted at the edges, turning fuzzy and some how vanishing ... leaving only it's grin behind ...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Here is Hawking's take:

Imaginary time - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Love it.

It also resolves issues with the 2nd law

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Motto of Postmodern Science: "If It's Weird, It's Wise"

If Hawking looked like Brad Pitt, nerds would dismiss his fantasizing physics. These degenerates demand that goofiness be preached by someone who looks goofy.

What a bizarre post. All you are saying is it is weird, since you don't understand it.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Some have theorized that time as we interpret it doesn't actually exist at all, that the past, present, and future are all happening at the same time, but "time" is the way our human brains interpret that sequence of events.

 

[Nobody911]

Some have theorized that time as we interpret it doesn't actually exist at all, that the past, present, and future are all happening at the same time, but "time" is the way our human brains interpret that sequence of events.

The concept of a timeline does imply a linear progression of events, with one event occurring after another in a chronological sequence.

Time is not reversible because it is a one-way progression from past to present to future. Once an event has occurred, it cannot be undone or reversed. This is a fundamental aspect of the nature of time as we understand it.

The concept of a "river of no return" refers to the idea that once time has passed, it cannot be recovered or revisited. The past is always behind us and cannot be changed, just as a river flows in one direction and cannot be reversed. This is a philosophical and scientific understanding of the nature of time and the irreversible nature of events.

However, in some theoretical and scientific discussions, the idea of a nonlinear or non-sequential timeline has been considered. Some examples of things that can happen like a circle( nonlinear )and keep happening again and again include:

1. Seasons - The cycle of spring, summer, fall, and winter repeats every year in a circular fashion.

2. Birth and death - The cycle of birth, life, and death is a continuous and circular process that occurs for all living beings.

3. Historical events - History has a way of repeating itself, with similar patterns and events occurring in a circular fashion throughout time.

4. Natural cycles - The water cycle, the carbon cycle, and other natural processes follow circular patterns in nature.

These examples suggest that time may not be entirely linear and that certain events and processes may have a circular or cyclical nature. This idea is explored in various philosophical and scientific theories, such as the concept of eternal return in philosophy and the idea of cyclical time in certain indigenous and Eastern cultures.

 

[scruffy]

My bad ... it's M87 ... "In pictures taken by the Hubble Space Telescope in 1999, the motion of M87's jet was measured at four to six times the speed of light." -- Wikipedia ...

The Wiki article states the apparent velocity is an illusion.

I've seen Naviar/Stokes in 75 dimensions ... but here's one in 10 dimensions ... f (x,y,z,w,v,u,t,s,r,q) ... but I'll challenge you on this ... post a 10-dimensional theory that has any use ...

Any form of string theory. Take your pick.

the general form of N/S is usually expressed as a 6-dimensional space, the three linear dimensions and the three rotational dimension everyone is familiar with as the six degrees of freedom ... and this 6-dimensional perception is quite useful for pilots ... airplanes spin all kinds of different ways without effecting linear momentum ...

Yikes. You need symmetry 101.

You might want to check out how SO(3) differs from pitch and yaw.

But go ahead, post a 10-dimensional theory and show how this is demonstrated ...

All modern forms of string theory are basically the same.

There's your problem ... in the context of physics, both entropy and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics are defined in terms of "energy,

Um... No.

frequency and vibration." ... where did you take physics? ...

I learned from Wheeler and John Hopfield. You?

Apparently information doesn't follow the 3rd Law of Thermodynamics ...

No one understands how it works yet.

Feynman is probably the closest.

Do you know what a scalar is? ... you never answered me on that, I gave you the citation you asked for, now it's time you started posting citations ...

=====

Yes. I know all about vectors and tensors and Hilbert spaces too. You?

The OP's title is correct ... time is profound NOT linear ... it's not a circle either, the obscure term is "polychoron", more common would be "polytope" ... a geometric shape in 4-dimensions ... and the algebraic equations for this shape are called the Lorenz Transformations ...

More likely it is a population measure.

That is why it is not directly a physical observable.

Yeah ... profoundly non-linear ... but not a hypersphere ... the 4-dimensional analogue of your circle ... more of a surface all twisted and distorted at the edges, turning fuzzy and some how vanishing ... leaving only it's grin behind ...

A quantum interaction is like a choice. It can't be undone. It is not reversible.

 

[MarathonMike]

Cool I wanna ride that flat circle back to when I was 30 and stay in a holding pattern.

 

[ReinyDays]

The Wiki article states the apparent velocity is an illusion.

You had to read to article to learn this? ... it's not an illusion, Hubble used her own internal clock to time this velocity ... this "million miles a second" value uses Earth-seconds ... if we used seconds as they pass at the relativistic jet, we'd get the normal 99% of c ... c'mon man, dilation of time should be your first thought ...

Any form of string theory. Take your pick.

String theory isn't science ... you're off into hocus-pocus pseudo-science now ...

These extra dimensions cannot be demonstrated, therefore they are not science ...

=====

No citations mean you're making this up as you go ... Do you know what a scalar is? ... obviously not and that's not that only mathematical term you've used incorrectly ... all you're doing is slinging bullshit ...

A quantum interaction is like a choice. It can't be undone. It is not reversible.

... like bringing up QM in a discussion about GR ... with a self-confessed Classical kind of guy ...

Closest I get to tensors is rotational motion in meteorology ... you? ...

 

[scruffy]

You had to read to article to learn this? ... it's not an illusion, Hubble used her own internal clock to time this velocity ... this "million miles a second" value uses Earth-seconds ... if we used seconds as they pass at the relativistic jet, we'd get the normal 99% of c ... c'mon man, dilation of time should be your first thought ...

I said it it my first response.

"Phase velocity does not qualify".

Anything else?

String theory isn't science ... you're off into hocus-pocus pseudo-science now ...

M-Theory is being explored at the LHC even as we speak.

These extra dimensions cannot be demonstrated, therefore they are not science ...

HORSESHIT.

You should be ashamed of yourself

=====

No citations mean you're making this up as you go ... Do you know what a scalar is? ... obviously not and that's not that only mathematical term you've used incorrectly ... all you're doing is slinging bullshit ...

Your density does not equate with bullshit.

The people at Oxford understand this, they're writing a paper on it right now.

... like bringing up QM in a discussion about GR ... with a self-confessed Classical kind of guy ...

Same physics. GR is fully compatible with quantum mechanics. I refer you to the work of Monika Schleier-Smith at Stanford.

Closest I get to tensors is rotational motion in meteorology ... you? ...

I use TensorFlow every day, for neural network modeling in Python.

Tensors are easy, what's hard is solving the diff eq's inside them.

Here's a place to start: the "metric".

In Euclidean space, the metric is uniform.

But sometimes, in physics, the metric breaks down, it does strange things. This happens for example, in an atom or a black hole, when the thermal radius gets near the Schwarzschild radius, then you get quantum fluctuations in the metric - and therefore ordinary geometry breaks down completely and your distances and times become stochastic.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That doesn't explain the speed of light ... if time is a circle, then why doesn't light return to us? ... we know time isn't linear, why we use the Lorentz Transformations ... because:

1] This explains the orbit of Mercury, and
2] Stars behind the Sun are offset during total solar eclipses ...

That's relativity, not circles ...

But time stops at the speed of light so you really have no way to understand what it means to be light

 

[scruffy]

But time stops at the speed of light so you really have no way to understand what it means to be light

This may be the right context to introduce the notion of criticality.

One of the standard models of criticality is called the Abelian sandpile. Basically, it works like this: you create a pile of sand by adding one grain at a time. First, you find that the slope of the pile converges to a single invariant value. (Scale invariance, is a big deal in physics). Then, once the stable equilibrium has been achieved, adding another grain will start to cause "avalanches", because the system has reached a critical state, it's right at the edge of stability and the addition of another grain makes it unstable.

In ordinary everyday chemistry, we encounter criticality (most commonly) at phase transitions. For example when hot water changes to steam, bubbles are an example of criticality.

The reason criticality matters in this discussion, is because of something called the Planck time. It's the smallest measurable unit of time, it's about 10^-44 seconds. It equates with the time it takes a photon to traverse the Planck distance, which is about 1/^20 the diameter of a proton.

My proposal (as food for thought), is the time WE know and experience, is the combined criticality of events happening at the Planck scale.

The law of Large Numbers (in this case 20 orders of magnitude) ensures that the macroscopic outcome is consistent from one place to the next.

 

[scruffy]

Heads up for ReinyDays

Calabi-Yau Manifold

Calabi–Yau manifold - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Nobody911]

Heads up for ReinyDays

Calabi-Yau Manifold

Calabi–Yau manifold - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

String theory is difficult to understand. Here are the reasons:

1. Abstract concepts: String theory deals with very abstract and complex concepts such as extra dimensions, vibrating strings, and supersymmetry, which can be challenging to grasp without a strong background in theoretical physics.

2. Mathematical complexity: String theory requires a deep understanding of advanced mathematics, including differential geometry, group theory, and complex algebraic equations. This can be overwhelming for those without a strong mathematical foundation.

3. Lack of experimental evidence: Unlike other well-established theories in physics, such as general relativity and quantum mechanics, string theory lacks experimental evidence to support its claims. This makes it difficult for many to accept and understand the theory without tangible proof.

4. Multiple interpretations: There are several different versions of string theory, each with its own set of equations and assumptions. This can lead to confusion and make it difficult for non-experts to understand the theory as a whole.

5. Evolving nature: String theory is still a developing field, and new discoveries and advancements are continuously being made. This makes it challenging for non-experts to keep up with the latest developments and understand the current state of the theory.

 

[Missourian]

It's more of a flat circle.

“Time is a flat circle”: Here's What it Really Means

If you’re here, odds are you are a fan of the TV show “True Detective,” which features the iconic line 'Time is a flat circle.' In its first season, the protagonist Rust Cohle, portrayed by

linguaholic.com

What are the odds of you being conscious/alive now and not the massive amounts of time being dead or not even born yet?

In the trillions of years that the universe will exist, the minuscule 80-odd years you will exist on this rock just so happens to be happening right in this instant? It's just too convenient.

There is no beginning, no end. You will never know anything but consciousness in one form or another at all times.....Till you don't.

Music to ponder time by:

Obviously.

That's why clocks are round!