Time as a result of lightspeed

Author: Benjamin

Posts

Total: 19
Topic's author
#1
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 827
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
A - defining velocity through spacetime

There is a constant in nature, called C. 
C is the speed at which anything moves through spacetime.

As predicted by Einstein and confirmed by experiments:
  • A stationary massive object moves 100% of C through time and doesn't experience movement.
  • A photon moves 100% of C through space and doesn't experience time.
  • Anything else lies between these two extremes


Total spacetime velocity = [speed through time]^2 + [speed through space]^2

If we chart this "function", we get a circle as a result. Since the radius of a circle is always the same, we see that velocity through space-time is always C. This explains why moving faster slows time, it's because you cannot move faster than C through space-time. Faster spacial velocity necessarily slows time-velocity. The extreme endpoint is a photon (or anything massless), which doesn't move through time at all. Conversely, it explains why a motionless object experiences time quicker. Afterall, if an object doesn't move then it must move 100% of it's C velocity through time. All of these predictions of treating C as the constant space-time velocity fit the predictions of Einstein as well as experiments.

CONCLUSION: C is the universal constant of speed. Nothing moves slower, nothing moves faster, all things move at C through space-time.




B - defining space

Space should be pretty straightforward. Space is simple to understand. Speed through space is to change your position.




C - defining time

Time has no definitive conclusions. Time is relative, it depends on the spatial velocity of an object. Why is that?

Solution 1: Say that time is a magical/unseeable dimension that alters our 3d space

Solution 2: Say that time is "the rate of interaction" in the universe

Solution 3: Unknown (at least to me)



I want to make a solid argument for the second one. Time = the rate of interaction. (Interaction is when to objects have an impact on each other. )


The fastest possible way to interact is to send a photon. A photon uses 100% of it's C velocity through space, and doesn't experience any time-delay.

Imagine two stationary objects, both moving 0% of C through space. This means that a signal photon sent from A to B is the fastest interaction possible.

[A] -----------------------------===>[B] 

A and B are both having a velocity through time of 100% of C, as predicted by Einstein. According to this model, they do in fact have a rate of interaction off 100%, since there is no conceivable way for them to interact quicker. But what if A and B were in motion? Well, it's velocity through space would increase, and it would move slower through time. What happens in our experiment?

              [A]----------------------===>----------[B]
                           [A]----------------------------------===>[B]

Excactly what you would expect. B is moving away from the incoming photon, which means that an interaction from A to B via the photon is slower. No matter how fast A moves, the photons hitting B move at the speed of light. However, if the photon is reflected back at A, it would move much faster. In the end, the total "slowing of time" in the system AB is really not that noticeable. This fits our experiments with atomic watches in orbit around earth.


However, what if we let object AB move at 90% the speed of light.
  • Interaction A=>B will take 10 times as long
  • Interaction B=> will take 0.52 times as long
  • In total, each interaction will last more than 5 times longer
  • AKA: it would move through time 5 times slower

In other words, when an object like AB is approaching lightspeed, it starts to interact very slowly.
And guess what Einstein said about high speed? Answer: that time would start getting very slowly.


Anything moving at the speed of light cannot accelerate any further since acceleration requires interaction.

Massive objects can never achieve C, because no matter how much energy you put into it, time will slow down exponentially. When your last photon is fired in order to accelerate your particle into lightspeed, it will take near infinite "time" for the photon to reach our particle. From the perspective of the particle though, time is moving so slowly that it just feels like a moment. Acording to Einstein, moving at C destroys time. This is exactly what this model explains.






CONLUSION:
Time is how fast objects interact, which depends on how fast photons can make them interact, which depends on the velocity of the objects that experience time.



The correlation between spacial C and time C is that the spacial C creates time C.
This explains why a simple particle moves at 100% spacial C, while only complex systems of interaction have mass and "temporal" velocity.
In fact, C's "rate of movement" might be the actual definition of time we are searching for.
The funny part is that this model explains how an objective value "C" is needed for there to be a relative value "time.


HOW TO LEARN MORE/ UNDERSTAND BETTER: 

Topic's author
#2
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 827
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@Intelligence_06
@Sum1hugme
@Theweakeredge
@Undefeatable
Science is complicated, isn't it.
#3
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Benjamin
"c" is the speed of light constant. That is a pretty fundamental oversight on your part.

  Classical time breaks down when particles become massless. Photons are massless. Therefore, photons do not experience time the way we do. 

  It's my understanding that our conception of time is based on the fact that the second law of thermodynamics is the only law that doesn't look the same going backwards as forwards. 
Topic's author
#4
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 827
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@Sum1hugme
PROOF ALL OBJECTS HAVE A VELOCITY OF C:

As you listen to this lecture, sitting in your chair, you are moving at the speed oflight through spacetime.
Again we find the particle’s speed through spacetime as equal to the speed of ligh
 
Likewise, objects in spacetime all move at constant speed c in spacetime but if youchange its direction, say by moving at speed v in the x direction, then spatial speed will changeand so will the speed along the ct direction. Again, its total speed will still be c throughspacetime.
 

We all travel at exactly the speed of light through spacetime.


This is what I said:
There is a constant in nature, called C. 
C is the speed at which anything moves through spacetime.
This is evidently true, as my expert scientifical sources explain.


C is the speed of light constant. But it is the speed of everything constant as well.



Time breaks down at a spatial velocity of 100% of C. This is because there is no room for "time" velocity since all the velocity is used to traverse "space".



With regards to thermodynamics, what exactly is it that doesn't look the same backwards and forwards? The arrangement of energy? Doesn't all laws have this effect?
#5
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,591
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Benjamin
Most of what you state is untrue.   Special Relativity tells us that a moving frame of reference has its spatial dimension shortened in the direction of motion relative to the stationary observer, and has its time dimension slowed down relative to the stationary observer.  Note that the key phrase is "relative to the stationary observer". Relative to itself, a reference frame is at rest and experiences neither length contraction nor time dilation. An astronaut on a speeding spaceship does not see his own rulers shortened nor his own clocks running slow. Rather, it is the man on the ground who sees the rulers on the spaceship shortened and the spaceship's clocks running slow. Also note that there's nothing wrong with the clocks and rules. Space itself is shortened and time itself is slowed down for a moving reference frame, relative to the stationary observer. These interesting effects  have been verified experimentally many times.
#6
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Benjamin
Scientists like to make science complicated.

As I've stated previously, "spacetime" is a compound word, the meaning of which, corrupts the simplicity of Space and Time.

Time and Space are....And Events occur, and have duration.

And scientists  haven't as yet understood the reason for the event possibility.
Topic's author
#7
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 827
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@FLRW
Most of what you state is untrue.
OBJECTION: Give me a few examples



Relative to itself, a reference frame is at rest and experiences neither length contraction nor time dilation.
You know why? Because the clock that measures time is running slower. The reference frame experiences no slowing of time, because the experience of time is a product of time, aka the interactions within particles.



Space itself is shortened and time itself is slowed down for a moving reference frame
The truth is that a moving reference frame TRAVERSES space faster, which creates this effect of "space slowing down".  Similarly, time slowing down is a result of speed -- the photons carrying "temporal" interactions have to traverse a longer distance, so "time slows down" because interactions (like a watch ticking) are slowed down. 


REMEMBER -- WE HAVE NOT OBSERVED A "TIME DIMENSION SLOWING DOWN",
We have simply seen that a moving atomic watch is progressing slower than a stationary one
This effect can be explained by this model: ATOMS MOVING FASTER VIBRATE MORE SLOWLY, WHICH SLOWS DOWN PERCEIVED TIME.


The fact that we cannot travel backwards in time proves that the time dimension is inexplicably linked to the 3d universe and the speed of light. 
In the model I presented, time is the rate of interactions, which makes it obvious that we cannot travel back in time without removing entropy and breaking Thermodynamics.
Topic's author
#8
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 827
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Scientists like to make science complicated.
Well isn't that why it is called science and not common sense?


I will make it simpler:
  • We have the 3d space, on which, things that exist have a position.
  • We have the speed of light, which determines the rate at which position can be changed.
  • Everything moving slower than the speed of light experiences time because they are accelerated and interact with each other.
  • Since all interactions happen at a maximum speed of C, the faster an object moves, the slower interactions can occur. This slows "time" down under high velocities

#9
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Benjamin
It isn't necessary for time to move or do anything other than be a possibility....So how can it be slowed down?

Events might slow down, and/or durations increase or decrease.

The speed of light determines the speed of light.....And things that occur at slower rates can also be measured.

And we also have the possibility of 3d space, which allows for event and duration.

Rate, distance and duration are all measurable.

Speed is simply the duration of an event relative to it's participating factors. Which are variously measurable, according to the determination of the intelligent recorder.


And scientists undertake scientific study....Though scientific theory isn't necessarily sensible.
Topic's author
#10
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 827
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4


Rate, distance and duration are all measurable.
We cannot measure time. A watch takes some interaction and measures the rate of interactions like the mechanical watches slowly ticking. 

The problem is that the rate of interaction measured by the watch is influenced by motion. "Time", which cannot be measured, is not slowing down - the rate of interaction is.

"time" is really just our experience of change -- change carried out by the photons.

That is why time and speed is connected:
  1. An object experiences time because photons bounce back and forth carrying "interaction".
  2. The rate of interaction is dependent on how fast photons can move between objects
  3. If the objects are in motion, the photons must traverse longer distances -- in other words, the rate of interaction slows down -- aka "time" slows down
  4. "Time" is relative because motion is relative. But the speed of light is constant.

#11
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
Yeah I remember trying to explain this concept to a few of my friends back when, well... back when I had friends.

I am not sure whether the actual real world time dilation experienced due to relative velocities actually match up to a formula that would give the idea any actual scientific significance but it is an interesting thought experiment.
#12
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
@Benjamin
I hate to be the common sense guy but photons aren’t the only way we measure time. 

#13
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
@Benjamin
I never said that time could be measured.

The duration of an event relative to it's participating factors, according to the determination of intelligent recorders. Is what I stated.

Time and Space are infinitely immeasurable possibilities, irrespective of a measurable event.

If nothing is possible, then nothing will occur.

#14
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Benjamin
You have just demonstrated the ultimate truth that space and time, more correctly combined as spacetime, is really synonymous with eternity in that in spacetime, the concept of time, itself, disappears. There is no time, and, therefore, no beginning nor end. The prophet, Yoda, was right, as he told Luke, "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter." We are properly beings of light, having all the properties of light, and the consequences of light. At least, that is our potential. However, we can avoid it, if that is our wish, merely by doubt. We, ourselves, are our most vicious enemy, merely by saying, and then acting as "I don't think so." Or, in Luke's vernacular, before he understood what Yoda was saying, "I can't." To which Yoda replied, "That is why you fail." We simply argue for our limitations, when there are none but those we impose on ourselves. Impositions, like "time."
#15
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
I never said that time could be measured.
Time is nothing but measurement. What cannot be measured is eternity. Since it cannot be measured, we assume it does not exist, because, in our misguided pride, we assume all things can be measured. The term "spacetime" is misapplied because it contains, in its own vernacular, the enemy of eternity: time. Eternity is what Einstein was talking about, so why did he call it "spacetime?" Even he could not take that leap of faith that it is properly called "eternity."
Topic's author
#16
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 827
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@fauxlaw
I imagined time more like the rate of change -- the rate at which light moves forward. This model means that time is universal, but the effects of time are relative due to speed.

Eternity is nothing but a theoretical [box] in which all instances of time, every "frame" of the universe is stored at once. I am not sure whether or not that is a model or reality.
#17
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
Eternity is nothing but
That s exactly what eternity is not. See my #15 to zed
#18
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@fauxlaw
Events can be measured.

TIME is just the possibility.


Similarly, distance and volume can be measured

And SPACE is just the possibility


Only intelligent observers need to measure stuff.

The possibilities of TIME and SPACE are eternal.

Topic's author
#19
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 827
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Time is nothing but measurement. What cannot be measured is eternity.

Merriam-webster-definitions


Measurement: to allot or apportion in measured amounts

Time can be measured, but there must be an underlying reality that is more than the measurement. I proposed that time is the rate of change in the universe, the rate at which measurable things, like the ticking of a clock, changes. You cannot measure time, you can just measure its effects --- that is why we call time "relative", because different objects react to time differently due to their speed. Time itself cannot be measured.


Eternity: infinite time 

Infinite: subject to no limitation or external determination

Eternity is the sum of all instances of time, which would need to be infinite in order for eternity to exist. However, since the universe is expanding, it cannot be eternal.

BGV theorem, is a theorem in physical cosmology which deduces that any universe that has, on average, been expanding throughout its history cannot be infinite in the past but must have a past spacetime boundary.[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borde%E2%80%93Guth%E2%80%93Vilenkin_theorem]
Our universe cannot be eternal, this is a basic requirement for Einsteins theory to work. Heaven or something like that might possibly be eternal, but not our current universe.