ALMA sees old galaxies before they merged. two ways to look back into the past?

The future isn't the outside of the "membrane".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's where time stops and only the timeless permittive condition remains. Nothingness is permittive of everything, including time. It is the physical/mathematical laws of the universe which determine what is permitted and what is restricted. But that is one hierarchy above the concept of a fundamental abstract "permittive condition" which is absolutely neutral in permittivity.

OTOH, it also suggests that time is an acquired excellence of duration or geometry, or more succinctly; A permittive condition permits time to be created.

But humans are the only (known) living organism which is interested in knowing what time is and/or what the future holds.

Bohm argues for an hierarchical Potential Implicate Order which immediately precedes reality. IOW all the necessary information must be in place for a quantum event to occur.
But that's within our Universe which is mathematically expressed through GR and operates through Quantum Mechanics.

But why should we assume there is a future at all? We can anticipate, but we do not create now (time) from the future (no time), we create now time from past time, an ever increasing measurement . Until the now stops, dies, or disappears.
Then the time-line is broken and no further "nows" can be created. However, when a timeline is broken it usually splits into separate new timelines. The Universe is an expanding bundle of time lines.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/time

In reality we are always looking into the past..even our now is an observation from past reality.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

yes, and in the model, photons arriving inside and from a smaller sized membrane. we experience the zero length now only because of slow nerves, but even at "c" it would still be the past.

we, in our conscience create the now from the past, from the last information. That is a neurological event, not TIME as in the dimension of the model. The geometric now is created by us moving into future time. Time that is measured at right angles to the membrane. Timelines on the expanding spherical membrane are welcome. May be the membrane should be described as having timeline reinforcement filaments. I am closer than you all to have my personal timeline broken, split into many.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

with due respect, if you accept to discuss the elements of the model, --then the universe, embodied by the membrane, has been moving out form its small size point in time, the BB and is now nearly flat,[ see posts 271,272 for the measurements], still expanding into time, into the infinite time ahead, leaving it's limited past time behind. expansion in the radial direction.
That is so (in the model) whether the membrane is thought of as a stretchable skin or as a collection of timelines as W4Y suggestion makes possible. .If the zero thickness membrane would look like the earth, all our hairy heads would face into the future.*** We do not move into the future forward, but upward. Time[movement through] is measured at right angles to space.
Post Script: *** a more interesting, place would be to live in the interior, floating freely in a no gravity environment. living in the past would have it's perks and perils. Inside, but outside the membrane.

 

It's not even clear this is a coherent notion: in mainstream science dimensions cannot meet, because they are always part of one and the same: spacetime.

False, it does no such thing.

You are conflating mainstream gravity with your version of gravity; mainstream gravity doesn't affect "time while it is still outside space", because such a thing cannot exist.

Perhaps, but until we find out, your model is built on pure speculation.

One could equally argue that the expansion of the universe is one of the most pure expressions of time (in fact, your model supports this notion), and thus that the universe is mostly time on such scales, not space.

True.

Yes, and my point is that that is fundamentally incompatible with how the theory of general relativity describes it.

Because such a thing doesn't exist in GR.

Look up "time dilation"; high velocities also affect the time dimension, not just (one of) the space dimension(s).

Aha, so that mechanism isn't actually described by your model at all, it's an assumption of it. Got it.

 

Note that stressing and warping the components of spacetime individually is in fundamental conflict with the theory of general relativity.

That was not my point. You are calculating spatial distances in a time dimension, and constructing spatial spheres in a time dimension. For that to be coherent, that time dimension must be unlike any time dimension previously described by mainstream science.

You've missed my point: the funnel would reach back to the formation moment of the black hole, not to the origin of the universe.

 

right!, I am making that point since the word go: the black hole is stuck on the radius, not in the BB, although some theorists opine that it is the white hole of the Small Bang of another nascent universe

In mainstream activities, we use tmeintervalls as a measure of length too, and vise verso, so unsurprisingly, when the first dimension, time is expressed as a Johnny come late 3 dimension, it would in a geometric model take that form.

NE, I am noting that some of the ideas, consequences are even violently in conflict here, but perhaps that is not so, The mainstream theories are alive and well. I am just given an alternate view in a simple geometric model. As to gravity, velocity warped dimensions, or their content, who is to say that, although they are warped in unison, that effect is not individually retained? if it would, then the effects would influence, even create a fields into the future outside of the membrane.

 

When you say always, you imply [space]time always existed. but the 3 dimensions did not, so it is obvious that they must have met at the B Meeting Bang. meeting of the minds too.

 

Yes, that is why we measure the distances across these spaces in light years, they are mostly time, measure in time units, linked to "c" thank you for your clarification.

 

That's true. All elementary particles (values and potentials) have to point in the same direction to form Bohm's Implicate Order.

A example may be that a photon can spend 2000 years in the chaos of the sun, but when it escapes, it takes 8 minutes to reach the earth.

 

So when you said in post #96: "Black holes even centering depressions that are pinholes reaching back toward the big Bang." you worded it incorrectly. OK!

False. For example, how many meters are there between two ticks of a clock? In mainstream science, that's a nonsense question: time intervals are measured in seconds (etc.), not meters (etc.). I think you are confused by the distance-measures of lightyear and lightsecond, but those are explicitly measures of spatial distance, not time.

I understand you are offering an alternative view; I am merely pointing out how alternative it is. Your views is replacing just about every concept it touches: gravity, time, space, dimensions, warping of spacetime, etc. None of those in your model are compatible with the mainstream scientific ones. By having to replace them more and more of them, the mountain of evidence needed to support your view is growing all the time.

False. Always here means that there is no alternative within the theory. We know the theory of general relativity doesn't hold at the moment of the BB, so the theory of GR doesn't demand a spacetime existed back then too.

In your model, this is indeed necessary.

False; the lightyear was introduced almost a hundred years before we realized the universe was expanding. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-year#History

Lightyears are a measure of distance, not time.

 

While it it is not surprising that there would be paralleles in the outworkings of different disciplines, my reference to upright conformity on Earth, was an illustration only! of:
the fact, that when we walk or move forward, our displacement through time, the duration, would be plotted on the upright axis on a chart. The illustration of an illustration, to give the membrane some thickness.
Time is at right angles to space. It is outside the membrane, at the tip of the "arrow of time, the direction of movement through time. Glad to see he photons get their act together and head our way, after that bumpy ride out of the sun's interior. yes, and I was surprised at the amount of photons present in the corona during the August 21 totality. much more than pictures showed. Hotter than expected too, of course.

 

I was referring to the preponderance of the through time expansion in [empty] space, in the model and reality, not the evolution of astronomical nomenclature . thank you for the link.

 

re black holes in the Model's membrane.
Prediction: the model precludes recent black holes being open - ended funnels that start as white hole beginnings of other mini universes. Such entities, if undergoing inflation would reach the inner surface of the membranes. It is one thing having galaxies merge, universes? unlikely, but intriguing. and Hawking radiation sucking matter and energy out of another universe?

 

re above reply, related ideas. I mentioned toward the BB. In post 334 above I again mention recent BHs, obviously a black hole resulting in a universe at the opening of it's funnel, would never catch up with our expanding membrane, particularly after ~14 billion years of HR draing matter and energy from it.

Often the model shares the concepts with the conventional view. Infinite time changes perspective of course, of the same reality. How the model seems to reacts to different situations, and the way it is pointed out here, was prompted by your valuable observations and of others. thank you.

"growing [ movin through] all the time ", like the universe at large.

Some of our theories are thought break down, not apply in BH, BB conditions, that just opens the way to realize that indeed novel thought events can take place, like infinite time being joined by the dimensional newcomers, 3D space, allowing measurements in combined units like Light Seconds my favoured, the diameter of the Earth Orbit is 1000 light seconds +-1.1 .

 

I had a simple idea of the model in mind, time, possibly infinite, then a point in it, from which the 3-1Ds, then energy, then laws and matter started to expand, literally move out into time as an expanding spherical membrane. 13.8 b. years ago, and counting. I never thought about detailed mechanism how time would be joined by the 3-1 dimensions, the 2 in the model. so:

Can you point out in the classical model, of a mechanism required for time or it's line to engage with an entity at its formation? I think it is a strictly automatic process. Duration count starts with appearance. Similarly, it should be thought of , when in the big bang, 1 dimension [time], became 4, (spacetime)!---anyway.
The expanding sphere can be thought of as an assembly of time -line filaments. see post 323. so think of the big bang as the beginning of multiple (later changing) timelines. no new mechanism required. you can have your cake and eat it too. bon appetit.

 

NE said:" Aha, so that mechanism isn't actually described by your model at all, it's an assumption of it. Got it. quote

late PS: just to dispel any misunderstanding, The timeline start at the Big Bang was only cited to illustrate a process we take for granted in the classical model. There clearly are no timelines reaching back to there, and not even to the transparency period. all that exist of that distant time is the radiation still circulating and arriving, and being captured in the now, the membrane, as the converging galaxies for example , subjects in the Opening Post.
If the now is really of zero duration, the membrane of zero thickness, there are no timelines to retrace into the past. The past is passe'. a void, empty again in the ESM model.
Timelines are a visual aid, an extension of our memory- based life experience, lived really one fleeting zero moment at a time.

 

reflections on the last posts: All the information, matter, energy forms, that ever existed at any time in the universe are present only in the membrane, Any time lines due to proper motions of entities would be traced in the membrane, not traveling separately through time, which is outside the "now". Such timeline in the model has a time dimension value only in the sense that it had a radius component perpendicular to its' length, due to curvature and expansion movement. Any signals from the past are received along the expanding and curved plane of the membrane.
PS : because the membrane is not a bell , curving back to the BB, there is no cage of timelines like permanent stringers connecting it, or any point inwardly. The membrane, the universe in the now, is theoretically~spherical, equidistant in time from the BB, but allowing for relativity effects.

 

No, we weren't. Please look at the quote in post #329; I was clearly talking about the universal expansion (Hubble).

Yes, but "reaching back" typically means it also reaches that point. That was my confusion.

And now that I think of it: how do these funnels respond in a big crunch universe, when the membrane starts moving inwards?

But your time is different from the one in GR, because yours can exist detached from spacetime. And so it goes with everything in your model, which was my point. You use the same words, but they are really different (and incompatible) things.

Novel thoughts, sure, but some of your thoughts are so novel they cannot be understood. For example, what does it mean that "infinite time is joined by the dimensional newcomers, 3D space"? I get what you are trying to say, but I don't understand how such a thing is even possible. How can time exist without space, but then suddenly space starts existing too, transforming the time into spacetime? It's easy to say that it does, but you have still to demonstrate how it can be done.

At the formation of time, or the entity? And what do you mean by "engage with" in this context?

More general, duration is a time interval, and a time interval is the time between two events (GR terminology).

The space dimensions are not a physical entity, so you cannot validly compare the two.

If there is no new mechanism required, then why can't you point to the (apparently already existing) mechanism that joined time and space into spacetime at the moment of the BB?

What do you mean by "transparency period"? Are you talking about the recombination era? If so, please look up the cosmic neutrino background.

That's a matter of definitions. If you define the now as the present moment, then it is by definition of zero duration.

Except using the normal definition of timelines, there are. Are you redefining the word "timelines" as well?

So the past doesn't exist anymore? I would like to point out that this has major implications for a justice system: you are claiming that one cannot be punished for crimes, because those crimes (that are in the past) don't exist anymore.

Just a clarification: your gravity is exempt from this in that it can reach outside of the membrane into the future, right?

Is your model deterministic? In other words, from only all the information in the now, could we (in principle) calculate back perfectly to what the universe must have looked like a few years ago? Because if not, and the past doesn't exist anymore, is it even meaningful to talk about the past?

 

The crimes do not exist anymore, gratefully they are past events, hopefully not to be repeated. They exist now only in our records, artifacts collected, waiting to be punished in the future, that has not arrived yet.

Yes it is, because all events left their mark, in the form of radiation (a fossil), records carried forward. A specialised skill to reconstruct a history of the past. If I went back to my hometown today, the place I shared with Einstein, it is gone, not the same anymore, he too, but we can very well get a picture of all he did there, and Princeton. The past is really gone. get used to it.

That is one of the strange ramifications of the model. It is based on the assumption that relativistic effects and field effects are affecting the dimension not only in unison, but also independently, because in the model time existed independent of space, and it's content. which had a beginning. If it is the content that is affected, it appears it reaches not into the future. the space dimension does. There is no question that time reaches into the future, beyond where we are, "now"

If you look around you, do you see any timelines? They are an artificial construct to help us see the 4st dimension play out. You could construct such a line on the membrane, but remember the surface was smaller in the past, so the line would be hard to pin down. like I said before, it would be a hairy interior of the sphere with all these artificial timelines. If only the "now "exists, the timelines are very short, and exist only in imagination. An abstract construct.

Easy, they would have a head start, already part way there, and already crunched. A confirmation of the model's worth.
Prediction: In the crunch phase of the membrane's movement through time, depressions like black holes would precede the sphere into disappearance.
note: while it is true, that an ideal empty inner sphere has no gravity inside, the presence of mass there changes that.

The Big Bang is not called Big for nothing, a one off job, kind of Proto Type. I have my own trade, demonstrating big bangs is not within the scope. but as I said, attaching time in form of a line to objects in space is done in mainstream all the time. thank you helping me define.