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

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by nebel, Dec 8, 2017.

  1. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    But it did not have to exist. The potential for the BB may have been the instant before the BB. (t0 + BB) = t1

    The way I visualize infinite existence is equal to instantaneous existence. You cannot tell the difference.
    Infinite time becoming expressed in a single instant = single instant. There has to be a chronology from beginning to end. Infinity has no chronology.

    Else you end up with the circularity of the time being the duration of time, without change.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    If you think in French, the word "Duration"comes from Dur, conjures up hard metallic, like durable. Time for me has that palpable presence. exactly.

    QUOTE="Write4U, post: 3577268, member: 261885"]The way I visualize infinite existence is equal to instantaneous existence. You cannot tell the difference.
    Infinite time becoming expressed in a single instant = single instant. There has to be a chronology from beginning to end. Infinity has no chronology.[/QUOTE]

    There are an infinite number of moments, instants, in just one second. so how can instantaneous existence be comparable to infinite, eternal existence? Although it feel that way, my 89 years are gone in a flash.
    Since time, the dimension has no beginning, why does there have to be a chronology? in the model, the Field , page, time #1 is left blank before the BB. That does not mean nothing happened, something could have, it just was not in our universe. I suspect there was a cascade of events with a chronology leading up to our Big Beginning.
    Infinity could harbour a lot of chronological history, more than 13.8 billion years into the past**. we are perhaps better of not to know. life is complicated enough.
    ** I am here not referring to the part of our universe that has expanded through time the other, opposite way, now 43 billion years away.(the way a photon flies)
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    Duration has a beginning and an end. Infinity has neither. Therefore, the term infinity does not indicate a duration of anything and only when something begins and continues does the term duration apply.
    There is no beginning to infinity and end, i.e. no chronoglogy of existence.

    However, the BB was the beginning of the duration of the universe and its specific associated time line.
    Time is a measurement emerging with duration of a chronology. It is not a dimension in which all things happen.

    This is Einstein's argument. Without space there is no time. Without time there is no space. The two are a self-referential system of existence in reality.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    with that one the present alternative theory, (infinite time with a matter moving through it) agrees. Einstein, in german, formulated spacetime. the present alternative theory calls for timespace.

    Infinite, eternal time, has an unlimited duration. who says that the 1st dimension has to be chopped into units as we are fond of doing?

    QUOTE="Write4U, post: 3577309, member: 261885"]There is no beginning to infinity and end, i.e. no chronoglogy of existence.[/QUOTE]

    The model, where Time is the 1st dimension, all pervasive, and the universe is moving through it, forming an expanding sphere in the process, does assume, that in the Pre-universe time, there were no chronometers indicating both the rate of movement, or registering the distance travelled.
    The absence of movement or instruments like chronometers does not mean time is not there, the underpinning of everything. To use an illustration:
    If you consider time to be represented by a road, called timespace. it is there, whether cars travel over it or not. Their speedometers indicate rate of movement , odometers count kilometres, since manufacture and trip set. We are on the roll only for 13.8 billion years., speed now not exceeding "c". Maximum speed through time achieved in gravity free standstill in space.
    The road existed before us, had with it the energy to form matter, and there is a long road ahead, futuretime still N.#1.

    Chronology of existence of all time past? Of course not, we are able to keep only our own log. Logically all other happenings before, outside our universe on that road (timespace) are in another car. ( if any).
    thank you for letting me explain that alternate view, reaching beyond the local neighbourhood.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019
  8. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    What you call time is only the permittive condition I spoke of. It has no properties of any kind. It is just permittive, including the emergernce of time alng with any change. As long as there is no change of any kind there is no duration
    and hence no time.
    Time cannot exist independent of change. In the absence of change, there is absence of time.
     
  9. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    W4U,
    The very word condition implies that there is a deeper base, namely available time already existing for any conditions to to exist in, come along.
    The "permissive condition" you spoke of long ago, (congrats), is therefore not time itself, but the latent uncreated energy "inhabiting" energytime, that opens the possibilities for happenings like our Big Beginning #4 to occur.
    The BB #4 being the point in time #1, when matter developed from energy, timespace opened up to A.E.'s spacetime,** energytime turned into mattertime locally. BB, The point where the universe #3 started moving into the futuretime still#1, and still carrying your "permissive condition", future energetic possibilities. so,
    permit me to correct you on the definition of your "permissive condition." thank you.
    ** pacetime, nebel's newest Freudian Slip.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    No it does not necessarily mean that at all. A condition can also be interpreted as a state.
    i.e. an abstraction of a permittive state or condition.
    vs. your interpretation
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/state
     
  11. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    W4U,
    with due respect, a state, like a condition is 2 levels removed from the fundamental base.
    For a state of an entity to exist, the entity has to be formed first, for that to happen there has to be time, made for it, possibly energy to provide the impetus. like
    Trump's state of the Union adress.
    Time trumps
    Time has priority.
    Time is fundamental.
    Time to recognize that.
    thank you: nebelleben.
     
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    No, a state does not necessarily indicate an existence at all. There can be a state of non-existence or nothingness. State can be an abstract model.
    What?
    Over what?
    Of what?
    Time to review your intuition.
    Abstraction
    "Time" is an abstraction.
    "Duration" is a measurement of change.
    "Age" is a measurement of duration.
     
  13. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    here is the result of your prompting! W4U (I do it too):
    There is such a thing as timespace, as mentioned in much earlier posts here. Being kind of a "block" time that the BBC article cited before, mentioned. so:

    Take basic eternal time, uncreated like energy. undefined and directionless. but try to have anything happen in it, --That implies an acceleration, shown to be time times time .
    Times to the second power, by definition 2 dimensional. the multiplication, in the English language at least, a triple bonus.
    now, happening all the time, while we are on the roll through time.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2019
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    Aceleration is not dependent on time, it is dependent on physical force, or change. Time is the emergent measurement of duration of acceleration.
    You cannot give time any physical properties. It has none.

    Without duration of change, time = 0.
    Thus 0^2 = 0 There is no such thing as a change of time.
    There is no aspect of time that is changeable or durable in and of itself, time cannot emerge from time.

    What you are describing is a "timeless permittive condition". No roll, no time.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2019
  15. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    I did not say the ist dimension no. #1 or the BBC's "Block time" is caused by time. That is the infinitely old, uncreated energy that would be powering that. What the laws, equations indicate is that The first Dimension time exists to allow acceleration t^2 to happen in it. Timespace is the realm in which things happen.

    Change is not required for the 1st dimension to exist. Think of no change occurring. does that mean time has disappeared? No, the entity in question just has not moved through time. Like being stuck in max gravity., whereas everybody else has moved on in time, proving that it exists alive and well, thank you very much.

    as as been said before, any condition is dependant on time to exist in. What you call the permittive condition is the uncreated latent energy that is so dependent to have time to exist in. None of the formulae we use has " permittive condition" as term, but we do divide distance by time.

    Time does not have to emerge, --period.--, appear "poof" every time something starts moving, changes, or stops. Time is uncreated, permanent, just like energy.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2019
  16. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    No it is not. It is caused by the continued existence of the universe. It does not in any way measure the duration or age of anything else "except" space.
    The time-block is only pertinent to the chronology of the space-block. Just as some bundled time-lines are associated with bundled physical chronological phenomena, and individual time-lines are associated only with individual chronologies.

    What else, other than space, is as old as the universe?
    How Old is the Universe? | Space
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2019
  17. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    Energy. is even older, it is the uncreated ingredient that the Universe's matter was converted from.
    "Other than space?"
    timespace is older than spacetime.

    Quote: "Planck measured the age of the universe at 13.82 billion years. June 8 2017. " Quote
    Planck who? I thought he died when I was 18.

    The Universe in the model, is sphere #3, it has moved through eternal time for 13 000 000 ooo+ what we now call years., which are only as a measure 4.5 00 000 000 years old, such little length in time chopped from an infinitely large dimension.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2019
  18. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    How do you know energy existed before the BB and was not generated during the BB?
    In association to what? Surely not space. Before space there was no space, no?
    Read my links.
    That is not mainstream cosmology, AFAIK.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    A 2013 map of the background radiation left over from the Big Bang, taken by the ESA's Planck spacecraft, captured the oldest light in the universe. This information helps astronomers determine the age of the universe. (Image: © ESA and the Planck Collaboration.)
    Related: What Is Big Bang Theory?
    https://www.space.com/24054-how-old-is-the-universe.html
     
  19. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    That is why it is posted in Alternative theories.
    A theory that by definition would provide s shift in outlook, which is happening all the time, against all odds.
    In the case of the hypothesis presented here, in the "ALMA" thread, that comprises the proven idea that
    energy is uncreated, therefore time that is required for its existence is uncreated too, hence eternal,
    predating the universe, with it's matter, which is a rather recent variant of energy.
    The COBE, PLANCK maps are impressive. thank you. pointing to a beginning in a point of time, in time, a dimension, which itself had no beginning.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2019
  20. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,819
    There is no proof of that at all. It is pure speculation. IMO, it is not even logical according to the laws of Cause and Effect.
    Energy cannot be causal to energy. That's circular reasoning.
     
  21. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    think about that. there is nothing circular to accept the fact, like it it not, that some advanced, or ancient concepts are just bigger than us, outside our reasoning power, evolved as we are just a mere few million years into reasoning.

    Circular reasoning would be to dream up a cause for the emergence of energy out of nothing, , and then an older cause for that nearest cause. Still , even then, for all that circular chain,

    you still would need time for all these causes to happen in. infinite time. a win win situation.

    There is interesting corollaries from the flatlander picture in an sphere expanding into time. The radius would be time, the curvature, indirectly discernible, would be a suspicious observation of the existence of that 1st dimension. Photons would come from all directions of the plane, from a smaller sphere, giving the impression you are in the center of the universe, when in fact you are at the cusp, moving into time. Time would be still loaded with energy, just like it was forever. The universe gaining energy (or keeping it constant) as it expands.
    flatlanders an victorian - era idea seen in modern light.
    All based on the idea , that laws of nature, one way or another extend into the distant past, thought not stranger than those of Penrose, Dirac the unknowns.
    thinking the unthinkable.
     
  22. nebel

    Messages:
    1,847
    If energy is indestructible, therefore uncreated, energy must be eternal, fundamental. It does not even have to be created. It needs no cause. but
    anything, even energy, or any condition, potential, needs time to exist in. from that chain of facts,
    The present alternate theory takes its base, the existence of time, field#1, through which we, being inside the membrane sphere #3 move into the future.
    To travel is better than to arrive. But no matter what,-- you have to be in time.
    Even if you want to introduce a cause, or, as required a chain of them, , like turtles all the way down,
    There has to be time for it all to happen in.
    You introducing "a cause" does not eliminate the need for time
    time has to be No.#1 as in the sketch. The paper it is happening on.
    At the least co-infinite with energy.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2019
  23. river

    Messages:
    12,062
    Disagree , not time . Space

    Energy and matter and Life need space . To exist .
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2019

Share This Page