Constructing Time from an Axiom

[arfa brane]

5......….Let P_T advance by one (rotate relative to S_1,2,3) at regular intervals.

I'm sorry, but can you explain what a regular interval means, here? If it means a regular interval of time, what happened to your "construction of time", if you simply introduce it?

In mathematics, a rotation is simply a thing that exists (and you can prove it! quite easily with geometry and some symbols), you don't have to rotate anything in "real time"; time isn't in the picture at all.

 

[Willem]

Can you describe time as an axiom, or whatever, with use of only real numbers?

Yes, but then there isn't a nice distinction of even and odd components of the space.

Slow down, I still have no idea what you're thinking with Plato's Forms.

It is used as a justification for using mathematical operators.

 

[Willem]

I'm sorry, but can you explain what a regular interval means, here?

Regular intervals are the same angular momentum. Constant angular momentum.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Yes, but then there isn't a nice distinction of even and odd components of the space.

Well, show me?

 

[Willem]

Well, show me?

See the following file: https://www.dropbox.com/home?preview=4D.png

 

[DaveC426913]

See the following file: https://www.dropbox.com/home?preview=4D.png

No problem. Just post your username and password.

 

[Willem]

This is false: S is two dimensional.

C is two dimensional numbers, 2x2 = 4.

Transform how? And what does "capture numbers" mean?

2 is not essential in the derivation, it becomes clear later (I am continuing to derive more physics).

What is the Riemann Circle of S_4?

The Riemann Sphere's imaginary part. That must read S_3, 4.

There's nothing dynamic about it.

You must imagine the Riemann Circle rotating clockwise. There is dynamics.

Now please prove that the name fits

It ticks over like a clock, it depends on the proto-particles's (RS x RS) state, and I must just add a recording ability to the proto-particles to correspond to the past.

 

[Willem]

there are two (number 2) due to symmetry.

​

Symmetry is broken by item 4.

Thank you for your input.

​

 

[Willem]

No problem. Just post your username and password.

You must use your own username and password. You must register an account.

 

[NotEinstein]

Regular intervals are the same angular momentum. Constant angular momentum.

Your argument is circular: angular momentum needs time per definition, so you are assuming time exists in order to prove that time exists.

C is two dimensional numbers, 2x2 = 4.

So mass is also two dimensional according to you? ( http://sciforums.com/threads/pi-minus-decay-conserves-parity.161763/#post-3570832 )

2 is not essential in the derivation, it becomes clear later (I am continuing to derive more physics).

That doesn't answer my question. You wrote something down, which (without giving definitions or an explanation what you mean) is gibberish.

The Riemann Sphere's imaginary part. That must read S_3, 4.

How can a sphere have an imaginary part?

You must imagine the Riemann Circle rotating clockwise. There is dynamics.

Your argument is circular: you are assuming ongoing rotation which needs time per definition, so you are assuming time exists in order to prove that time exists.

It ticks over like a clock,

Only because you assumed time exists before. Your argument is circular.

it depends on the proto-particles's (RS x RS) state,

Time depends on the presence of (proto-)particles? Not according to science.

and I must just add a recording ability to the proto-particles to correspond to the past.

Why is a recording ability required?

Symmetry is broken by item 4.

And since item 4 is similar to item 2, it's also broken by item 2.

Thank you for your input.

Instead of thanking me, why don't you go and learn science instead of these imaginations unhindered by knowledge of it?

 

[Tiassa]

Mod Hat — Inquiry

You must use your own username and password. You must register an account.

So, are you just spamming for a software company, then?

To be clear: You are making strange assertions and posting, as support, nondescript links requiring others to register for another private firm's website, thereby giving it things of value, in order to view your allegedly scientific information. If you're pushing your own thesis, be prepared to appropriately support it; burying the information behind walls like that is inappropriate. To the other, if you're simply here to advertise for a private software firm, stop.

 

[NotEinstein]

Mod Hat — Inquiry



So, are you just spamming for a software company, then?

To be clear: You are making strange assertions and posting, as support, nondescript links requiring others to register for another private firm's website, thereby giving it things of value, in order to view your allegedly scientific information. If you're pushing your own thesis, be prepared to appropriately support it; burying the information behind walls like that is inappropriate. To the other, if you're simply here to advertise for a private software firm, stop.

I think Hanlon's Razor applies here. Willem (before trying to use Dropbox) posted a link to his local hard drive. I think it's just a case of severe "digital illiteracy". (Just my opinion though.)

 

[Willem]

Your argument is circular: angular momentum needs time per definition,

I thought I got away from that sort of thing: try to define the speed of time. It's a hidden circularity the way I stated it.

Why is a recording ability required?

I imagine particles has a log book of states at regular times. This is required for information not to get lost.

 

[NotEinstein]

I thought I got away from that sort of thing:

Well, clearly you didn't.

try to define the speed of time.

"Rate". The word you are looking for is "rate".

And it's not so difficult: 1 second per second (assuming you're comparing the same clocks).

It's a hidden circularity the way I stated it.

So now that it's out in the open, and your argument has been shown to be bad; care to re-formulate, and remove the circularity?

I imagine particles has a log book of states at regular times.

Please provide evidence that particles have such a log book. Any evidence would be nice. (And probably Noble prize worthy!)

This is required for information not to get lost.

False. Log books like that are not required to "not lose information"; information theory is quite clear on this.

 

[DaveC426913]

You must use your own username and password. You must register an account.

No one's going to register with Dropbox just to see a picture you put there.
Just attach the .png here. There's an upload file button in the lower right corner of the editing window.

 

[Willem]

Your argument is circular: angular momentum needs time per definition

care to re-formulate, and remove the circularity?

I can define "regular intervals" in terms of space and then require quantum rotations. Here goes: define equal lengths on the circumference of the circle, this is regular intervals.

I can't find the upload button. The picture button needs a url.



.

 

[Willem]

How can a sphere have an imaginary part?

It comes from the imaginary number plain it is the i-axis.

 

[Willem]

So, are you just spamming for a software company, then?

No!

 

[Willem]

Here is the picture:

 

[Willem]

And it's not so difficult: 1 second per second (assuming you're comparing the same clocks).

Then you got to define some clock as more fundamental than the other one.