Elvis Sibilia's Philochrony theory of everything

Perhaps the name River would not be correct for the dimension of time, but I chose it thinking of Isaac Newton who said: "time is like a river in which everything happens". That's a metaphor.
Yes, it is a powerful metaphor if you accept that time exists in the future where "nothing" has happened yet.
Therein lies the rub.
IMO, a more realistic metaphor for the future is a "timeless, dimensionless, permittive condition of nothingness"
 
Different opinions about time

I insist on the issue of time because there are many people (1) who think that it does not exist because it is not perceived. Another group (2) of people believes it is an illusion. And a third group thinks it's a dimension of space.

1) It is true that we do not have a sense to perceive time directly, but we do have an subperception of it. We have a perception of one moment now (A) and then another moment later (B). Between A and B there is continuity or connection.

2) The dimension of time or River is an illusion not time itself. It is necessary to differentiate between the objective time and its psychological dimension.

3) Time flows in only one direction, for this reason it cannot be a dimension of space. We go through the dimensions of space in two directions. In addition, a four-dimensional space cannot be represented.

When we listen to a song we notice that it has a duration (beginning and end) and the succession of sounds (voice and music) is continuity. To deny the existence of time is to deny the existence of phenomena and processes.
 
But are you not describing the emergence of a measurable chronology? Why does time have to exist before it becomes manifest as a duration of something? Unless attached to a physical event, time is immeasurable (non-existent), no?

Does your theory meet the requirements of Occam's Razor?

Note: "Uni-verse" translates into "single song".
 
Beyond the time and date

This is a revision to Philochrony's approach to time.
Every day we handle the measurements of time: the time and the date. But what is behind the time and date, and in general the measurement of time? Time is the duration of things subject to change delimited by a beginning and an end. Time is a physical quantity because it can occur in greater or lesser quantity. Let us remember that time is magnitive because it is objective, subperceptible and measurable. With the measurement of time we have an exact notion of the time elapsed or that which is about to elapse. If it were not for the measures of time each person would have their own measure and there would be no consensus on the time that passes.

Time has always been measured with a uniform periodic phenomena, such as the motions of the Earth and the Moon. The invention of the clock and the calendar are the instruments that have most influenced the life of man in societies to be more organized.

The philochrone person is one who understands accepts the ideas set forth in this topic.
 
Last edited:
Physics of time

Physics is the natural science that describes matter and energy and their relationship to space and time.
Changes are the indicator of time. An indicator is the device or signal that communicates or reveals a fact. Changes are characterized by having a beginning and an end, which is an interval. Time measurements are based on periodic intervals, so time is a physical quantity.
We observe time through changes, so time is subperceptible (magnitive).

The consequences of the greatest magnitude or amount of time are aging (humans), growth (plants), material decay, disorder (entropy) and the replacement of the old by the new. This is the Law of the passage of time.

In addition to being magnitive, time is irreversible. It is this principle of irreversibility that prevents travel into the past.

Intuition is the method I have used to reach conclusions in Philochrony.
 
Asexperia has worked long and hard and must be tiring by now, hands cramping from typing. I have created a tool to help the rest of us continue his good work.

It is called the >>> Philochronizer! <<< click here

Simply click the Philochronify! button to generate randomized, philochroniferous word salad.


Time is the periodic interval of Philochrony.

'Duration' is the magnitive dimension that measures time.

Philochrony is the periodic dimension of space.


'Becoming' is the magnitive dimension of space.
 
Last edited:
It is called the >>> Philochronizer! <<< click here

Simply click the Philochronify! button to generate randomized, philochroniferous word salad.


Time is the periodic interval of Philochrony.

'Duration' is the magnitive dimension that measures time.

Philochrony is the periodic dimension of space.


'Becoming' is the magnitive dimension of space.

You don't have valid arguments to refute my ideas, so you resort to irrational ideas, without logic.
 
You don't have valid arguments to refute my ideas, so you resort to irrational ideas, without logic.
  1. I have no need to refute your ideas; they're just ideas. I have an idea that the world is powered by pixie dust.
  2. The onus is not on your opponents to refute anything; the onus is on you to make your case.
  3. What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Roll a D3.
 
Time: 1D sequential space

First, time is the 1D sequential space created by the continuous succession of irreversible changes bounded by a beginning and an end. Changes go from the past to the future through the present creating the 1D sequential space (1D SS). You might think that the 1D SS is an illusion, but it is objective and it is what clocks measure.

A time interval is a 1D sequential space created by the succession of changes. The beginning and end of changes are the frame of reference in 1D SS. The measure of the 1D SS is the length of the interval. Time is done on changes, which are its indicator. In 3D ordinary space (3D OS) the points are fixed, static. Objects move in it. The coordinate axes are the frame of reference.

Although the concept of space is used to explain time, these are independent entities. As we have already seen, the points of space are static and changes dynamic. Time is a continuous doing, changing.

In conclusion:
1) Time is equal to 1D SS (subperceptible), but different from changes (perceptible).
2) 1D SS is the nature of time.

Asexperia
 
Last edited:
Time in Physics and Philochrony

This is the first time that I relate Physics and Philochrony regarding the subject of time. For physics, time is what clocks measure (Albert Einstein). According to Wikipedia, time is the physical magnitude with which the duration or separation of things is measured. But these definitions are incomplete because, what do clocks measure? Time. With this we would fall into a vicious circle. In the definition of Wikipedia, what is duration ? For some physicists, including Julian Barbur, time is an illusion, it does not exist. Isaac Newton resorted to a metaphor to explain time. Newton said that time is like an invisible river in which everything happens. Physics is about material and tangible objects, and time is intangible. Time is imperceptible and unobservable to physical equations.

For Philochrony time is derived from the word interval. So time is the distance or separation between two sequential moments one of which occurs before and the other after. For this reason time is 1D sequential space.

It is already known that time is magnitive, that is, objective, subperceptible and measurable. It is objective because the intervals are real. It is subperceptible because we do not perceive the intervals at once, but we see the beginning before and the end after. It is obvious that it is measurable by means of periodic phenomena.

In conclusion:
Physics provides the tools to measure time, clocks. Philochrony proves the existence of time and provides a theory about its nature.
 
Last edited:
What if we looked at this from a different perspective.

Can we say;
a) Time is neither causal nor physical.
b) Time does not exist except as a measurement of any physical chronology with a known beginning and a known end.
c) Time is a passive emergent relative result of "duration"
d) Time has no fundamental independent dimensional existence other than as a mathematical permission.

What say you?
 
The becoming-duration duality (B-D)

This is a revision to the concept of becoming-duration.
Time is the duration of things subject to change (becoming) that determines periods and epochs. The concept of time encloses those of becoming and duration. Becoming is the continuous succession of irreversible changes that go from the past to the future through the present.

Duration is the permanence of things in reality from a beginning to an end. This is the complexity of time. The becoming and durationc complement each other to constitute time. Becoming without duration is eternity. In watches the movement of the hands is the becoming and the numbers and marks are the duration.
Time is not only what we read on a clock, we must think about the concepts of becoming and duration.

A summary of time is that it flows (becoming) originating the different intervals (duration).
In conclusion, time is a duality: becoming-duration = time. Spacetime is a mathematical structure invented by Albert Einstein based on the equation t = d/s, where s is the speed of light or c.
 
Last edited:
Philochrony is a science

A science is composed of true knowledge verifiable by experience. Philochrony proposes that time is magnitive and also proposes the Becoming-Duration Duality.
Magnitive time is objective, subperceptible and measurable. We verify the continuous succession of irreversible changes (becoming) that go from the past to the future through the present. Becoming is objective.
We verify that events have a start (before) and an end (after). Duration is subperceptible.

We also verify that clocks give us an accurate measure of the passage of time.
As for the becoming-duration duality we verify that there is no becoming without duration and duration without becoming.

For a time I considered Philochrony as a theory, but that limited the study of Philochrony, which is the science that describes the nature of time and proves its existence.
Chronology and Chronometrics are disciplines of Philochrony
 
Last edited:
For a time I considered Philochrony as a theory, but that limited the study of Philochrony, which is the science that describes the nature of time and proves its existence.
Chronology and Chronometrics are disciplines of Philochrony
If I understand you correctly, you do not propose that time already exists in the future, right?
I believe you demonstrated how time comes into existence in the present.
 
Philochrony is a science
No, it really isn't, as far as I can tell.

It makes no testable, quantitative predictions that I'm aware of, for example.

Sure, it refers to a few things that we already know about, but it's sort of an ad hoc gluing of new terms to existing concepts.

Does it do anything better than existing scientific theories? Does it fix any errors or gaps in knowledge in existing theories? Not that I've seen so far.

Is it falsifiable? If not, it's probably not science. What is a test we could do to check whether it is false?
 
It makes no testable, quantitative predictions that I'm aware of, for example.
More specifically, does it make any predictions that are distinct from our current standard models, such that that prediction could be a litmus test of falsifiability.
For example if it predicts property x to be negative, contrary to our current model's positive, then we might test property x to see if it is + or -.
If it does not do that, we might as well just stick with our current models.
 
Back
Top