World Lines & (x, y, z, t)

lpetrich said:
(space is fundamental but time isn't)

Not it isn't. Einstein-thumping is not a very good argument, and what's worse, Einstein agreed with me and not you.

On the contrary, I agree with him on space and time -- time is much like an extra space dimension, part of a space-time continuum. But what would it matter if I disagree with him on something? He's not some inspired prophet of revealed truth. Farsight, your arguments are the sorts of arguments a theologian would make, not a scientist.

From my graduate-school years and from studying the professional literature, mathematics and all. You have mainly been working from sources comparable to the Discovery Channel and New Scientist.


He was trying to explain GR in nontechnical terms, much like the Discovery Channel and New Scientist. What you have been doing with it is quote mining it, like a creationist about evolution.


That's the sort of stupidity one sees from creationists. Like a creationist asking how a bird's wings had evolved from a wingless body. This ignores a rather elementary fact of comparative anatomy: birds' wings are front limbs, so existing front limbs were modified into wings. Farsight, I keep on seeing similar elementary blunders from you.

That's a VERY lame approach to bibliographies. Even very informal ones.
Click to expand...

That sums it up. You're spanking him with the analogy he loves so much. Farsight the creationist theologian. LOL.
 
Write4U said:
questions:

Does tomorrow's space already exist?

Does tomorrow's time already exist?

Does tomorrow already exist?
Click to expand...

Good questions. I'm going with yes for the space we'll be occupying tomorrow. Though that's probably wrong but I can't figure out why. The other two I'm going with no.
 
Time exists...if it did not exist, neither would space.....if space and time did not exist, neither would anything else.
The Universe evolved space and time [now called space/time] and everything depends on those two realities...
Philosophical claptrap aside.
 
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Lee Smolin on the nature of time

Lee Smolin – author of the new book Time Reborn – thinks that time is real. In fact, as he tells Margaret Harris in this podcast, he believes that time is so real that everything – even the supposedly timeless laws of physics – is subject to it

see....
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/multimedia/2013/sep/23/lee-smolin-on-the-nature-of-time
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::




Similar in many ways to Sean Carroll's explanation on the reality of time.
 
paddoboy said:
Time exists...if it did not exist, neither would space.....if space and time did not exist, neither would anything else.
Click to expand...

Space is infinite 3 dimensional distance (infinite volume). How could that not exist? How could space possibly NOT exist? Space is inevitable, there is no alternative to space.
 
Dinosaur,
An atom/molecule which moves some distance from the object is no longer a member of the set. Its World Lines are no longer related to the other World Lines in the set.

An atom/molecule which moves from some distance & becomes part of the object becomes a member of the set: Its World Line is now a member of the set.

Atoms/molecules which change their configuation are still part of the set.

The above model describes a 4D Space-Time continuum which is static: There is no motion.
Click to expand...
world
I am sure I am missing something , but how can you describe motions of atoms as part of "world lines" (time)) and come to the conclusion that "there is no motion" in the spacetime continuum.

I always thought that change (motion) was causal to the time part of spacetime. I admit, I base this on David Bohm's hypothesis of a "holomovement"

The holomovement is a key concept in David Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics and for his overall worldview. It brings together the holistic principle of "undivided wholeness" with the idea that everything is in a state of process or becoming (or what he calls the "universal flux"). For Bohm, wholeness is not a static oneness, but a dynamic wholeness-in-motion in which everything moves together in an interconnected process. The concept is presented most fully in Wholeness and the Implicate Order, published in 1980...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holomovement
Click to expand...
 
Motor Daddy said:
Space is infinite 3 dimensional distance (infinite volume). How could that not exist? How could space possibly NOT exist? Space is inevitable, there is no alternative to space.
Click to expand...

questions:
a) did space exist before the BB?
b) could space exist without time?
c) is spacetime "infinite"?
 
Write4U said:
questions:
a) did space exist before the BB?
Click to expand...

Yes, the infinite volume of space is inevitable. Like I said, there is no alternative to space. How could space not exist? Space is not created or destroyed, it just is!

Write4U said:
b) could space exist without time?
Click to expand...

Space is volume. Time is duration. They are both inevitable. There is no alternative to either. We are trapped in space and time! ;)

Write4U said:
c) is spacetime "infinite"?
Click to expand...

Space is infinite volume. There is infinite time in the past and future, but we use time to measure from point to point, and that's finite!
 
Motor Daddy said:
Space is infinite 3 dimensional distance (infinite volume). How could that not exist? How could space possibly NOT exist? Space is inevitable, there is no alternative to space.
Click to expand...

Space and time as we know them, evolved from the BB.
WMAP has shown the Universe/space/time to be overall flat....which does indicate the Universe is infinite.
But I don't believe we can be sure of that.
 
paddoboy said:
Space and time as we know them, evolved from the BB.
WMAP has shown the Universe/space/time to be overall flat....which does indicate the Universe is infinite.
But I don't believe we can be sure of that.
Click to expand...

Space did not evolve. Space is volume, and there is nothing to volume other than 3 dimensional distance. There's nothing to distance except 1 dimensional space. Light is the standard.
 
Motor Daddy said:
Space did not evolve. Space is volume, and there is nothing to volume other than 3 dimensional distance. There's nothing to distance except 1 dimensional space. Light is the standard.
Click to expand...

Space did evolve, along with time.
They evolved at the instant we call the BB.
The Universe space/time is expanding from that point....
The CMBR is the relic heat from that period.....
The abundance of hydrogen and some Helium, show how matter evolved from energy and the decoupling of the Superforce.
That is the standard cosmological picture which is well supported at this time and has no peer.
 
When we say the Universe/space/time evolved at the BB, we do not mean it evolved from a point in space.
The BB happened everywhere at the same time, since everywhere was what evolved from the BB...in other words space and time.
The BB did not start in space. It was the evolution of space.....and time.
Our understandings and explanations as to what happened, cease at t=10-43 seconds...or the first Planck instant.
Any further back then that is sheer speculation.
 
paddoboy said:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Lee Smolin on the nature of time

Lee Smolin � author of the new book Time Reborn � thinks that time is real. In fact, as he tells Margaret Harris in this podcast, he believes that time is so real that everything � even the supposedly timeless laws of physics � is subject to it

see....
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/multimedia/2013/sep/23/lee-smolin-on-the-nature-of-time
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Similar in many ways to Sean Carroll's explanation on the reality of time.
Click to expand...

I like exploration of alternative theories about space and time, but from what I heard, Smolin's arguments are vague, confused and completely unpersuasive.
Ms Harris also seemed to have her doubts.

The whole thing reminds me of the Carlin's 'Hippy Dippy Weatherman"
 
Motor Daddy said:
That point that you say space evolved from...that point is a point in space. Space did not evolve, the contents of space evolved. Space is infinite volume, irrespective of the contents.
Click to expand...
I thought I might speak up here. MD, you are of course singing my song. Space is infinite and has always existed unless you believe in a beginning of space and time. That statement is hard to disagree with, but I'm sure someone will, but the point is about "nothingness".

I have been asking those who believe in a beginning to tell me their view on it, i.e. is it "something from nothing"? What's with that? How could you define "nothingness" in such a way that something could come from it?
 
paddoboy said:
When we say the Universe/space/time evolved at the BB, we do not mean it evolved from a point in space.
The BB happened everywhere at the same time, since everywhere was what evolved from the BB...in other words space and time.
The BB did not start in space. It was the evolution of space.....and time.
Our understandings and explanations as to what happened, cease at t=10-43 seconds...or the first Planck instant.
Any further back then that is sheer speculation.
Click to expand...

Speculate all you want, your speculations can't remove space or time, they are inevitable. You measure the time from the BB all you want to, that in no way affects any other object's measured duration in space. There were objects in space long before the BB. Mass evolves to space!
 
Write4U said:
questions:
a) did space exist before the BB?
b) could space exist without time?
c) is spacetime "infinite"?
Click to expand...

Eternal Inflation [all inflation theories] predict that our universe is a component of a multiverse of inflating universe. The inflation events are Eternal into the future while the origin of the multiverse is hidden [behind an event horizon] in the past. So inflation theory predicts a future and a past where inflation events occur. The standard model of cosmology predicts the [cosmological] distance between non gravitationally bound systems is expanding.
The experimental results from WMAP predict our universe had a beginning but is infinite in extent. Spatially flat.
 
Motor Daddy said:
That point that you say space evolved from...that point is a point in space. Space did not evolve, the contents of space evolved. Space is infinite volume, irrespective of the contents.
Click to expand...

I don't look at it as a "point IN space". Before the BB there was no space, there was only a point (singularity) from which our "reality of spacetime" originated.
 
Write4U said:
I don't look at it as a "point IN space". Before the BB there was no space, there was only a point (singularity) from which our "reality of spacetime" originated.
Click to expand...
I wanted to ask you, did the point in space come from nothing? Or do you just say we can't know because, after all, it was a singularity?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top