Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 32

Thread: On past and ether

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    Just to tease you.

    1) Is there really a past? Or is there only a constantly changing universe that only exists in the present. If the past doesn't exist anymore (the balloon is hollow), then the future certainly doesn't exist. If all that exists is a present that spans no time, does time really exist? Wouldn't all measurement be illusory, because all measurement takes time?

    2) If all of space is evenly filled with cosmic background radiation from the big bang, doesn't this background radiation form a kind of de facto ether? Or If all of space is filled with virtual particles, don't these virtual particles form a kind of ether?


    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Argos on 2002-12-03 12:45 ]</font>

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    3,011
    On 2002-12-03 12:39, Argos wrote:
    If all that exists is a present that spans no time, does time really exist?
    Only in our usual concept.
    2) If all of space is evenly filled with cosmic background radiation from the big bang, doesn't this background radiation form a kind of de facto ether? Or If all of space is filled with virtual particles, don't these virtual particles form a kind of ether?
    Also, it foams a kind of rootbeer, too.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    872
    On 2002-12-03 12:39, Argos wrote:
    Just to tease you.
    Oh, you awful, awful tease!

    1) Is there really a past? Or is there only a constantly changing universe that only exists in the present. If the past doesn't exist anymore (the balloon is hollow), then the future certainly doesn't exist. If all that exists is a present that spans no time, does time really exist? Wouldn't all measurement be illusory, because all measurement takes time?
    What about the possibility that time is quantized, and that there is a "master clock" ticking away the chronons? Movement would be quantized, and the smallest particles would be jumping from square to square on the cosmic checkerboard, rather than "moving" as we sense motion. i.e., the cosmos is a big "motion picture" which is actually made up of successive stills.

    Personally, I suspect "the balloon is hollow," and that time-travel is a meaningless concept. But I don't have the math to prove it. Meanwhile, I'm a "many worlds" fan, and thus I would say that, from any instant, *all* possible futures branch off. The balloon divides like a mad bacterium!

    2) If all of space is evenly filled with cosmic background radiation from the big bang, doesn't this background radiation form a kind of de facto ether? Or If all of space is filled with virtual particles, don't these virtual particles form a kind of ether?
    Not exactly, since it takes an investment of energy to make the virtual particles real. They serve *some* of the functions the ether was supposed to serve -- but they also serve some of the functions that "forces" were supposed to serve. The strong nuclear force is actually a wash of pi-mesons indetectably (until you put in a lot of energy) holding the protons together. No one ever suggested *that* role for the ether!

    Silas


    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Argos on 2002-12-03 12:45 ]</font>
    [/quote]

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    872
    Um... Can someone explain why my message was edited by Argos?

    Maybe I was wrong about time travel!

    Silas

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    3,011
    On 2002-12-03 13:26, Silas wrote:
    Um... Can someone explain why my message was edited by Argos?

    Maybe I was wrong about time travel!
    Of course you are--watch out for the Geminids!

    But in this case, you merely copied the edit message from the previous post. Notice the dangling end quote.

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: GrapesOfWrath on 2002-12-07 13:08 ]</font>

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    514
    Look at the time. It was just part of the quote you took from Argos' post.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    561
    On 2002-12-03 12:39, Argos wrote:
    1) Is there really a past?
    I am writing this sentence now but you can see the words I have not yet written. To you, this comes from the past. To me, this is the present. And to the Argos who asked the question, I am in the future. We all exist in our own sections of the time-space universe, like rows of little houses on a street called time.

    On 2002-12-03 12:39, Argos wrote:

    2) If all of space is evenly filled with cosmic background radiation from the big bang, doesn't this background radiation form a kind of de facto ether? Or If all of space is filled with virtual particles, don't these virtual particles form a kind of ether?
    If space was filled with this radiation, then why would we have to spend so much time gathering photons to detect it?

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Argos' descendant on 2112-01-01 12:00 ]</font>

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    561
    [quote]
    On 2002-12-03 13:25, Silas wrote:
    What about the possibility that time is quantized, and that there is a "master clock" ticking away the chronons?
    [quote]

    I recently wrote an n-body program where time and space are in the digital domain. Unless I put a friction factor in space, quantization errors caused energy to increase in the system.

    So I turned on the friction and an interesting phenomena developed. The friction served to cool down the particles, allowing them to compress down to a point where the quantum errors and friction provided an equilibrium. If I added particles, then pressure from the outer ones caused the central ones to achieve more quantization errors, causing them to acquire sudden energies. More particles and BOOM... mini-novae. Even more and the particles thrown from the mini-novae would coalesce farther out into nodes that could get too big and explode as well, creating little clusters. Whenever 2 clusters merged, they would make a spectacular explosion, like fireworks on the screen.

    Even though this was in the flatlander's realm with a ridiculously enhanced error, it showed properties that you would expect (in a subtle version) from real space-time if you assume it to be in the digital domain.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    30
    Hmm sounds interesting. Can I have the code? Pleeeeease?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    561
    On 2002-12-03 17:26, Fruh-Batz wrote:
    Hmm sounds interesting. Can I have the code? Pleeeeease?
    Not yet. There's a bug in a settings dialog that is... well... embarrassing [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_redface.gif[/img]. When you change the settings and close the dialogue then open it again, some of the settings don't show the current config. I want to fix that before sharing the code.

    I did it in MS Visual C++ for windows API. I have a similar program in visual basic, but it is SLOW!

    Anyway, I'll let people know about it in a week or so when I get around to writing the dialogue update code.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    897
    On 2002-12-03 17:44, traztx wrote:
    On 2002-12-03 17:26, Fruh-Batz wrote:
    Hmm sounds interesting. Can I have the code? Pleeeeease?
    Not yet. There's a bug in a settings dialog that is... well... embarrassing [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_redface.gif[/img]. When you change the settings and close the dialogue then open it again, some of the settings don't show the current config. I want to fix that before sharing the code.

    I did it in MS Visual C++ for windows API. I have a similar program in visual basic, but it is SLOW!

    Anyway, I'll let people know about it in a week or so when I get around to writing the dialogue update code.
    Sign me up as well.

    The code sounds interesting. Why did you write it?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,405
    Without intelligence there is no such thing as time. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] -Colt

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,189
    Yes, the past is real. Time is a dimension that is tied up with the other three. You may only be able to move forward in time, but that's just becaues it's one dimensional. If it were two dimensional, you'd be able to rotate around and have all kinds of fun.

    Ether is a loaded term. It implies a medium that is "at rest" for propagation. Relativity sort of throws the "at rest" bit out the window so it's hard to say that the vacuum is an ether...

    However, the CMB is actually a convenient reference point to measure motion in the universe. It is not, though, the medium through which light travels so it is also not an ether.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    On 2002-12-03 13:25, Silas wrote:
    What about the possibility that time is quantized, and that there is a "master clock" ticking away the chronons? Movement would be quantized, and the smallest particles would be jumping from square to square on the cosmic checkerboard, rather than "moving" as we sense motion. i.e., the cosmos is a big "motion picture" which is actually made up of successive stills.
    It's an interesting approach. But I see some determinism in this idea. It seems to imply that the stills are "waiting" (in the future) to be projected. On the other hand, I think that quantum mechanics allow for such a discrete behavior of reality.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    On 2002-12-03 17:44, traztx wrote:
    On 2002-12-03 17:26, Fruh-Batz wrote:
    Hmm sounds interesting. Can I have the code? Pleeeeease?
    Not yet. There's a bug in a settings dialog that is... well... embarrassing [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img]ops
    Hey, Traztx, let us know when it's done. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    561
    On 2002-12-03 19:59, Wiley wrote:
    Sign me up as well.

    The code sounds interesting. Why did you write it?
    I love coding, especially if it's something visual.

    There was a program on the net that showed the Earth and Moon (not in proportion) and allowed you to add satelites and watch them interact. That inspired me to write this program. It's somewhat mesmerizing to watch the particles play with each other.

    I'm trying to figure out how to use the D3D DLL. If I can figure that out, I want to make a 3-D version that you can fly the camera through and watch again in real-time.

    Someday I hope to get a projector and have some of my programs running during my music performances.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    On 2002-12-04 11:36, traztx wrote:

    I love coding, especially if it's something visual.

    There was a program on the net that showed the Earth and Moon (not in proportion) and allowed you to add satelites and watch them interact
    Why don't you try "Flash"? ActionScript can do wonders. And it's less overhead, and easier to distribute.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    561
    On 2002-12-04 11:57, Argos wrote:
    Why don't you try "Flash"? ActionScript can do wonders. And it's less overhead, and easier to distribute.
    I don't speak java-nese yet, so the learning curve is a bit steep. Maybe if someone likes it they will port it.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    30
    As soon as you get that code ready, I think I'll make an OpenGL version of it. I like to do small pieces of GL code that do funky things.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    561
    I got the dialogue box all fixed up. The program is looking good. I'll zip it up into an install-shield and throw it onto my site tomorrow.

    For now, here are some screenshots showing various settings. Bear in mind, this is more art than physics. I wrote this for the visual effect more than any resemblence to reality...

    Confetti

    Deep Sky Gatherings

    Deep Sky Motions

    Maelstrom

    Marble Patrol

    Energy City

    Diving into the Blue

    Christmas Beads

    Stay tuned for the source and executeable (win32 only).

    -Tommy
    info@tommyraz.com




    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: traztx on 2002-12-08 03:29 ]</font>

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    561
    OK... installshield was confusing, so I just threw it into a zip.

    See if this works...

    www.tommyraz.com/nbodyplus1.0.zip

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    314
    If the past does not exist, then all my memories are lies. If the future does not exist, then I will not be able to experience the next second.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    149
    J S Princeton wrote
    "You may only be able to move forward in time, but that's just becaues it's one dimensional. If it were two dimensional, you'd be able to rotate around and have all kinds of fun."

    Why does the one-dimensionality of time only allow forard movement? A line goes both ways. Or is it only our perception of time that is one-way?

  24. #24
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    561
    Why does the one-dimensionality of time only allow forard movement? A line goes both ways. Or is it only our perception of time that is one-way?
    Good question. I think the past and future are both in the realm of our imagination, based on evidence we observe. For the past, we observe our memory cells or look for evidence left behind in our environment. For the future we have observational evidence that allows predictive thought.

    PS: I noticed the tails feature of my n-body sim mentioned earlier doesn't look good on some computers (the border pen is black instead of cycling thru colors). You might not get the same effect I got in the screenshots. Sorry.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    897
    Thanks for the program, traztx. I will try to compile it on my home computer tonight. Then I can really start playin' with it. BUWAHAHA! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Wiley on 2002-12-09 16:32 ]</font>

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    On 2002-12-09 14:18, traztx wrote:

    Good question. I think the past and future are both in the realm of our imagination, based on evidence we observe. For the past, we observe our memory cells or look for evidence left behind in our environment. For the future we have observational evidence that allows predictive thought.
    Our memories are a construct of the present, since we access them *now*. They are by no means evidence of the past, just as our dreams are no evidence of anything.

    Another interesting thing comes to my mind.
    The Principle Of Uncertainty states that we cannot determine the position and speed of a particle all at once. It doesn't say anything about the time the observation is being carried out. This not only implies that we cannot predict the future, but, also, that we cannot record the past. Since *past* is apparently perfectly definite, a snapshot of the wave function collapse in a given moment, doesn't it violate the uncertainty principle? Can we determine the position and speed of particles, under the condition that they are in the past?

    [Imagination is flying high. Maybe stupidity too, but someone once said that, when it comes to science, there is no such thing as stupid questions. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]]

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Argos on 2002-12-10 11:46 ]</font>

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    I liked those patterns (especially Maeltrom), traztx. Very cool. Keep coding. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    149
    Based on observation, it is quite apparent that there IS a lot of disagreeement about what took place in the past. Look at how much controversy arises in our interpretation of 'history'. It is well known how unreliable eye witnesses are. Only past astonomical events are tied down very well. However, the major events of the past are 'macro' events (such as finding the positon and velocity of any large object), and therefore can be determined fairly accurately without reference to the principles of quamtum mechanics.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    240
    Who says Ether theories are dead?

    http://www.magna.com.au/~prfbrown/aether.html

  30. #30
    Guest
    <a name="2-12-28.AEI"> page= 2-12-28.AEI aka AEItHOUR
    On 2002-12-28 08:17, Yul wrote:
    Who says Ether theories are dead?

    http://www.magna.com.au/~prfbrown/aether.html
    7:02 A.M. YEP! mY GUESS ? its alive and well?
    I rather doubt that "Physisists" will ever find it..
    Now Chemists? I thnk may be a WHOLE nother story
    probably biochemist in sPACIFIC
    archeao_Bio_chemist would be my guess as to who to ask? Ca? R U listening?

Similar Threads

  1. Can the ether just be electrons?
    By vincecate in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 2011-Jul-13, 05:37 PM
  2. Ether resurgent?
    By Harry Palmer in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 2007-Jun-05, 02:18 PM
  3. The Effects of Gravity’s Ether
    By Hans in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2007-Feb-19, 06:46 AM
  4. SR, ether, and Doppler shift
    By grav in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 2006-Aug-19, 02:17 PM
  5. Ether
    By peassens in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2005-Dec-08, 10:13 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •