Thoughts About Time

Understanding Time: About Spirits and Apparitions

AP Rajshekhar — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:18:16 +0000

Spirits, ghosts, apparitions whatever you call them, is a part of our daily staple for thought. There are various theories about them ranging from hallucination to them being ectoplasmic beings. However, not many have considered an alternative approach - approach based on dimensional theory. If you remember my last post, you will remember my theory about space being a 2-D entity with universe as structures within the same. Now let us take it a bit further. Any structure whether 2-D or 3-D cannot stop itself from vibrating. In other words, none of the structure, irrespective of shape and size, can be still If there is vibration, that means there is frequency associated with that structure.

Having different frequencies can enable different structures to occupy same spot. This means at a given point in space there can exist, multiple universes without knowing existence of each-other. Now, for a small duration if any two of them approach same frequency, they will become apparent to each other. Even though, they may pass through each other due to difference in frequency. At such an instant, the organisms (like us) will see the reflection or a hazy image of the organisms of the other structure. These hazy image, depending upon the neighborhood of the approaching frequency, may interact with our universe. To be precise, my theory is stated thus “When universes occupy same plane at different frequencies, due to unknown reason or reasons, approach a frequency that is in the neighborhood of the natural frequency of the universes, the organisms of each universe sees an image of the other The spirits and apparitions are these images “. In nutshell, ghosts are living being of other universes which interact with our universe at one or other point in time With this I wrap up my post Awaiting your comments and thoughts.

Understanding Time: The Fourth Dimension -II

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:10:15 +0000

The structure discussed in previous post is one of the many approaches towards visualizing 4th Dimension. It may be or it may not be. The reason is that there is no way to prove it. However, it can clarify the change in everything, including our body. Hence, visualization of time is possible to an extent. It also proves that as such the three dimensions are inert. The time brings about change and different structures are formed.

This leads us to the next level of our quest. It is beyond doubt that space is basically founded on intermingled dimensions. But what about its situation? I mean to say “Is space an independent unit or is it a constituent of some super-dimensional ultra-spatial structure?” By physics there are five basic dimensions – Length, Breadth, Height represented by Length. Apart from it Mass and Time are the other two. So all in all five dimensions Length, Mass and Time are the building blocks. All other dimensions are supplementary. But they are not beyond space. Hence, one can conclude that space is the ultimate super or ultra structure. This conclusion is accepted by almost all. All the theories about origin and fate of the universe is based on the assumption that space is all containing. Even parallel and alternate universes are also believed to be parts of this space. Yet one nagging query remains. At the time of Big Bang all the space was packed into singularity So where was the singularity enthroned? With this question I am wrapping up this post.

Understanding Time: The Fourth Dimension – I

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 13:56:05 +0000

Once the generalized view of Past, Present and Future has been discarded, the same question arises again What is time? Why is it so difficult to understand it? In my opinion the main hurdle is the inability to visualize the 4th Dimension w r t other three dimensions. The effect of time on matter is slow and gradual If space is considered for visualization, we can create a model or assume its shape. But how about time? There can be a possible answer i e space is completely surrounded by time just as globe is surrounded by space. If this is the case, it will be difficult to establish time’s existence. This brings us to the next step of questioning What is the relationship between space and time? Space is a three-dimensional specimen Hence space is dependent on dimensions. By this we can say that change in any dimension could change the structure of the space Suppose, three dimensions form a space having structure of a cube Fig a Fig b Fig c
Let Fig a be the reference space If any of the dimension’s distance from the origin is changed, or the direction of the orientation is changed, structure of space also changes. Now take a pt and join it to the origin. Taking this as a new dimension construct a structure(Fig c) resulting in a four-dimensional structure which demolishes its reference structure (Fig a) in its totality. If this 4th dimension is capable of manoeuvering the orientation, distance etc of other dimensions, we get an ever-changing space This 4th dimension is Time.

Understanding Time: Implications

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 04:12:15 +0000

In the last post I stopped at Paradox. The term Paradox is another head of the Hydra of questions that time and its related aspects presents to anyone who tries to understand it. So what does paradox really mean? Is it a theoretical ‘being’ or does it have a practical bearing? Dictionary meaning states that Paradox is a statement that seems contradictory but is really true. That means all the paradoxes that a person confronts (O K only in books) are true. But science stops anyone from believing anything unless it is experimentally proved. This implies that all theories concerning time (I am also generalizing as every theorist does) are more or less unfounded. Because, as I said earlier, one cannot trite the validity of a theory about any component of a system from within the system. By this the only conclusion that I can come is whatever theorems have been formed about time (I am leaving gravity out of it for the time being) are faux passé. The best example is the theory that Speeds greater than speed of Light is impossible to achieve The theorists prove it using E=mc^2. If speed approaches speed of light i e c, then m will approach infinity. Thus making ‘faster than light’ travel seemingly impossible. However, here the assumption is c is constant What if it is not? So due to these theorems I say that time based theorems are faux passé. This may seem radical and cruel but true Everything is based on an assembly of un-architectured structure.

However, I feel everything is not lost. Some of the bricks of the foundation are in their correct position. The task is daunting. Even then one cant quit trying. The tools in accomplishing this task is logic, capacitance of observation and perseverance I think this is a perfect conclusion for an imperfect introduction.

Understanding Time: More Questions

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 03:23:50 +0000

Starting of where I left off in the last to last post, by taking time as surrounding and universe as a system, the hypothesis of time suspension could be explained as “A phenomenon-product of system being isolated from surrounding by an intermittent force – the force being gravity”. But to prove this, the observation point needed is located outside the universe, reason being inability to deduce the pattern of kaleidoscope by observing it only from inside. This rule is applicable to all theories ranging from origin of the universe to ‘semi planetary placinra’. The vastness (not infinity) of space causes the problem in finding such observation points.

Coming back to our main problem of origin of gravity. However, this question need to be kept in back-burner for the time being as facts need to be processed. So I am moving onto next question It is a known fact that time brings about changes. These changes transform energy from one form to another. As I said before time and gravity are interlinked. So, change in one should not only affect the other but also there should be interchange of energies resulting in changes that will affect any dimension. That means if work is done against gravity why no change in dimension was not recorded? Even if such a change was recorded there is no agreement on the reason of change. So, what really happens to the body moving against gravity say with Mach-2 speed? The energy i.e. KE and PE gets stored and inter-converted. But don’t these energies cause any change in its basic dimensions? If so, then satellites should have some change, however small must have been there. Since, time is also a dimension, so there should be a time interchange or by complexity a Paradox With this dangler I am signing off this post.

Understanding Time: Of God and Souls

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 03:15:59 +0000

From my childhood I have heard a saying which roughly translates to “God’s form is time“. What does this essentially mean? Does this mean God is above and beyond time? Or does it mean that God is Time and Time is God? Let me take it on-by-one. If we suppose (not assume) that first one to be true i e God is above and beyond time, theen may of the powers of God can be understood. For instance, if God is beyond time, then everything will be like a frame-by-frame display to God who can become any part of any frame. So past, present and future will be literally out of the picture.

If the second one is taken to be true, then that means there is no difference between God and Time. Then omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of God are unquestionable. However, this brings another ‘power’ into focus. That is Energy The only component of this universe that is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent – just like God So can it be that Energy is God And the different forms are the forms taken by God on different occasions?

If God is Energy itself, then what does that tells us about Soul? Atma (Soul) is considered part of Paramatma (God) When Soul merges with God, then Moksha or Libration is attained. In the case of God being Energy, then Soul is a form of Energy. And death is nothing but the form of Energy (Soul) leaving the body Birth is Energy taking a different form. This can also imply that “All is one and One is All” is correct because everyone is one or other form of energy With this I sign off this post.

NB: The post is result of my discussion with one of my friends. This was only an attempt at a different look at the aspects of God and Soul.

Understanding Time: Blockades

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 03:08:35 +0000

Starting from where I left off yesterday, any attempt to answer the question about origin of gravity hits a logical blockade It is a known factor that without matter gravity cannot exist as “Gravity is the force with which a matter or particle attracts another particle provided both are not intermittent by other particles or anti-particles” If we take this statement as base, then gravity was non-existent before Big-Bang Then what was it that brought the substance (was it composed of particles?) of the pre-universe era, together to form dense matter? If answer to these question can be found then I am certain many a headaches can be cured But where to look for an answer? Our Milky Way, of course, or nearer, our Earth The force experienced by all must have an origin here itself Or is it possible that Earth is an inconsiderable unit of a super-system which have gravity as its surrounding and of which time is a forward-backward biased catalyst? There is also a possibility of being other way round i e universe-the system, time – the surrounding and gravity being the conductor of reactive input and effective output? If it is so then various phenomenon including different stages of universe can be explained with respect to properties intrinsic to gravity With this partial conclusion I am signing off Keep visiting for more

Understanding Time: Dimensions

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 03:02:22 +0000

Many things have been said about dimensions The scientific community is at agreement on the facts regarding fundamental dimensions But on the existence of 4+ dimensions, the opinion is fractured I am of the opinion that dimensions depend upon the mass and evolutionary stage of a star That means the prima factor is gravity If we look from this angle, gravity manipulates the dimensions According to Einstein’s theory of relativity, even time depends upon gravity In other words even time cannot escape clutches of gravity

If this fact is true then time variation will be least in a system nearest to (in space) to singularity i e a black hole However, black holes are of two types - stationary and spinning. Spinning black holes creates a circular gravitational field known as argosphereWhereas stationary ones are themselves gravitational batteries Any matter falling under its gravitational pull demolecularizes within seconds However, if a particle accelerates into argosphereand at instant ‘t’, it enters argosphere, then at that instant itself (t) an antiparticle accelerates out of it with release of energy This displays gravity’s prowess

From these facts, it is plain as pikestaff that gravity is a power, beyond any comparison, to reckon with If it is such a power, then its source should be, as logic suggests, a superior power But till date, I am waiting for a conclusive answer about its origin, central path of action and its fate Sir Issac Newton propounded the laws of gravity Even this law and its successors could not answer the preliminary questions – “How did gravity come into existence? Did it explode into centre stage with Big Bang or was it present even before ‘the Great Prelude’?”With these questions I am signing off this post I will continue on the same note So keep visiting

Understanding Time: Setting the Stage

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 02:53:56 +0000

Time and space – for me these two terms have been like a magnet I have always pondered over them – both from scientific as well as ‘non-scientific’ perspective In the coming days, I will be jotting down my ideas and thoughts about time So keep visiting

Time:

Everyday we use the term time ‘Everything depends upon time’, ‘There is a time for everything’ and so on But, what is Time exactly? How can one define time? There is a simple definition that has been going around it states Time is that can be measured But this definition arises another question - What is the yardstick for this measurement? From ancient time itself earth’s rotation and revolution has been the basis or yardstick for the measurement of time However, rotation and revolution varies So what are we left with? A whole bundle of misconceptions

Then you will ask what should be the basis? A basis should be a non-varient But is such an ideal, universal and non-variant basis available or can such a basis be found? Let me leave that question for the moment (for your ponderings) .Now next problem in understanding the working of time Change in every quantity is measured with respect to change in time If time’s measure change from one point in space to another, then how the measured change can be accurate? Thus, in short, all the derivatives of time are set on a foundation of transitory theorems

All the changes measured depend upon time, then on what does time depends? Is the dependency on ever changing orbits and orbital velocity? Or is it the frequency of atom (believed to be accurate)? But what of changes in them that occurs with changes in environment? These are questions that needs to be answered in order to understand time

In the upcoming posts I will try to put forward my thoughts, ideas and approach in answering these questions So keep visiting

Understanding Time – Is 'Present' really Present?

AP Rajshekhar — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:59:00 +0000

What is time? What are dimension? What is space? Was there an origin of space? What is the fate of time? Is the space-time continuum a reality? And last but not least are these inter-dependent or inter-related? These were some of the questions I have been asking in the last few posts. From this post onwards I will present answer to some of these as perceived by me. Also in the course of presenting the answer more questions will raise their heads.

To find answers to these question one must go to the root of the problem i.e. find out why time theory was required? The answer can simple (to accurately measure the work done) or complex (to find the transition periods of darkness and light with respect to their biological process or vice-versa). Let us take upon the simple one first. Hence, by the first probable answer, the time theory theory was propounded by unknown theorist or theorists to find the rate of work done. At first, there was day and night. Then as human beings evolved, time theory was institutionalized, building new blocks without triting the strength of the foundations.

Somewhere in between concept of present, past and future were added. However, no one contemplated on the factor of negligible existence of ‘Present‘. I mean to say that there is no infinitesimal being of ‘Present’. Past is the moment bygone. And future is the moment to come. But every moment to come is becoming moment begone within no ‘time’. So the time of transition from future to past is infinitessimally small. Therefore, in my opinion, the term Present has no significance in terms of time. It is nothing but generalization for the sake of ideal case. Please think about it. With that I am signing off this post.

After Notes: Thank you all once again for providing such valuable comments. Subra, the article you mentioned is correct. However, the scientific community is still divided as on whether the results were correct or manipulated. Himali, the c is a variable in many parts of the universe as it has been proved in a lab experiment. When light travels through freon at a particular temperature, light slows down by some 7 times which is not negligible. So in theory speed faster than light is possible. About the Everything is based on unarchitectured structures what I mean to say is that invariance of c is the basis of most of the speed – time related theories. When it is being proved that c is variable, then how can we say that all those theories are relaying on strong architectural foundation. @ thanks for the quotation. Can you detail me on the context so that I can use it in the future. With that I am signing off. Keep visiting and reading and commenting.