Comments on Time – Wikipedia

Time

Reference: Disturbance Theory

.

Time is the indefinite continued progress of existence and events that occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future. Time is a component quantity of various measurements used to sequence events, to compare the duration of events or the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change of quantities in material reality or in the conscious experience. Time is often referred to as a fourth dimension, along with three spatial dimensions.

Time is the experience of change. Such changes are from ephemeral to enduring. Continual changes have the characteristics of sequence. The sequence may reverse but from the viewpoint of experience the direction of change is always “forward”. Real time always refers to changes in physical extensions. Therefore, in the absence of matter and field there are no extensions and no time.

Time has long been an important subject of study in religion, philosophy, and science, but defining it in a manner applicable to all fields without circularity has consistently eluded scholars. Nevertheless, diverse fields such as business, industry, sports, the sciences, and the performing arts all incorporate some notion of time into their respective measuring systems.

Time has always been measured relative to changes in material aspects, whether in religion, philosophy, or science.

Two contrasting viewpoints on time divide prominent philosophers. One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe—a dimension independent of events, in which events occur in sequence. Isaac Newton subscribed to this realist view, and hence it is sometimes referred to as Newtonian time. The opposing view is that time does not refer to any kind of “container” that events and objects “move through”, nor to any entity that “flows”, but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz and Immanuel Kant, holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be travelled.

Newtonian time is measured objectively with respect to changes in matter. But Leibniz and Kant view time subjectively as an abstraction.

Time in physics is unambiguously operationally defined as “what a clock reads”. See Units of Time. Time is one of the seven fundamental physical quantities in both the International System of Units and International System of Quantities. Time is used to define other quantities—such as velocity—so defining time in terms of such quantities would result in circularity of definition. An operational definition of time, wherein one says that observing a certain number of repetitions of one or another standard cyclical event (such as the passage of a free-swinging pendulum) constitutes one standard unit such as the second, is highly useful in the conduct of both advanced experiments and everyday affairs of life. The operational definition leaves aside the question whether there is something called time, apart from the counting activity just mentioned, that flows and that can be measured. Investigations of a single continuum called spacetime bring questions about space into questions about time, questions that have their roots in the works of early students of natural philosophy.

The clock time is Newtonian time because a clock is made up of matter. When we consider field that underlies matter, the changes in the extension of the field appear as time, such that the extension and its change maintain a constant ratio ‘c’. In other words, the extensions of the field can change only at a certain rate determined by ‘c’. In abstract terms, neither space nor time can be considered independently of each other, as they occur in a fixed relationship.

Temporal measurement has occupied scientists and technologists, and was a prime motivation in navigation and astronomy. Periodic events and periodic motion have long served as standards for units of time. Examples include the apparent motion of the sun across the sky, the phases of the moon, the swing of a pendulum, and the beat of a heart. Currently, the international unit of time, the second, is defined by measuring the electronic transition frequency of caesium atoms. Time is also of significant social importance, having economic value (“time is money”) as well as personal value, due to an awareness of the limited time in each day and in human life spans.

The objectivity of time has improved with the discovery of the field. The subjectivity of time is felt very strongly as always.

.

November 1, 2017 – 9:13 PM Categories: P-Postulates | Post a comment

Space (Wikipedia) (old)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceSpace
Reference: Disturbance Theory

.

Parts from Wikipedia article are quoted in black. My comments follow in bold color italics.

Space – Wikipedia

Space is the boundless three-dimensional extent in which objects and events have relative position and direction. Physical space is often conceived in three linear dimensions, although modern physicists usually consider it, with time, to be part of a boundless four-dimensional continuum known as spacetime. The concept of space is considered to be of fundamental importance to an understanding of the physical universe. However, disagreement continues between philosophers over whether it is itself an entity, a relationship between entities, or part of a conceptual framework.

The above is an incomplete definition of space. This word “boundless” makes it a mathematical abstraction. Real space always describes the dimensional extent of something. If that something is not identified, then you do not have a complete description of space.

Our sense of space comes from the dimension of material objects. We assume space to be as rigid as these objects, but that doesn’t seem to go with reality. The above paragraph seems to admit to this incompleteness of definition.

Debates concerning the nature, essence and the mode of existence of space date back to antiquity; namely, to treatises like the Timaeus of Plato, or Socrates in his reflections on what the Greeks called khôra (i.e. “space”), or in the Physics of Aristotle (Book IV, Delta) in the definition of topos (i.e. place), or in the later “geometrical conception of place” as “space qua extension” in the Discourse on Place (Qawl fi al-Makan) of the 11th-century Arab polymath Alhazen. Many of these classical philosophical questions were discussed in the Renaissance and then reformulated in the 17th century, particularly during the early development of classical mechanics. In Isaac Newton’s view, space was absolute—in the sense that it existed permanently and independently of whether there was any matter in the space. Other natural philosophers, notably Gottfried Leibniz, thought instead that space was in fact a collection of relations between objects, given by their distance and direction from one another. In the 18th century, the philosopher and theologian George Berkeley attempted to refute the “visibility of spatial depth” in his Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision. Later, the metaphysician Immanuel Kant said that the concepts of space and time are not empirical ones derived from experiences of the outside world—they are elements of an already given systematic framework that humans possess and use to structure all experiences. Kant referred to the experience of “space” in his Critique of Pure Reason as being a subjective “pure a priori form of intuition”.

The reason the complete definition of space could not be discovered until now is because of the hidden reality of FIELD.  The existence of field was not known until it was discovered through extensive experimental observations made of the electromagnetic phenomena by Faraday. The space out there represents the dimensions of field. Field is the fundamental substance that fills the emptiness.

In the 19th and 20th centuries mathematicians began to examine geometries that are non-Euclidean, in which space is conceived as curved, rather than flat. According to Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity, space around gravitational fields deviates from Euclidean space. Experimental tests of general relativity have confirmed that non-Euclidean geometries provide a better model for the shape of space.

The conceptualization of space has mostly been philosophical and mathematical. Assumptions about space have been slowly discovered over time as in non-Euclidian geometry and general relativity. Now it will take a study of field to get a better understanding of space.

.

October 31, 2017 – 7:26 PM Categories: P-Postulates | Comments (1)

Energy and Cycle

All-sky illustration of all Hubble observations as of 27 June 20

Reference: Disturbance Theory

.

The characteristic of the field is “continual change”, which manifests itself in the form of endless CYCLES. Each cycle is an oscillation between electric and magnetic states. This oscillation is the source of quantization of ENERGY. Energy is the active substance that appears in all interactions and builds all phenomena including matter.

Field consists of cycles of ENERGY.

Each cycle has the same amount of energy. A cycle thus represents the ultimate unit of energy. The quantitative value of this unit is the Planck’s constant ‘h’, which is a universal constant.

A CYCLE represents a unit of energy.

The rate of recurrence of cycles is called FREQUENCY. As frequency increases, there are more cycles in a measured interval. So the density of cycles increases with frequency. Energy becomes more focused and substantial with increase in frequency. This can be shown by the  relationship

E = hf,

where E is energy, f is frequency, and h is the Planck’s constant.

 

Energy builds up with cycles. These cycles organize themselves in different phenomena. Energy can  be converted from one type of phenomenon to another. Such a conversion seems to conserve the cycles of energy. Thus comes about the law of Conservation of Energy.

Energy appears to conserve itself as the total number of cycles in the universe.

.

October 31, 2017 – 3:18 PM Categories: P-Postulates | Post a comment

Arts and Maths

Arts and Maths

Math and Arts are two very different subjects that lie at the opposite ends of a spectrum of “Expression of Life”. We express life in many different ways to explore and understand all different aspects of it. In my view, Arts is much more complex than Math. What is being expressed through music, theater and drama is millions of times more complicated than the expression of simple rules through arithmetic, algebra and geometry.

Mathematics is like trying to understand the dimensions of Arts in its atomic simplicity. A person who has mastered mathematics can truly appreciate Arts to its deepest dimensions. What an artist does intuitively, he can do it with much greater understanding and mastery, once he has understood mathematics.

We talk about being left-brained or right-brained… we talk about being analytical or intuitive… but these “opposites” are part of the same spectrum of understanding. Therefore, it is very possible that we can be both left and right brained, or both analytical and intuitive.

If you are an artist, just check out mathematics. You have some revelations coming your way.

.

October 31, 2017 – 8:07 AM Categories: Education | Post a comment

Inertia and Field

elec_mag_field

Reference: Disturbance Theory

.

The field maintains itself through continual change. This property of maintaining a status quo is called INERTIA. Inertia was first observed by Newton in the context of matter.

Newton defined inertia in his book “Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica” as follows:

The vis insita, or innate force of matter, is a power of resisting by which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavours to preserve its present state, whether it be of rest or of moving uniformly forward in a straight line.

The reality of field was not known at the time of Newton. Now we know that field is a substance more fundamental than matter. So the concept of inertia may now be extended to the electromagnetic field.

The electromagnetic field must form itself continually in each cycle in order to exist Permittivity (ε) is the measure of resistance that is encountered when forming an electric field in a particular medium. Permeability (μ) is a measure of how easily a magnetic field can pass through a medium.

The electromagnetic field forms in an empty background. For this formation the permittivity is ε0, and the permeability is μ0. Therefore, this formation faces a resistance equal to (μ0ε0). This resistance is a form of inertia.

The speed of light in the empty background is, c = 3 x 108 meters per second. This rate of propagation is finite because the formation of each cycle of light faces a finite resistance. If there were no resistance the speed of light shall be infinite.

There is relationship between the resistance to formation and the rate of propagation of light. This relationship is:

c = 1/√(μ0ε0)

The resistance “μ0ε0”represents the inertia of the electromagnetic field in the empty background. The units of “μ0ε0” are s2/m2.

Inertia, therefore, is an aspect of the very formation of substance.

.

October 31, 2017 – 7:47 AM Categories: Physics | Comments (3)