20150415

Matter and Time

Blog 20150415 

Dave had this comment on my “Time is Motion” Blog:

“I've always thought of time as a camera recording everything coming to be and ceasing to be, the ceaseless movement of matter. The camera being this precise moment -- now - a fixed point. If there was no movement down to the atomic and sub atomic levels the very notion of time would be irrelevant.”

Thanks Dave for your insight. Although time is really not a camera, I get the idea. In a sense, a picture freezes motion, which is time. The corollary is that if all motion stopped, all matter would disappear. This is another way of stating the Fourth Assumption of Science, inseparability (Just as there is no motion without matter, so there is no matter without motion).

This should help us confront the silly idea of time dilation. We might “dilate” the photo we took through enlarging it, but we could never do that with the motion that the camera cannot photograph. We can dilate the photo and the matter it depicts because those items have xyz dimensions. They exist, but motion does not. This “connection” between matter and motion is a necessity for the existence of the universe. This is also why a finite particle cannot exist. Such a particle would have to be filled with “solid matter,” which could not have anything within it that was in motion. Such a particle would defy the rule that motion is required for matter to exist. That is why we define matter as that which contains other matter, ad infinitum, per the Eighth Assumption of Science, infinity (The universe is infinite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions).     





3 comments:

Bligh said...

Assuming this is place to respond to Steve.
Fundamentally, time is motion. The ancient Greeks called it change. I like energy best, but that is vague also. The physical universe "changes" at an infinitesimal rate. The "state" of physical matter changes in an analogue fashion. Best thought of as a wave like form. The infinitesimal state changes are what we recognize as time evolution.
Is that more clear?
Bligh (George)

Glenn Borchardt said...

Bligh:

You wrote: "I like energy best, but that is vague also." [Sorry, but energy is not motion, it is a calculation. Energy neither exists nor occurs. It is a matter-motion term and thus is neither matter nor motion. Regressive physicists don’t understand energy either, mostly because they do not always adhere to the Fourth Assumption of Science, inseparability (Just as there is no motion without matter, so there is no matter without motion).]

You also wrote: “The physical universe "changes" at an infinitesimal rate. The "state" of physical matter changes in an analogue fashion. Best thought of as a wave like form. The infinitesimal state changes are what we recognize as time evolution.” [Sorry, but changes occur at varying rates, some fast, some slow, obviously. Individual microcosms do not have a wave-like form. Wave motion is group behavior. For instance, water waves are properties of trillions of water molecules. Also, time does not evolve. Both time and evolution are motions. So, that would be like saying that evolution evolves. Only microcosms can evolve, because only microcosms can move.]

Glenn Borchardt said...

Comment from Bligh:

“I have a theory that underlying matter and motion is a fundamental oscillation between two states, matter and anti-matter. Oscillation is motion and energy, whether you consider energy to be defined as an amount or not. It is analogous to motion. Oscillation is just a more specific type of motion.”
Sorry, but anti-matter does not exist. In neomechanics we define matter as an xyz portion of the universe that contains other matter ad infinitum. The anti-matter conception seems to derive from what happens during electron-positron annihilation in which oppositely spinning complexes of aether collide and disintegrate into a cloud of aether particles (Borchardt, 2009).

Sorry, but oscillation is motion, but it is not energy. Energy is a calculation, not a thing or a motion. It is not analogous to motion, but a matter-motion term that has no meaning without the concomitant matter, per the Fourth Assumption of Science, inseparability (Just as there is no motion without matter, so there is no matter without motion).

Reference:
Borchardt, Glenn, 2009, The physical meaning of E=mc2, in Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, Storrs, CN, v. 6, no. 1, 27-31.


Post a Comment

Thanks so much for your comment. Be sure to hit "Preview" to see if it will publish correctly. Then hit "Publish". Include your email address if you wish to receive copies of your comment as well as all other published comments to this Blog.

For those having trouble getting this comment section to work:

Nitecruzr writes:

[FAQ] Why can't people post comments on my blog?

The Blogger / Google login status, and the ability to post comments, is sensitive to both cookie and script filters. Your readers may need to enable (stop filtering) "third party cookies", in their browser and on their computer. The effects of the newly unavoidable CAPTCHA, and the Google "One account" login, requires third party cookies, even more than before.

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/11/the-google-one-account-login-and-cookie.html

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/comments-and-cookie-filters-october-2014.html

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/the-new-commenting-captcha-is.html

Third party cookies filtering, in a browser setting, is the most common solution, overall - but your readers may have to search for other filter(s) that affect their use of Blogger / Google.

Any filters are subject to update, by the creator. If the problem started a few days ago, your readers may have to look on their computers, and find out what product or accessory was updated, a few days ago.

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/01/almost-nobody-controls-their-own.html