Search FQXi

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Previous Contests

Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest
December 24, 2019 - March 16, 2020
Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Jeff Schmitz: on 10/4/12 at 11:53am UTC, wrote I wish I knew why my rating is only 1 (I am thankful there is no zero...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 5:36am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

John Merryman: on 9/3/12 at 16:24pm UTC, wrote Jeff, You give a very clear and concise description of time as emergent...

Steve Dufourny: on 9/3/12 at 13:40pm UTC, wrote You know Mr.Smitz, I ask me what is this specific cooling since this BB.The...

Steve Dufourny: on 9/3/12 at 13:26pm UTC, wrote The times is indeed defined proportionaly with its entropy.That said this...

Jeff Schmitz: on 9/3/12 at 13:07pm UTC, wrote Entropy defines time, it does not change its rate (since rate is defined by...

Vladimir Tamari: on 9/3/12 at 0:25am UTC, wrote Hi Michael I enjoyed your leading with Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s concept of time...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Robert McEachern: ""At least that's the premise." That's the problem. "the theorems that..." in Alternative Models of...

Malcolm Riddoch: "@Robert: ""This latter, Ψ(U), can't describe a 'drug test' can it?" For..." in Alternative Models of...

John Cox: "Lorraine, I briefly described the relationship of mass to inertia..." in Emergent Reality: Markus...

Lorraine Ford: "John, I would say that you need to think what you mean by “physical..." in Emergent Reality: Markus...

Lorraine Ford: "Re "I tend to speed-read then review before scoring after reading a good..." in Undecidability,...

John Cox: "George, We shouldn't conflate contradiction with inconsistency. QM has a..." in Watching the Watchmen:...

John Cox: "Georgi, by and large I agree. Near the end of the discussion panel,..." in Watching the Watchmen:...

RECENT ARTICLES

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

FQXi FORUM
January 24, 2020

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Billy Pilgrim Blues by Jeffrey Michael Schmitz [refresh]

Author Jeffrey Michael Schmitz wrote on Aug. 31, 2012 @ 12:07 GMT
Essay Abstract

We have time all wrong. Time is very important, but it is not a fundamental thing. Time is a function of entropy. What I mean by this, why I think this is important, what indications exist that show time is a function of another quantity and how this effects how we understand physics will be explored.

Author Bio

Jeffrey Schmitz has his Masters in Physics from the University of Tennessee. He has taught Astronomy, Physics and Physical Science as an adjunct instructor at seven different colleges in and around Chicago.

Ted Erikson wrote on Aug. 31, 2012 @ 19:50 GMT
Jeffery:

Cute essay on meaning of time and entropy. As I wrote my essay, I brought up the problem of reversibility, citing how would one cause a 3-D configuration of energy (or mass) change and return to the original configuration, e.g. like the 1-D reversible work done by two weights hanging on a pulley.

If interested, maybe you might read my essay, comment, and rate (high, preferred, heh heh)

To Seek Unknown Shores

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1409

Thank you, more fuel on the fire..

Ted

report post as inappropriate

Jeff Schmitz replied on Aug. 31, 2012 @ 20:19 GMT
Thank you. There are so many essays to read, but I am looking forward to reading your work.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 31, 2012 @ 20:12 GMT
Hello from Belgium,

a function of entropy and a constant implied by the rotations of spheres and is also a pure irreversible duration.

The heat is also a variable relevant !!!

Stirling will agree isn't it ?

Regards

report post as inappropriate

Jeff Schmitz replied on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 13:07 GMT
Entropy defines time, it does not change its rate (since rate is defined by time). Heat as it relates to entropy is important, but it is not a direction relationship. You brought up a good point about rotational systems. There are many ways to increase entropy, I wanted to keep things simple to keep me point clear.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 13:26 GMT
The times is indeed defined proportionaly with its entropy.That said this time is purely irreversible in its generality of evolution.

The rate, the duration is implied by the rotations of spheres. Our internal clocks are purely linked with universal duration. Time and entropy are linked indeed, the entropy increases due to evolution and so the polarizations between these fermions and bosons. The time, it , is just a constant implied by these rotations implying so a duration.

There are many ways indeed to increase entropy.The steps are complex and so simple spiritually speaking. The entropy is fractalized ina pure therùmodynamical logic.See the proportions with the rotations of spheres, insert the volumes of the serie of uniqueness and insert the rotations spinal and orbital.

The entropy and its steps of disponible energies is fascinazting when we consider the entropical aroow of times and its pure irreversibility correlated with the rotations implying the duration of evolution. all is proportional in fact....

Regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 13:40 GMT
You know Mr.Smitz, I ask me what is this specific cooling since this BB.The main central sphere, the most important BH where all turns around, is fascinating. If this entropy increases in the physicality and in the same time, we can consider the infinite light above the walls of our universal sphere, quant. and cosmol.So it implies several interesting extrapolations about the infinity and infinities. In fact, the classment will permit to see better the increasing of entropy.It is paradoxal about the infinite light above our physicality.Considering a finite entropy in increasing inside this universal physical sphere and its spheres. The rotations like the time are purely and universaly linked.

Ps in my line of reasoning, the universal sphere does not turn, implying a maximum mass at its present analyze. The mass increases proportionaly with entropy.And the duration implyied by the rotating spheres is irreversible.

Regards

report post as inappropriate

Member Benjamin F. Dribus wrote on Sep. 1, 2012 @ 01:09 GMT
Jeffrey,

Interesting essay. When I first learned about the relationship between entropy and the arrow of time as a young student, I imagined I could build a "time machine in a box" by decreasing entropy in a certain region at the expense of entropy increase elsewhere. Of course, you could immediately ask "decrease entropy with respect to what?" and if the answer is "time," you are no further along.

In any case, there's no question that entropy and time are intimately linked. I eventually came to the view that time is a way of talking about cause and effect, and that entropy determines in a sense which causal relations are most likely. At large scales, this might amount to the same thing as viewing time as a manifestation of entropy, but not so much at smaller scales. If you're interested, I explain these things somewhat in my essay:

On the Foundational Assumptions of Modern Physics

Take care,

Ben Dribus

report post as inappropriate

Jeff Schmitz replied on Sep. 1, 2012 @ 02:52 GMT
Ben,

Time being a function of entropy seems the most important in the small scale. Undefined time leads to undefined space. Quantum mechanics is all about undefined position.

Jeff

report post as inappropriate

James Lee Hoover wrote on Sep. 1, 2012 @ 17:03 GMT
Jeff,

You say that time is a function of entropy. You don't use the concept of an atomic clock because entropy is impacted there too? The second law of thermodynamics states that entropy tends to increase in an isolated system. Thus time is not fundamental?

Jim

report post as inappropriate

Jeff Schmitz replied on Sep. 1, 2012 @ 21:08 GMT
Jim,

Entropy is needed for an atomic clock to function. An atomic clock is a steady state device, as in a Carnot engine (or any real engine) you need an energy flow from heat source to a heat sink for useful work to be produced. In the case of an atomic clock, our useful work is a highly exact radio signal, but the clock itself still requires a power source and cooling to function. The overall entropy of the universe is increased by an atomic clock.

Entropy increases for an isolated system and time still "goes" as entropy increases. A completely isolated system that has reached maximum entropy or so called "heat death" will be undefined in time. Our Universe as a whole will reach a heat death state and be undefined in time and space.

An isolated system that increases in entropy should keep the same time "pace" as the rest of the universe, except for an uncertainly due to the size of the isolated system (the larger the system, the larger the uncertainty).

Jeff

report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher wrote on Sep. 2, 2012 @ 14:24 GMT
Dear Jeff Schmitz,

I found reading your essay both an entertaining experience, and to be very instructive concerning the abstraction of time. In my essay Sequence Consequence, I carefully explain why real time cannot exist because reality can only be experienced once by any human at a real here and for a real now. May I make a comment about a fundamental aspect of abstract thought? All abstract thoughts about reality seem to have to have an objective completion of anything real or imagined, consisting of a commencement at a particular moment in time and at a known place, to be of a measurable size and repeatable obtainable shape, and to be of a measurable finite duration? As best as I can tell, reality has no need for any of this. I wish you well in the contest.

report post as inappropriate

Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 00:25 GMT
Hi Michael

I enjoyed your leading with Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s concept of time - his stories use the concept of simultaneity a lot - while A was doing so and so , B was walking towards...he also has a very ordered sense of time in narrative. I think the Universe works a lot that way, Special Relativity notwithstanding. Yes entropy and 'time' are necessarily linked, since time is impossible without change, as you point out. I also agree with you that the speed of light should vary, and that the photon concept should be re-examined, but do not quite get the idea of repetitive modes of time. Perhaps a figure would help.

For my own ideas on time and everything else please see my fqxi essay Fix Physics! and my earlier research on which it is based where time is not a dimension. Beautiful Universe Theory .

With best wishes,

report post as inappropriate

Jeff Schmitz replied on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 13:55 GMT

I am looking forward to reading your work, I need to read, think about, then re-read these essays, so it will be some time before I get to yours.

I have the speed of light as a constant with everything else (time and space) set to that.

A repetitive mode is undefined in time, just as a wave function is undefined in space until there is an interaction. This uncertainty in time could be used instead of an uncertainty in space.

Jeff

report post as inappropriate

John Merryman wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 16:24 GMT
Jeff,

You give a very clear and concise description of time as emergent phenomena, but you miss why physics has so much trouble making sense of it. By treating it as a measurement from one event to the next in a series, it only re-enforces the assumption of events as fundamental and not the dynamic processes creating them. As I point out in my entry, it's not that the present moves from past events to future ones, but that the changing configuration of what exists, turns future into past. Not the earth traveling a fourth dimension from yesterday to tomorrow, but tomorrow becoming yesterday because the earth rotates.

No blocktime and no multiworlds, because it is the collapse of probabilities which creates actualities.

Duration doesn't exist external to the present, as some meta-dimension, but is the situation of the present, between measured events.

It is a situation of physics' focus on precision over analysis coming around and biting it in the rear. "Shut up and calculate" doesn't always work.

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 05:36 GMT
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is
$R_1$
and
$N_1$
was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have
$S_1=R_1 N_1$
of points. After it anyone give you
$dS$
of points so you have
$S_2=S_1+ dS$
of points and
$N_2=N_1+1$
is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have
$S_2=R_2 N_2$
of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be:
$S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1$
or
$(S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1$
or
$dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1$
In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points
$dS$
then the participant`s rating
$R_1$
was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process. I hope the FQXI community will change the rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Jeff Schmitz wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 11:53 GMT
I wish I knew why my rating is only 1 (I am thankful there is no zero rating). I want to know what I could do so my next essay for the next constant might get a 2.

report post as inappropriate