Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

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


Previous Contests

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

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.
read/discusswinners

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

read/discusswinners

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
read/discusswinners

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

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
read/discusswinners

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

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

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

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

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Xmen74152 Lora: on 10/7/19 at 10:03am UTC, wrote Thank you so much for this wonderful Post and all the best for your future....

Xmen74152 Lora: on 10/7/19 at 10:03am UTC, wrote Thank you so much for this wonderful Post and all the best for your future....

Charles Reis: on 4/7/18 at 11:11am UTC, wrote hiii...... Get Apk Market Free Download

muneer ahmed: on 3/11/18 at 13:03pm UTC, wrote Your post is very helpful to get some effective tips to reduce weight...

muneer ahmed: on 3/7/18 at 12:13pm UTC, wrote It was a very good post indeed. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it in my lunch...

muneer ahmed: on 3/7/18 at 11:55am UTC, wrote I love significantly your own post! I look at all post is great. I...

muneer ahmed: on 3/7/18 at 11:41am UTC, wrote Incredible articles and awesome design. Your blog entry merits the greater...

muneer ahmed: on 3/5/18 at 10:43am UTC, wrote If more people that write articles really concerned themselves with writing...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Robert McEachern: "Coins always have two sides. Always. The fact that some observer has..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Georgina Woodward: "Robert, Re.measurement being considered the cause of subsequent effect; I..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Eckard Blumschein: "Steve, Darwin contradicted to the view of Parmenides, ..., and Einstein..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "Joe,do you understand that the universe is finite like our series of..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "this second law is so important,my theory of spherisation and these quantum..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "I must explain what is the real meaning of Spherisation in my theory.It is..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "lol no indeed it is not a lot,like I said I liked your general ideas.I have..." in The Demon in the Machine...

Steve Agnew: "There are three assumptions...is that a lot? The aether particle mass, the..." in The Demon in the Machine...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read 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
October 15, 2019

CATEGORY: What's Ultimately Possible in Physics? Essay Contest (2009) [back]
TOPIC: Awakening of the Observer in Physics by Amrit Srecko Sorli [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Jul. 17, 2009 @ 08:16 GMT
Essay Abstract

Who is the observer in a process of scientific experiencing of the universe? Is observer part of the mind or is observer consciousness itself. We will explore this subject here by studying the role of observer in a process of experiencing of time. Today in physics there are two fundamental approaches to time. The first and most common approach says we use clocks to measure the time component of space-time, space and time being cofounded as the basis of physical reality. However this approach has no experimental support. There is no evidence whatsoever that clocks measure one aspect of space-time, and in truth we cannot observe space-time at all. The second approach says time is cofounded with motion through space. This approach is supported by experiment and observation. We employ clocks to accumulate local internal motion, and then use the result to calibrate duration. This is then employed in the measurement of external motion or material change, and the comparative rate of such change. Our evidence tells us that this rate of change varies with gravity, being commonly known as gravitational time dilation. However we can only measure space and motion, not time, and thus we must assert that the true basis of fundamental reality is space and motion rather than space-time. Time is run of clocks in space. Space itself is timeless. Non-awakened observer experiences run of clocks indirectly through psychological time of past-present-future. Awakened observer experiences time directly as a run of clocks in timeless space. Awakened observer is conscious that linear time past-present-future is merely model of the mind and that universe itself is timeless. Awakened observer is also conscious about himself. He is consciousness itself.

Author Bio

Diploma “geodesy engineer” in 1980 University of Ljubljana, Slovenia Working as engineer 7 years in company Hidro Koper From 1987 to 1990 working at University of Ljubljana as an independent researcher on the subject of relation between gravity and life. From 1990 to 1999 searching on relation “time-gravity-consciousness”. 2000 founding “Space-Life Institute” in Italy From 2000-2006 published around 40 articles in several scientific journals about time, gravitation, cosmology and bio-cosmology.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Doug Huffman wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 11:44 GMT
Eng. Sorli, How can your assertion be falsified? If it cannot be falsified then can it be 'scientific' (after Sir Karl Popper) and, if not, physics? Thank you.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jul. 26, 2009 @ 18:06 GMT
Hi Amrit. I applaud your efforts.

Time is dependent upon the integrated extensiveness of being, experience (and space), and thought.

The self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general. This is why the Common Chimpanzee lives two thirds as long as we do -- in captivity, of course; as they are between (in the middle of) our dream and waking experiences in regard to BOTH time and the integrated extensiveness of their being and experience.

NOTE: Significantly, dreams occur during/across the one third of our lives that we spend sleeping, as you know.

You may want to quote/consider what I have written in your future work. My various writings are definitely of interest to you.

I will be entering this contest.

Best of luck.

Frank Martin DiMeglio (author)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


StevenO wrote on Jul. 28, 2009 @ 15:08 GMT
Hi Amrit,

Thanks for your great article. Have you read "The Serial Universe" by J.W. Dunne? He exactly addresses the role of the observer and self-consciousness in science and how that logically leads to the appearance of time. His conclusion is that an observation-only based science will find paradoxical results like time as an infinite regression, laws of relativity and QM.

You can find it here: The Serial Universe

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 16, 2009 @ 17:21 GMT
Hi Steven

I like Dunne description of time: time divides subject and object. Yes, atemporal experience is non-dual.

yours Amrit

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Aug. 17, 2009 @ 22:52 GMT
Thank you for taking the time and the trouble to read my essay and for your kind asssessment of its worth. Reality confusion I feel is caused by one not understanding that no observer's eyes are ever in a fixed position and therefore nothing that the observer observes can ever be in a fixed position. I would also like to know why not a single woman has ever spent a moment of her time trying to determine what conditions on earth were like millions of years ago.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 19, 2009 @ 07:02 GMT
Hi Joe

Quantum space is a concrete physical space in which stellar bodies are moving.

It is made out of quanta volume of Planck.

Question here is how concept of quantum space is compatible with concept of space-time. In a given volume of physical space where is space and where is time, how space and time are building physical space? There is no answer on this question; nobody is able to explain how space-time builds physical space.

Solution is that quantum space itself is timeless. In quantum space “before” and “after” exists only in a sense of numerical order of physical events that we measure with clocks. So time is information about numerical order of physical events.

Time is not part of space. Space-time is only a mathematical model that describes motion of objects and particles in timeless quantum space.

Unconscious observer is not aware of above. He experiences events through the inner time that is result of neuronal dynamics.

Conscious observer is aware of above. He experiences change as they run. Inner time has no influence on him.

Conscious observer will connect GR and QM, he will develop physics where time will be merely an information about change in timeless universe.

"Millions years ago" exists in physical reality only as numerical order of events.

Bookmark and Share



light in the tunnel wrote on Aug. 19, 2009 @ 22:37 GMT
This essay presents a topic that does what the best physics does: it pushes recognition of the need to control for subjectivity in the very conceptual language used by human minds to contemplate and describe physical reality. Time is a useful concept for humans; so much so that it has been seemingly objectivized in much philosophy and global standardization. This essay therefore overcomes an enormous amount of ideological momentum in exposing how time is not an actual fixture of the natural universe, but rather a conceptual human artifact used to make sense of it. Instead of arguing about the reality of time's existence, readers should take this essay as an opportunity to explore the difference between subjectivity and the objective world it imagines itself to observe directly. The universe may be timeless, but can humans conceptualize it as such? Thanks to this essay, some may get a little closer.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 20, 2009 @ 09:09 GMT
Dear Doug Huffman

You wrote:

Eng. Sorli, How can your assertion be falsified? If it cannot be falsified then can it be 'scientific' (after Sir Karl Popper) and, if not, physics? Thank you.

My answer:

All ma assertions are based on elementary perception.

1. We observe with eyes only change in the universe

2. Time as physical reality is not observable.

3. Conclusion is that time is created between perception and experience, means in the mind.

Change – senses (observation) – mind processing in time – experience

Do you have better solution? Please present it here.

Sincerely yours Amrit

Bookmark and Share



czeslaw wrote on Aug. 20, 2009 @ 09:31 GMT
As many years ago Wheeler wrote the future physics will be a science of informatic and we observe it now. The people can build first quantum computers which which works even 0.1 seconde. It is very little but it is a begining of the real quantum informatic.

The experiments in last years show that information is quantized only. The whole physical world is also quantised, because of the quantized information - said Anthon Zeilinger.

If everything is quantized so there isn't something like time.

Our reality is created of the information about quantum events. A quantum event is a simplest change and there isn't time or time dilation on that level.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 20, 2009 @ 09:40 GMT
Dear Czeslav

We all agree that universe change on macro and micro level

The fact is that on micro level measurable time t for some change is zero.

This simply means that some change i.e physical events are immediate; as gravity and EPR experiment and other i present in my essay.

How physical event can happen in time zero. This simply means that event happen in space only and not in time. Time is merely information about event we obtain with clocks.

So quantum space is timeless and is a direct energy and information medium for some quantum phenomena.

Linear Time we experience is of the mind. Awakened observer knows that.

It is question of few years this fact will enter main stream also thanks to FQXI that makes possible tom present this ideas here.

Yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 20, 2009 @ 09:48 GMT
PS

»time dilatation« means that in certain circumstances speed of events slows down - explaind in my essay

There is no time running in the universe, never ever someone perceive time with eyes

Bookmark and Share



Narendra Nath wrote on Aug. 21, 2009 @ 05:25 GMT
My entire post got lost suddenly and it becomes difficult now to recollect what i wrote , as it was coming sponatneously to me, instantly! That is the problem of electronics/computer operated display. technology may be good but it does affect human capability at the personal level somewhat. See no one is doing Physics of the type that won Nobel prizez in the good past. Now, even corallory type research or a collection of lot of such research brings in such awards.

Let me recollect some points as below:

1. The universe has gotten created and humans had no role in it. We can not add anything additional here; only what we can make by combining somethings that already exist.

2. We can understand the whats and hows of the phenomena taken place but we can not examins the whys!

3. Science is based on concepts that we generate. If the expalnations get acceptance of alrge number of us and gets time tested, it receives sort of approval. However, it still may get modified if newer facta emerge.

4. All instruments that we may make , will always have limitations in accuracy and precision. We can only impriove upon with technology but can never eliminate. Similarly, QM has introduced theoretical limitations in explanation of the phenomena taking place in the micro-world.

5.Our level of consciousness has to match the level of universal consciousness that may well have created this physical Universe. We do not yet have any explanation for what existed prior to the Big bang that may explain how the Creation resulted in physical mass/energy release at such a large scale.

6. To me, Gravity has played a mysterious role in the early universe and now playing any such role anymore. gravity is also defying its unification with the other three force/fileds we know. By the way, these four filds have not emetged simulatatneously with the creation of the Universe. The time sequence was gravity,nuclear strong, e.m. and then last the nuclear weak.That conforms to what we know scientifically about the evolution of the Universe.

7. dark matter and dark energy mystery is also tied to the point made above.

Let me close the post here as i am unable to recollect other points i thought of in the first instance. Let the general discussion continue between us, including all the others coming to this site

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 15:46 GMT
Dear Narendra

Regarding creation of the universe I’m sceptical. Why universe should be created? There is a need of creation. According to my research universe is a system in a constant dynamic equilibrium, no beginning and no end. Universe is timeless. Julian Barbour wrote a book in 1999 “The End of Time – The Third Revolution of Physics”, I wrote book with the same title in Slovene in 1990 “Konec Casa”.

For me “Third Revolution of Physics ” will be discovering of “inner time” on the large scale; all physicists will discover that time is part of the mind and universe is absolutely timeless. With clocks we obtain time merely as information about numerical order of events that run in space.

In space “past” and “future” exists only as a numerical order of events.

Until you do not discover inner time you experience events running in linear time.

Once you discover inner time you experience events running in space only as they run.

yours amrit

attachments: 2_5._Active_Galactic_Nucleus_As_A_Renewing_Sistems_Of_The_Universe.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 16:59 GMT
Actually with clocks we measure speed and numerical order of physical events.

So time is information about speed and numerical order of change.

Would be more correct and say that with clocks we provide information about speed and numerical order of change, where symbol “t” means numerical order of change and that stream of change itself is timeless.

I would use term “time” only in relation to “inner time”.

attachments: TIME_IS_INFORMATION_ABOUT.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 24, 2009 @ 06:50 GMT
The universe is in a continuous change. A change n gets transformed into a change n+1, the change n+1 into a change n+2 and so on. Clocks measure a frequency, velocity and numerical order of change. Changes do not occur in time, changes occur in space only. Time is not a part of space. In the space there is no past and no future. Past and future belong to the inner time that is a result of neuronal activity of the brain.

attachments: With_Clocks_we_Measure.........pdf

Bookmark and Share



nina wrote on Aug. 25, 2009 @ 11:51 GMT
very interesting.... just so on......

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jurij wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 07:10 GMT
I agree. Time does NOT exist.

If we think about totaly empty space (not universe)

we can see that there is no mooving - no time.

So in reality exists only mooving.

Diferences in mooving we call "time".

So - "travelling in time" is product of a stupid mind.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 08:49 GMT
Hi Jurij

Big mistake is idea that there is no motion without time, motion happens in timeless space, we measure velocity of motion with clocks, symbol “t” in physical formulas means “tick” of clock that run in timeless space

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Jurij wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 09:32 GMT
Srečko,

we must drink a koffe together & speak about that.

ps: the picture in attachment is my photospop-creation

attachments: oko_piramida1.jpg

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 30, 2009 @ 02:09 GMT
Time is ultimately dependent upon the integrated extensiveness of being, experience (and space), and thought. You can see how this applies to photons in relation to time -- consider how the words "integrated extensiveness" apply.

Dreams improve upon memory and understanding by increasing (or adding to) the integrated extensiveness of being and experience (including thought) in and with...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Aug. 30, 2009 @ 07:24 GMT
Hi Frank

Linear Time is neuronal process, might be dreams are too.

So dreams are dynamics of energy in the brain in timeless space.

When you wake up from the dreams you wake up into timeless space into eternal here and now.

zours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 1, 2009 @ 02:48 GMT
Hi Amrit:

You basically evaded what I wrote.

Your work/concepts would be centrally and fundamentally benefitted/improved by the ideas in this and my prior post. Again, how do you see these ideas as being consistent with the ideas in your essay?

The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sensory experience is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience. Dreams make sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism) more like thought. Accordingly, the unification of Maxwell's and Einstein's theories (in a fourth spatial dimension) is plainly and significantly evident in/as the dream. Dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience at the [gravitational] mid-range of feeling BETWEEN thought AND sense. Dreams add to the integrated extensiveness of being, experience, and thought in and with time.

I keep telling the participants at FQXi that the natural and integrated extensiveness of being and experience go hand-in-hand -- in and with time as well. I have proven this definitively.

The self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general. Also, the self represents, forms, and experiences comprehensive approximations of experience in general. If the self did not represent, form, and experience a comprehensive approximation of experience in general, we would be incapable of growth and of becoming other than we are.

Do you disagree with this and my prior post? If so, clearly and specifically explain why please. Thanks.

You cannot get out of this either, as it is a fact:

Dreams are an emotional experience that occur during the one third of our lives that we spend sleeping, because emotion is one part (or one third) of feeling, emotion, and thought. Consistent with this, both feeling and thought are proportionately reduced in the dream. Thoughts and emotions are differentiated feelings. Dreams are essential for thoughtful and emotional balance, integration, comprehensiveness, consistency, and resiliency. Indeed, emotion that is comprehensive and balanced advances consciousness. If the self did not represent, form, and experience a comprehensive approximation of experience in general, we would be incapable of growth and of becoming other than we are.

How is this consistent with your ideas on time in your essay? Please do explain.

Thank you. I am very serious about advancing the truth/understanding.

Sincerely, Frank

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 1, 2009 @ 15:33 GMT
Dear Frank

Mind creates models of the world, science is a model too. Dreams also belongs to the mind just they are not rational they are emotional, irrationatinl.....

Science is a logic dream about the universe.

Awakened observer is aware of that.

He knows the difference between models of the universe and universe itself.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 1, 2009 @ 21:33 GMT
Hi Amrit,

I am surprised about your opinion that "Physical space itself is therefore timeless; "There is no experimental evidence whatsoever to support the view that space-time exists".

I can show you experimental evidence to support the view that space-time really exists by two methods. First, we can detect the space-time foam experimentally. The existence of space-time foam proves that space-time really exists.

Ronald J. Adler, On the detectability of quantum spacetime foam with gravitational-wave interferometers, 2000.

A second method: I can prove you that space and time, extension and duration are real things by following experiment:

What happen if we remove the spacetime from a vessel? It means that inside of vessel disappears the extension and duration property. What will see there the external observer? The sides of the vessel should thus come into proximity at near-luminal speeds, and the clocks placed near vessel should tick slower. Thus, if we remove space-time from region, the observer must register time dilation and length contraction (because extension and duration properties disappears). Thus, we can detect such processes by help of two atomic clocks or gravitational interferometer. There is description of such experiment here:Absolute vacuum.

It is the best proof that space-time really exist.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 1, 2009 @ 23:07 GMT
Amrit, you didn't answer the questions again. Do not speak to me in riddles.

I am EXTREMELY intelligent. I see through smokescreens immediately. Speak clearly and specifically.

Your ideas on time are not in accordance with those of this post, are they?

What follows in this post has tremendous and undeniable implications/significance regarding time Amrit. Admit...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 2, 2009 @ 11:43 GMT
Leshan

Gravity radiation from mass was never observed in an experiment. Only diminishing of speed of double stars was observed.

Time dilatation means only that speed of material change slow down in stronger gravity field that itself is timeless.

Physical time t exists as a tick of clock in timeless gravity field

Yours amrit

PS to read more se discussion on

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/489

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 2, 2009 @ 11:48 GMT
Frank

Clocks are manmade invention to measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of change in timeless gravity field.

Mind works in a frame of linear time that is his own creation. Dreams belong to the mind. One observer wakes up he knows all that.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 07:49 GMT
Amrit, your responce is not correct.

I agree, that physical time t exists as a tick of clock. But please understand my arguments:

Let we have a conteiner. Then we remove the space-time from conteiner. It means that the propery of extension and duration disappear inside of container. What the external observer should see here? The sides of container come into a poximity with one another and the clocks placed near tick slower.

Thus the appearance of time dilation near our vacuum chamber is the proof that we can really remove space-time from chamber. It is the proof that both time and space REALLY EXIST. More information here.

Your timeless theory is wrong. The experimental detection of spacetime foam is another proof that both space and time really exist.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 07:56 GMT
Leshan

you agree that time is tick of clock

If you agree on that than follows:

medium in which clock tick is timeless

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 08:14 GMT
Sorry, the above link "More information" do not work. There are more information about how to remove the space-time from the chamber here:

http://www.fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Leshan_Les
han.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Leshan wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 08:41 GMT
"you agree that time is tick of clock. If you agree on that than follows: medium in which clock tick is timeless."

In timeless medium clocks can neither tick nor exist! There is another experiment:

Let us construct a timeless medium. Let us remove both space and time from chamber: we made a hole in space and time. Inside of hole the distance between any two points is equal to zero and time does not exist. Thus, if we increase the concentration of holes in space, the distance between every two clocks contracts and the time slow down. In the limiting case, when space consists of holes only, the distance between any two points are equal to zero and the time dilation is infinite!

Thus, in timeless medium (in hole) clocks can neither exist nor tick because the sizes of clocks are equal to zero. If we remove DURATION, the extension also disappear! Because it is spacetime.

Since near gravitating bodies appear length contraction and time dilation, it is the proof that space and time really exist. And we can create holes in space and time. I can prove it experimentally: Let we place clocks near a vacuum chamber. Then I remove the all the matter from chamber including space-time. If the time dilation appears near our chamber, it is the proof this theory is true!

How to remove the space-time? By Descartes method: we must remove all the body from chamber without permitting another body to occupy its place.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 08:42 GMT
Leshan

you can not remove space-time from chamber because space-time does not exists a phsical reality

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 09:40 GMT
“you can not remove space-time from chamber because space-time does not exists a phsical reality”

I can prove EXPERIMENTALLY that I can remove the space-time from the chamber. It will means that space and time really exist.

You agree that the usual Torricelli's vacuum cannot slow down time. If we place the clocks near a usual vacuum tube (TV kinescope), we never observe the time dilation effect. Now I’ll create the absolute vacuum (a hole in space and time) and the clocks should tick slower. We must observe experimentally two effects – 1) the walls of vacuum chamber come into proximity at near-luminal speeds; 2) the appearance of time dilation effect. It is the proof that both extension and duration disappear inside of vacuum chamber.

How to remove really all matter from the chamber, including space-time? By using the Einstein relativity. No signal can move faster than c. Thus if we remove matter from chamber very quickly (instantly), the surrounding matter and space-time cannot occupy this volume instantly, because the speed of motion is limited by c. Therefore, a hole in space-time appears for short time.

For example, at annihilation of electron-positron pair both particles disappear instantly, therefore the hole must appear. Also holes must appear at decays of particles and inelastic scattwering. Thus the appearance of time dilation effect at annihilation, decays and scattering will prove the existence of holes in spacetime.

To prove the existence of holes in spacetime I need only two atomic clocks and a collider or the atomic station. The clocks placed near collider or atomic station should tick slower that control clocks placed far outside.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 11:14 GMT
Hi all ,

Dear Amrit ,

I agree with many things .But The Universe has a beginning and will have an end ,this end is only physical and the eternity begins there where the mass,the spheres are balanced .

The atemporality is only behind walls in my opinion ,if an mathematical extraplations shows this eternity ,it's not a reason to admit this atemporality in all physical dynamics .The Entropy is secret and it's not our rule like consciousness to know that now .

I agree what the times is difficult to encircle and we mesure it whith clocks but without time the evolution don't exist ,because all has a specific dynamic in this constant ,the motion ,the mass ,the space without time didn't exist .

We must accept our physical laws,their invariences ,theirs coherences and theirs constants .

If a data shows us an atemporality ,don't forget the decimals ,an immediate information must have a limit too .We can't see this decimal ,it's so far of us ,like the quantum walls and cosmological walls .The relativistic perception must have lmits too I beleive .

In all case ,your papers is relevants ,congratulations

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 4, 2009 @ 06:40 GMT
Leshan

To prove the existence of holes in spacetime I need only two atomic clocks and a collider or the atomic station. The clocks placed near collider or atomic station should tick slower that control clocks placed far outside.

Amrit

Time is tick of clock in timless gravity field. If clock runs slower this is it, time runs slover

time = tick of clock

there is no time behing tick of clock

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 5, 2009 @ 04:36 GMT
Dear Amrit S. Sorli,

You are right. On considering the variability of space when an object pass through space, we may have to re-investigate the space-time dimensions by string theories and braneworld scenarios, as space is only the extension of matters. Thereby defining Universal clock to measure the duration of events is much difficult and re-structuring the atomic analogy is essential to define observer for events.

With Best wishes,

Jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Leshan wrote on Sep. 5, 2009 @ 14:13 GMT
It is true that time is tick of clock. But since we can influence physically the rate of clock ticks, since time is a physical phenomen.

"timeless gravity field" - The gravity cannot be timeless because the clocks tick inside of gravity field. Inside of timeless medium (a hole in space-time) clocks cannot exist nor tick because here disappear both duration and extension.

Our dispute can resolve the experiment only: if scientists detect the spacetime foam, consequenly yout timeless theory is wrong.

If I prove that I can remove space-time from chamber, then timeless theory is wrong. I do not need clocks to prove it. The walls of chamber must come into proximity, if I remove spacetime. The observer must see the destruction of chamber.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 5, 2009 @ 16:53 GMT
Dear Jayakar

Events have no duration.

They have frequeny, velocity and numericl order. Duration is because we experience change into linear inner time.

see file attached

yours amrit

attachments: 5_With_Clocks_we_Measure.........pdf

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 6, 2009 @ 02:20 GMT
Dear Amrit S. Sorli,

I think the natural events have periodicity, as tick of clock. When an object passes through space, the strings vibrate with asymptotic space-time holes or vents in space-time foam and thereby we may assume that the holes in space-time as space holes or vents, as there is no inner time duration of events in them.

Yours jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 6, 2009 @ 06:13 GMT
Dear Jayakar

Spce-time is a math model only.

Quanta of space have a basic vibration, they change electrical charge from positive to negativein a Planck time.

Cange of electrical charge does not run in time, change is timeless.

With locks we only measure change.

All universe is timeless, motion is timeless.

Time is tick of clock in timeless universe.

yours amrit

attachments: 7_IIGSS_BASIC_FREQUENCY.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 6, 2009 @ 10:38 GMT
Dear Amrit S. Sorli,

I think the Universe has spontaneous and inherent dynamics in which change of events have periodicity in time with the time of the Universe.

Yours jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 6, 2009 @ 17:03 GMT
Dear Jayakar

Universe run without time. Universe run in timeless space Buddhism call "shunyata"

Time is man invention in order to measure change.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 16:53 GMT
Dear Amrit S. Sorli,

Though the Matter-universe not has time as there is no dynamics in entirety, in Cluster-matter-universe model, there is inherent internal dynamics and has reference time. Thereby, I stick on my post at Sep. 5, 2009; 04:36 GMT.

Yours jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 18:18 GMT
Dear, Jayakar

when you will stick next it will happen in the same timeless space.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 8, 2009 @ 15:44 GMT
Dear readers,

I do not see the critique. It is not a forum for cosmetics and women, it is a forum for physics! If you rate an essay, it means that you read and understand the essay. Therefore, please publish your opinion and critique of the essay. We do not write holy papers, all essays have errors.

Why all physicists are afraid of criticism? I'm sure it is the main cause of the crisis in science. Every year a lot of papers are published but a little critique appears only. The false theories will grab all the world without critique!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 9, 2009 @ 05:52 GMT
Leshan

time is run of clocks in timeless space.

Please comment and disprove my statement above with experimental data.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Jim George Snowdon wrote on Sep. 10, 2009 @ 13:23 GMT
Dear Amrit,



I believe you may have made an error in your post of September 5th, @16:53 GMT.

Events do have duration. We have duration and motion in our timeless universe. In our conscious experience of duration, we assume time is passing.

We move at a surface speed in excess of 1,600 kilometers per hour. The constant physical changes that this planetary rotational motion creates, supports the illusion of time passing. Our clocks are in concert, since we use this same motion as the measurement baseline for our time keeping systems.

For most intent and purpose, time exists on a rotating planet for it`s conscious inhabitants. Had we evolved on the moon, it would be easier to see that time passing is an illusion, that it`s really a case of duration elapsing, that there is no such thing or force as time, in reality.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 10, 2009 @ 16:43 GMT
Dear Jim

Events run in timeless space.

They have no duration.

We measure with clocks their frequency, velocity and numerical order.

Because we experience change in inner time we experience as they have duration.

Duration of change is result of measurment. We can only talk about numerical order of events.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Narendra wrote on Sep. 11, 2009 @ 17:52 GMT
Do you believe that the speed of light can not be exceeded in free space under any circumstances? Suppose a space ship is able to condense space in front and expand space behind, thus creating space inhomogeneity, will it still be limited to speed not exceeding c, the velocity of light.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 11, 2009 @ 19:09 GMT
Narendra light speed is maximum speed.

After that on Planck scale transfer of information and energy is immediate, so we cannot talk about speed any more.

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 12, 2009 @ 05:45 GMT
Dear Amrit S. Sorli,

The ‘time’ I refer is for a Coherent cyclic cosmological model described in continuum mechanics in which space is only the extension of matters and the Cosmic-matrix is in fluidity. We may have to consider on scalar transformation of Planck time and we may need some modification in Lorentz transformation or some other transformation(s) in mathematics.

Yours jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 12, 2009 @ 06:00 GMT
Jayakar

Universe is timeless. In the universe there is no time, only motion. Regarding Lorenz transformation in faster inertial system is velocity of events that is getting slower, tick of time included. Clocks run in space only and not in time.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 12, 2009 @ 10:30 GMT
'time is run of clocks in timeless space. Please comment and disprove my statement above with experimental data'

Amrit, do you have any experimental proofs for your statement ‘time is run of clocks in timeless space’? Can you prove experimentally that space-time does not exist?

Therefore your affirmation do not have any experimental advantages concerning my affirmation that ‘space-time exists’.

Moreover I can show you below some experimental proofs that space-time exists.

1. The appearance of virtual particles in empty space-time is the proof that space-time is a real physical phenomenon. If the space-time do not exists, why the virtual particles appear in empty space?

Please understand that virtual particles appear as a result of physical processes in space-time. Space-time ‘boils’ therefore virtual particles appear. Thus, the appearance of virtual particles is the experimental evidence that space-time is a physical object. Whence virtual particles appear if space-time does not exist?

2. Since we can influence the rate of time (tick of clocks) using material bodies (gravitation), it is the proof that time also is a physical phenomenon. If time do not exist, nobody can influence the time. For example the point with zero dimension do not exist, therefore you cannot influence the point. You cannot increase or decrease its sizes because it does not exist; it is not a physical phenomenon. But since you can manipulate the time, consequently it is a real physical phenomenon.

3. Your arguments from essay prove nothing.

3.1Your example with the Minkowski space-time is not a proof that time do not exist because you agree that it is a mathematical abstraction only. You cannot use a mathematical abstraction to prove that space-time does not exist.

3.2 Your example with the EPR also is not a proof for timeless space. 'The EPR experiment similarly reminds us that physical space is a timeless environment.' My theory of hole teleportation also use timeless communication, but it is a proof that space-time really exist. Because timeless communication is possible outside of space-time only (through a timeless hole). Quantum teleportation use the same mechanism, I published a paper (in Russian) that quantum and hole teleportation may have the same nature.

'time is run of clocks in timeless space'

How clocks can tick inside of a black hole? Inside of black hole do not exist MOTION, even atoms and nuclei are destructed. Since your 'clocks cannot run inside of blach hole, consequently your timeless concept is wrong. Your statement cannot explain all time phenomena.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 12, 2009 @ 12:49 GMT
Leshan

1. Virtual particles appear and disappear back into quantum space that is timeless

2. In stronger gravity clock mechanism run slower, physical time that is tick of clock run slower; there is no physical time beyond clock tick

3. , 3.1. I do not need to prove my idea that time is clock run in timeless space, you have to prove that space-time is physical reality; there is no one experimental data confirming that

3.2. in EPR timeless quantum space is direct medium of information

Inside black hole clock cannot thick as matter in black hole transforms into QS

To read more see discussion here: http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/489

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 12, 2009 @ 14:24 GMT
Dear Amrit S. Sorli,

Of course, universe not have clock as it not have space. Then tick of time is event in clock that is in tensor field and we may conclude that two clocks are not identical. So funny the physics, I really enjoy this debate.

Yours jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 12, 2009 @ 15:00 GMT
Jayakar

Yes two clock tick with different speed regarding density of quantum space. On the top of Mount Everest quantum space is more dense and clock there tick faster, at Pokhara lake quantum space is less dense and clock tick slower.

Physical time t = tick of clock in timeless space

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 12, 2009 @ 15:07 GMT
PS

Conviction that clock measures some time that is part of space has no experimental evidence. We all see that clocks are mechanisms with which we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of events that run in quantum space i.e. gravity.

Because we are not aware of inner time, we see time outside. I believe that physics in India will be first in the world accepting this vision. Because India has great tradition in meditation. In meditation observer becomes self-aware. He recognizes inner time and sees change as they run in timeless space. For me this will be one of the greatest insights of science in third millennium.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 13, 2009 @ 10:39 GMT
Dear Amrit,

Then quantum space is graviton with no inner time, am I right.

Yours jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Leshan wrote on Sep. 13, 2009 @ 13:34 GMT
Dear Amrit

Your plan how to obtain a FQXI prize is very good; Since Barbour got a prize for his timeless theory, you repeat the Barbour's actions. Your essay also proves that time do not exist. You have changed the title of essay only. Yes, it is a plan destined for success. But appear the following questions:

1. Do you think FQXi awards twice the same timeless idea? The prize for a timeless idea has obtained Barbour and others already.

2. It is not an essay contest about the nature of time. Your essay does not fit to our present essay contest. Do you have new ideas that explore the limits of physics? Also I do not see 'the innovative and influential thinking about foundational questions' in your essay. All important ideas about time were published in the 'Nature of time' essay contest, therefore your essay does not contain new ideas in general. Therefore the scientific value of your essay is very low.

3.1 What are the limits of physics explanatory and predictive power? What does this tell us about the world? Your essay does not contain such kind of information.

3.2 What technologies are fundamentally forbidden, or may ultimately be allowed, by physics?

Your essay does not contain such kind of information.

3.3 What role do 'impossibility' principles or other limits play in foundational physics and cosmology? Your essay does not contain such kind of information.

Thus, your essay is outside of our present essay contest. Also your essay has logical contradictions. You declare first that space-time do not exist. Then you agree that 'According to loop quantum gravity, space itself consists of quanta' It contradicts one another.

Besides your timeless conception is very doubtful, because scientists look for experimental detection of space-time foam. The detection of foam will be the proof that space-time really exist. Also we cannot change unphysical things. However, since we can influence the rate of time (tick of clocks), consequently time is a real physical phenomenon.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 13, 2009 @ 15:01 GMT
Leshan, Between Barbour idea on time and mine is quite a difference. Barbour says that there is no time in universe. He also says that there is no motion.

According to my research

1. Physical time is run (tick) of clocks that run in quantum space. There is no physical time behind tick of clocks.

2. Quantum space itself is timeless, space-time is a math model only

3. With clocks we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of physical events in quantum space.

4. Experiencing in linear time is result of inner time that belongs to the mind.

So I do not remove time from physics, my vision is to proper understand time: time is man invented physical reality for measuring physical events.

My life experience is that only conscious observer can understand that and because of that I send to FQXI my essay. Conscious observer is perfectly aware of inner time and this allows him proper understanding of time.

If FQXI would give me some award I would be most happy because this would help me to study PhD on my theme.

Yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 13, 2009 @ 17:55 GMT
PS

Leshan

Thus, your essay is outside of our present essay contest. Also your essay has logical contradictions. You declare first that space-time do not exist. Then you agree that 'According to loop quantum gravity, space itself consists of quanta' It contradicts one another.

Amrit

Space-time is math model only; it does not exist as a physical reality.

Cosmic Space itself consists of quanta of space.

Physical time is run of clocks and run of clocks cannot be part of space. Run of clocks happens in space. So space is timeless. Idea of “foam of space-time” is for me utterly wrong.

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 14, 2009 @ 07:43 GMT
The question “What is Time?” is deeply related to the question “Who is the observer?” In physics today observer is searching exclusively outside physical world. He is not searching how his mind influences his experience of physical world. For deeper understanding of physical world observer needs understanding of how his mind influences scientific experience. Scientist perceive physical reality with senses, than perceived information get processed by the mind, finally experience happen. By searching inside observer discovers that his mind functions in a frame of space-time that is mind creation. He becomes aware that physical time is run of clocks merely and that quantum space into which change run is timeless.

This is insight of my research and there is no objection to it. All experimental data support it. Recent brain research is confirming that experience of change consequently in linear time is result of neuronal dynamics of the brain.

Physics should be sincere and drop idea of space-time being fundamental arena of the universe.

I do not say as Barbour says that time is an illusion. I say that the idea space-time being physical reality is an illusion. For me time as a clocks run is man created physical reality and is consistent part of physics and will remain in physics for ever.

It is a big intellectual jump in incomprehension that there is no time behind run of clocks. This simply means that now is eternity itself. All experimental data confirm that fact. So there is no hindrance to accept that as a standpoint of physics. We have to leave behind our idea that Einstein achievements are pillars of physics that will never be improved. He was aware that time do not exists as a physical reality into which change run. He has tried to “hide” to incorporate time in space. Because of that in SR imaginary 4-th coordinate is a product of clock tick t, light speed and imaginary number i

X – i x c x t

Mathematical Imaginary coordinate cannot be physical. But his hidden device did not succeed. Physics today see space-time as physical reality and does not take in consideration that there is no experimental evidence for that. This mistake will be now improved.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 15, 2009 @ 18:05 GMT
There comes a time when the mind takes a higher plane of knowledge but can never prove how it got there.

Albert Einstein

attachments: 1_FROM_SPACETIME_TO_TIMELESS_QUANTUM_SPACE.doc

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 16, 2009 @ 16:51 GMT
Schrödinger cat in box is an interesting question. In this thought experiment cat remains in a box one hour. Clocks are “ticking” 60x60 seconds and than we open the box.

When atom decay happens cat is dead, until atom decay do not happen cat is alive. Cat in box can not be both simultaneously alive and dead. Cat is alive or dead before we open the box. It is not that with opening box cat will be alive or dead. Opening of the box has no relation to cat life. Relation to the cat life has atom decay. And atom decay has no relation to the opening of the box.

If cat is alive when we open the box this means decay of atom did not happen in one hour.

If cat is dead when we open the box we can do autopsy of the cat and calculate when atom has decayed. Cat biochemical reactions are natural clock “tick”. With autopsy we can see when (if) cat as biochemical clock has stopped.

Cat cannot be both simultaneously: alive and dead.

Cat does not live or dies in space-time.

Cat is living and dies in timeless quantum space only.

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 17, 2009 @ 10:34 GMT
'Space-time is math model only; it does not exist as a physical reality'

Amrit, the math model cannot have a PHYSICAL STRUCTURE! For example a mathematical point cannot have a physical structure because it is a math model only. Since your essay affirms that 'According to loop quantum gravity, space itself consists of quanta' consequently space-time is a physical structure. Since space-time...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 17, 2009 @ 22:22 GMT
Leshan,

Math model has a physical structure. Physical structure of space-time is neuronal dynamics of the brain. Space-time is mind invention - creation.

Physical time as a run of clocks is also man invention in order to measure change in quantum space that itself is timeless. Run of clocks is not part of quantum space.

There is no contradiction in my vision. My vision resolves many contradictions, read my article.

A question for you: if space-time is physical reality tell me exactly how space and time are related (coupled) into space-time.

Yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 18, 2009 @ 06:15 GMT
Dear Amrit,

Your affirmation violates the logic. Please search Google for an example of imaginary mathematical abstraction with physical structure. All mathematical abstractions do not have physical structures. For example a point, line, plane are mathematical imaginary abstractions therefore they do not have any structures. If space-time is an math abstraction, it cannot have any physical structure. The mathematical abstractions cannot have a physical structure! Please show me an example of imaginary mathematical abstraction with physical structure. Another case is when physicists creates a mathematical model for a REAL physical object. But there the object is a Real object by definition.

'if space-time is physical reality tell me exactly how space and time are related (coupled) into space-time' I see I must write another essay better than yours to prove that space-time really exist. Space-time are 3 dimensions and time is 4 dimension. All these dimensions exist inside of space cells. Therefore space and time is coupled inside of space cell. I have the experimental proof: if you slow down the time then length contraction appear also. Because both space and time are coupled. You cannot create the length contraction without time dilation. Both time dilation and length contraction are coupled effects; therefore space and time are coupled effects.

Dear readers,

Please comment this affirmation - the imaginary mathematical structure have a physical structure.

Sincerely

Leshan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Leshan wrote on Sep. 18, 2009 @ 06:18 GMT
Dear readers,

A error in the last proposition: Please comment this affirmation - the imaginary mathematical abstraction have a physical structure.

Sincerely

Leshan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 18, 2009 @ 07:22 GMT
Leshan thoughts are of the mind and mind is in the brain. Physical structure of mathematic is in neuronal activity of the brain. The whole science is a mind creation.

Scientific mind process information of the physical world that enters in senses in a frame of space-time that his own creation.

yours amrit

attachments: 10_6._Consciousness_As_A_Research_Tool_Into_Space_And_Time.pdf

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 18, 2009 @ 13:39 GMT
Dear Amrit,

Your example about brain shows a real phenomenon, but not an abstraction. The brain and main are real phenomena, but not abstraction. If you destroy the brain, you destroy the mind. Therefore your example describes a real phenomenon, not an abstraction.

Space-time foam is a concept in quantum mechanics, devised by John Wheeler in 1955. Your affirmation that space-time is an abstraction contradicts quantum mechanics and logic.

About your attachment (paper) from EJTP:

1. Your paper is not a logical theory, it contains the arbitrary postulates. Your postulates appear from nothing, for example: 'The movement of the pendulum has no duration' Do you have any deduction or logical reasoning for this proposition? It is a proposition that appears from nothing. This method is good for creation of fairy tales and stories but not for scientific papers. Every movement of the pendulum has duration and we can measure this duration.

2. 'space-time is a mental form through which the movement of the pendulum is experienced'

Space-time can exist without mind and conscious. The humans appeared some (millions) years ago, but current theory and observations suggest that the universe is between 13.5 and 14 billion years old. The most part of his time Universe exist without human mind and conscious.

3. 'There is no experimental evidence that physical space itself has three dimensions'

The existence of 3-dimensional objects like cubes is a proof that space itself has three dimensions.

Sincerely,

Leshan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 18, 2009 @ 15:50 GMT
Leshan

1. Motion in the universe has no duration on is own. We give it a sense of duration by measuring them. Duration is in the brain means in the mind. In physical world it is only motion, frequency, velocity and numerical order.

2. Something is old only I a sense of numerical order of clock tick. Universe is timeless, universe is NOW.Clock tick in timeless quantum space.

3. We can define position of an object in cosmic space with three dimensions. This does not necessary mean that space itself is three-dimensional. We can observe in cosmic space only distances and not three-dimensional space.

You did not answer my question ?

A question for you: if space-time is physical reality tell me exactly how space and time are related (coupled) into space-time.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Leshan wrote on Sep. 19, 2009 @ 07:32 GMT
Dear Amrit,

'Clock tick in timeless quantum space'

I have published a lot of arguments against this proposition but you don't take it into account. It is no sense to publish any new objections since you repeat the same proposition-dogma. It is not a logical discussion. I write for you new arguments and ideas and I don't see any responses; instead you repeat always the same...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 19, 2009 @ 18:32 GMT
Leshan

Fourth dimension of math model of space-time is X4 = i c x t.

i - imaginary number

c – light speed

t – tick of clock in timeless quantum space

Yes universe run without the observer.

With development of intelligent beings there beings discover that that UNIVERSE CHANGE, not in time, universe just changes Time is a measure of change. I cannot help. It is so.

Yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 20, 2009 @ 07:29 GMT
PS

Leshan, the key terms of physics are “energy” and “change” i.e. “motion”. Smallest change i.e. motion is when photon pass distance of Planck distance.

Cosmic space into which stellar objects exists is definitely a foam of energy about which we do not know so much, because leading opinion for last 100 years was that space is not fundamental, space is result, a consequence of matter. With idea of quantum space we are getting closer to the truth.

In the universe there is only one energy that has different forms: cosmic space, matter, electromagnetic energy, mind, consciousness.

The question is here how all this forms are coupled. This is main task of physics. Regarding space and matter is interesting that space is inside of matter too, space do not finish where material object starts. This means that in terms of dimensions space is 4 dimensional and matter is 3 dimensional. 4-th dimension of space is definitely not time, there is no one experimental data proving existence of space-time being physical reality.

Time is clocks run. With clocks we measure energy flux. Motion i.e. change is fundamental characteristic of the energy. Energy cannot be still. Energy is in constant change, transformation.

So there is no place for time being fundamental physical reality. Time (clocks) are man invented tools of physics.

time is tick of clocks, yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 21, 2009 @ 06:14 GMT
Leshan

where is cosmic space is X4 = i x c x t ?

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share



Author Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Sep. 21, 2009 @ 06:43 GMT
PS

Leshan

Do you have any experimental proofs for your timeless space?

Amrit: All experimental data confirm that space is timeless and physical time is tick of clocks.

Bookmark and Share



amrit wrote on Sep. 21, 2009 @ 17:46 GMT
Leshan please tell me only one experimental data that is against my theory ?

I have proof because we all see that clocks run in cosmic space and we all know that space-time is a math model only.

There is no one evidence time (clocks run) being part of space.

If you have one tell it, show it.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Leshan wrote on Sep. 22, 2009 @ 00:37 GMT
Amrit, you wrote:

'Smallest change i.e. motion is when photon pass distance of Planck distance'

It is another contradiction. The existence of the Planck distance is the property of SPACE, consequently space-time really exist.

Your theory must have experimental proofs. For example I proposed the theory of absolute vacuum and an experiment able to prove my theory. I need two...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Sep. 22, 2009 @ 07:23 GMT
Leshan in black hole QS quanta of space still exist. They vibrate with their basic frequency.

Vibration of QS is: they change their electric potential from negative to positive in a Planck time.

Vibration of QS is a natural clock to measure other frequencies, velocities and numerical order of events.

This natural clock is "ticking" for eternity. This natural clock has no creation.

All happens in the quantum space that vibrates with basic frequency.

Science has invented clocks to measure events. So it is a big illusion to think that clocks measure some physical time in which events run.

I hope this is clear now.

yours Amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Leshan wrote on Sep. 22, 2009 @ 09:02 GMT
Congratulations, Amrit, now I see a logical answer, it is clear now about clocks. It is true that some quantum clocks tick everywhere, even inside of black holes. However, inside of black holes the time dilation is infinite; therefore your natural clocks are frozen forever.

Amrit, now you have found the definition of physical time. Now you have found a proof that space and time really exists. The physical time is a oscillation of quanta of space. These natural clocks tick in every point of space, it is a proof that space and time really exists. I strongly recommend you to write a new essay/paper about physical time as tick of quantum clocks. Since we can influence the rate of time using matter (gravitation), it is another proof that space and time really exists. You cannot influence the mathematical abstraction only.

Sincerely, Leshan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Sep. 22, 2009 @ 10:20 GMT
Dear Leshan

As QS frequency does not "tick" in some physical reality called time also clocks do not tun (tick) in some physical reality called "time" or "space-time".

Quantum space is timeless in a sense that time is not 4-th dimension of quantum space. QS vibrate with their basic frequency and form physical space in which massive bodies exists.

Basic vibration of QS is a constant in the universe as light speed is also a constant.

Velocity of other physical change is influenced by gravity.

Clocks tick slower in stronger gravity.

My essa

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Sep. 22, 2009 @ 10:28 GMT
PS

my essay is OK, you just did not understand well my vision, now I see you understand it. You somehow mix time with change. Change of frequency of QS is not time, it is change. OK we can say "natural clock". Most important is to understand that QS do not tick in time, QS ticking is natural time itself.

So there is no time behind clocks run.

Clocks tick in quantum space that is timeless in a sense that time is not its 4-th dimension.

It is a great inside that. You can try yourself. Watch a pendulum for a while. You will see after few minutes pendulum will move in timeless space, on NOW. Sensation of linear time will disappear.

eternity is now, yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Leshan wrote on Sep. 22, 2009 @ 19:28 GMT
Dear Amrit, I wrote in my previous post that you can publish a new paper in EJTP about your ideas of quantum clocks. You can mention also our discussion. (I do not have in mind your present essay).

Yours Leshan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Sep. 22, 2009 @ 19:49 GMT
Leshan

publishing here is more important than EJTP.

FQXi is a most courage and anti-dogmatic scientific gathering I know.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Sep. 24, 2009 @ 17:23 GMT
Quantum space is immediate information and energy medium at the Planck level.

Information and energy move in space only and not in time.

We publish with Fiscaletti about that subject in PHYSICS ESSAYS 2008.

yours amrit

attachments: Nonlocality_and_the_symmetrized_quantum_potential.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


narendra nath wrote on Sep. 25, 2009 @ 06:54 GMT
dear amrit, we meet again. i congratulate you on your new essay, in continuation of your ideas on the nature of time you dealt with in 2008 contest amicably. The problem comes when one separate science from philosophy. In fact all sciences, specially Physics started as Philosophy. We all get Doctorates in Philosophy as the highest degree in any discipline. In fact in indian philosophy too TIME called 'Kaal' is considered as a consequence of the God incarnate. The other aspect of God remains unmanifested but all pervaiding, all powerful and what not. The latter God desired to play around and enjoy and hence created this universe, which is a kind of 'Maya' or illusion in his reality. Thus, God manifested a small tiny part of His unmanifested potential, without affecting His totally immense potential. It is a kind of dream world He enjoys, remaining impersonal!

The quantifications being attempted in science are appearing to reach a better and better relative truths about the universe but surely these attempts will not reach the end till the researcher merges himself with the God Incarnate.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Sep. 26, 2009 @ 11:03 GMT
Dear Narendra

Mind can only discuss about got and knowing nothing.

The only scientific way to search ion god to entering god is self-observation of the observer.

we are now discussing this option here as a frontier goal of physics.

Mind is searching only in a frame of neuronal space-time, observer is reaching beyond into timeless nature of quantum space.

attachments: 1_MATHEMATICAL_SPACETIME__NEURONAL_SPACETIME_AND_TIMELESS_QUANTUM_SPACE_arXiv.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Narendra nath wrote on Sep. 28, 2009 @ 17:15 GMT
i am sorry i do not seem to understand what you mean in your latest comments on mind. You are just equating mind within the confine of the brain. Then how can you distinguish the two separate words as these are actually.

Timelessness is a concept in your mind. In Physics its first violation will be concept of time conjugation with energy in the uncertainity relations, making time either as infifnity or zero? What do you prefer? It will lead to enrgy being zero or infinite. Both these options are not acceptable in Physics as these lead to singularities that are not realistic.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Sep. 28, 2009 @ 18:40 GMT
Dear Narendra

Physical time as run of clocks is man invention to measure change in timeless universe. With clocks we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of material change. Material change have no duration. We give them sense of duration because we experience them in a linear concept of time that is based on neuronal activity of the brain.

Timelessness is not a concept of the mind. Timeless universe is a physical fact.

Universe is timeless we say so or not. Nothing can change this fact.

Space-time is a concept of the mind. There is no space-time in a physical universe.

Energy of the universe is not finite and not infinite, because finite and infinite are mathematical concepts that can not be applied on physical reality.

We can build cosmological models where energy is finite or where energy is infinite, how is with the energy of he universe we will never know exactly. It goes beyond the limits of the scientific mind.

In order to know more about the universe we have to search with the consciousness. My essay is about that.

yours amrit

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Narendra wrote on Sep. 30, 2009 @ 13:27 GMT
Dear Amrit,

You showed interest in 'consciousness ' just now. In my essay on this site i have attached a post carrying a manuscript entitled ' Relevance of Consciousness in Sciences'. May be it interests you.

Your statement repeated many a times 'it is a timeless world, never born or will necer die ' involves time too as a parameter. Please work out a Physics theory for decay of a physically observed process using timelessness as a concept, ignoring both space and time as concepts. You may also reproduce the results of the Theory of relativity in your timeless world.

Please also go through the essay i posted on this website and may be make some comments that may involve your idea of a timeless world!Mind is neither scientific nor inscientific. Mind is the total consciousness of an individual. It is more than the organ brain that does thinking and processes and stores data.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 3, 2009 @ 09:52 GMT
Dear Narendra

My research is more about gravity. Gravity is result of curvature of timeless quantum space. More mass is in a given volume of quantum space more space is curved. Curvature of quantum space depends on its density. More mass is in given volume of quantum space, less space is dense and more is curved. Density of quantum space Ds in a centre of massive object is Ds = 1/m, where m is a mass of stellar object.

I experience consciousness as my awareness that limits og physics are in going beyond the concept of space-time into the concept of timeless quantum space.

I read your essay, you have a sharp insights of connecting physics and meditation.

I see this will be of an immense help to raise from space-time timeless space.

yours amrit

attachments: TIMELLESS_QUANTUM_SPACE.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 4, 2009 @ 07:11 GMT
PS

Quantum space is 4-dimensional, matter is 3-dimensional. Material objects are existing and are somehow “captured” into quantum space in a similar way as 2-dimensional geometrical objects are existing in 3-dimensional geometrical space. Presence of material objects is diminishing density of quantum space that is increasing its curvature. Curvature of quantum space generates gravity.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ben Ralston wrote on Oct. 4, 2009 @ 20:23 GMT
Physics and philosophy both share the same fundamental problem: they try to find absolute answers using relative means. Einstein said:

“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”

Similarly, we cannot find an absolute answer using a relative tool - mind. Our minds are limited (relative) not only by their capacity, but more so by the means with which they gather their information: the senses. Our senses are extremely unreliable -dogs apparently have a sense of smell many times stronger than our own; their hearing is also able to detect frequencies which ours cannot; and many animals are reported to be able to see light frequencies (x-ray and UV) which our eyes cannot.

So how is it possible to find the absolute conclusions which are sought by scientific, rational, mental processes? It is not.

Einstein also said:

"the rational mind is a faithful servant, and the intuitive mind is a sacred gift. We have created a society which honours the servant and has forgotten the gift".

Science and philosophy are stuck when they rely only on the rational mind. In the new science, which Amrit is expounding (i think - but i am no scientist!) rational mind and intuitive mind must meet.

And finally - time is relative. What runs the universe, and all it's relative parts, is absolute. Some call it God, some call it Energy. I simply call it the Absolute. To find any absolute answers in science or philosophy, we must transcend what limits us - which is our relative mind.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 4, 2009 @ 21:06 GMT
Dear Ben

In deep meditaton we experience being in NOW. This NOW in science is timeless quantum space.

Clocks run in NOW.

Relative is velocity of events clocks including.

On the moon is the same NOW in which we would get older faster.

Clocks run faster on the moon than on the earth.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Oct. 4, 2009 @ 21:26 GMT
"Dear Ben

In deep meditaton we experience being in NOW"...

Dear Amrit

Well, actually it's not quite right - in deep meditation we become AWARE of the experience of being in the now. The experience is always the same, only our awareness of it changes. There is no other experience, because reality is one. Being is being, regardless of awareness.

Or so it seems to me...

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 5, 2009 @ 07:58 GMT
Being is aware regardless of the object.

Awareness is function of being-consciousness.

Watch your mind and you will discover inner time.

You will step into NOW.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ben Ralston wrote on Oct. 5, 2009 @ 10:20 GMT
Hi, anonymous is me - forgot my name!

Being is aware, that is true. But awareness is not necessarily of being. Awareness can be of clock ticking (ever done a job that you found boring?), or of worry about the future, or regret over the past. Or awareness can be focused on trying to solve a scientific debate... but only rarely do people stop playing all these silly games and focus their awareness on the joy of simply being. That is when the awareness unites with the actual experience.

As for "Awareness is function of being-consciousness." - No. Consciousness is a function of awareness, not the other way around. Proof: when you sleep you are aware, but unconscious. Awareness underlies all experience, it is ever present.

As this relates to the space-time argument: when there is awareness of time, it is because there is a sense of duality, or separation. When awareness unites with reality (being), time ceases, and one ever expanding (eternal now) moment is all that exists.

Yours

Ben

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 5, 2009 @ 13:33 GMT
Ben in Buddhism consciousness is compared with shunyata, emptiness. Here I see parallels with timeless quantum space.

Consciousness is basic frequency of quanta of space, see on file attached.

yours amrit

attachments: 9_IIGSS_BASIC_FREQUENCY.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Oct. 5, 2009 @ 19:22 GMT
Greetings Amrit,

Something in your abstract made me think this would be an interesting essay to read. Unfortunately, I was significantly disappointed. Rather than having a connected sequence of logical statements, you seem content to reiterate the point that 'space itself is timeless' without it appearing to have a significant basis in your own reasoning. I agree with some of your points, but you did not convince me.

I have often thought that a theory could be constructed using the Observer effect as its only basis. This links up well with concepts from Constructive Mathematics. I elaborated somewhat on this idea in Quantum Biosystems Journal Vol. 1 No. 1 - How Can Complexity Arise from Minimal Spaces and Systems?. Unfortunately; you don't speak much about the causal role of observation in Physics, and content yourself to speak on psychological aspects thereof.

I think it might be helpful for you to read a paper by Fotini Markopoulou, which speaks about Wheeler-Dewitt as a view from outside of space and without time, and contrasts that with the view of reality as seen from the perspective of multiple time-based observers. "Planck scale models of the universe" can be found at arXiv: gr-qc/0210086.

As to the psychological perception of time; you may wish to download a paper I wrote on brain laterality, which suggests that the two brain hemispheres do the same kind of processing in opposite directions of time. That paper is on viXra dot org - Does Lateral Specialization in the Brain Arise From the Directionality of Processes and Time?.

Although I support the view that an awakened person can 'stand outside of time' you do not really go into the ways such a perspective might reveal insights into fundamental Physics. Ergo; I found this essay unsatisfying, but I commend you for trying.

All the Best,

Jonathan J. Dickau

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 5, 2009 @ 20:10 GMT
Dear Jonathan

My basic statement "physical time is run of clocks in timeless space" is based on elementary perception. I do not need to prove it. You have to prove it is wrong. Tell me where ?

Rovelli wroter a paper: Forget Time,

http://www.fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Rovelli_Time.pd
f

would be better to say: Forget Space-time.

Idea of space-time being physical reality is a barrier for further development of physics. Ultimately is possible to leave that concept behind and introduce timeless quantum space.

I'm not against time in physics, time is fundamental physical quantity.

Just it is not independent of man as energy and change are, time as a run of clocks is man invented physical reality.

There is no time behind run of clocks.

With this insight I'm deeply content.

If you are disappointed, I can not help.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 5, 2009 @ 20:42 GMT
PS

Jonathan you wrote: I agree with some of your points, but you did not convince me.

Tell mew which points you agree and why.

I do not need to convince someone.

Myself I'm not convinced anything. Physics is based on facts not on convictions.

Space-time being physical reality is an unproved conviction.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 6, 2009 @ 10:49 GMT
In General Theory of Relativity original solution for gravity is curvature of cosmic space. I original papers on General Relativity (1916) Einstein did not mention gravitational waves. This idea arises few months later in order to resolve “action on distance”. Here wee see that there is no action on distance. Gravitational motion is result of change of density of quantum space that is mathematically defined as change of its curvature.

attachments: 1_QUANTUM_SPACE_DENSITY_CHANGE.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Oct. 6, 2009 @ 16:56 GMT
Thank you Amrit,

I will attempt to address your comments both as how they relate to Physics, and by the way they relate to perception or cognition. I will also deal separately with the metaphysical concepts you have introduced.

For starters; I question the notion that a linear or clock-based perception of time is natural. My friend Evan Pritchard wrote a book called "No Word for Time" and the title comes out of the fact the Algonquin languages do not include a term for the consensus time of clocks. It is craziness for them to tie activities to a clock because things take as long as they take. And this acknowledges Turing's principle that once processes reach a certain complexity, it is impossible to predict the exact time to completion of a task. Now I assure you that Evan's Mic Mac teacher notes the rising and setting of the Sun, the phases of the Moon, and the Seasons changing. But this is different from being on the clock.

Metaphysically speaking; one standing outside of time would effectively be outside of space as well, in my opinion. If by awakened, you are speaking of someone who instead of identifying with the physical corporeal self, has come to identify with pure consciousness as their identity, the idea that 'There is no time behind run of clocks' is perhaps sound.

But for those living within time, it is a directional process, and it is an integral part of all processes, as they move from one step or stage to another. There is both a thermodynamic arrow of time, born of entropy, and a quantum mechanical time arrow, born of decoherence. For the most part, they point in the same direction, but it is the flow of energy that keeps them both moving forward. I'll be taking this up at FFP10 next month, and I also talk about time in my contest essay. For the record; I believe it is more primal than space. I'll talk about the importance of space-time next installment, or you can read my essay.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Oct. 6, 2009 @ 17:40 GMT
Hello again,

A few links:

My contest essay:

The Possibility for Answers from Physics

FFP10 site:

Frontiers of Fundamental Physics

Book by Alex Mayer (useful to understand essential nature of space-time):

On the Geometry of Time in Physics and Cosmology

I highly recommend Alex's book as he fully grasps the importance of space-time as an essential insight of Modern Physics. It is his belief that most scientists don't really understand the full meaning and importance of this concept.

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 7, 2009 @ 08:20 GMT
Dear jonathan

Yes, space-time is a concept.

Timeless cosmic space where physical time is thick of clocks is a scientific fact.It is not a concept.

My paper is published in viXra

http://vixra.org/abs/0910.0004

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Oct. 7, 2009 @ 14:51 GMT
Thanks Amrit,

I'll check out the paper referenced above, when there is time.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 7, 2009 @ 18:32 GMT
I see time and gravity being deeply related.

Proper understanding of time

http://vixra.org/abs/0910.0004

leads us to proper understanding of gravity

http://vixra.org/abs/0910.0007

Our imagine of gravity force seems to be not exact.

It is more correct to imagine “gravitational motion” which means that because of quantum structure of space massive bodies simply move into direction of lover density of quantum space.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


AMRIT wrote on Oct. 7, 2009 @ 19:27 GMT
PS

In today’s physics the conviction still prevails that gravity works directly between massive bodies. Research here shows that mass changes structure of timeless quantum space and this change generates gravitational motion. There is no direct attraction force between massive bodies. Hypothetical gravitational waves emitted and absorbed by the mass seem to be fictitious entities. Gravity motion is result of dynamics between mass and density/curvature of timeless quantum space.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 8, 2009 @ 20:27 GMT
Quantum Dynamics

Awakened observer is conscious that in the physical world forces do not exist. Terms “gravitational force”, “electromagnetic force” “weak and strong nuclear force” are physical terms that describe gravitational dynamics, electromagnetic dynamics, strong and weak nuclear dynamics.

All material change in the universe can be reduced on motion of elementary particles that are structured energy of quantum space. Energy of quantum space is non-structured, it only change density. Quantum space is less dense in areas with mass and high dense in areas with no mass.

Elementary particle which do not change density of space is mass-less. Dynamics between quantum space and elementary particles produces motion.

Motion in the universe is result of quantum dynamics that we describe in physics with “forces”. There is nothing wrong in that when we are aware about.

Similar is with space-time which is only a physical term and not physical reality.

In the study of physics students should have subject of phenomenology for a few years in order to prevent creation of all kind of strange ideas in physics as for example “chronos” a hypothetical “hybrid particle” that should be building up foam of space-time.

Space and time cannot be unit in one physical reality because they are two physical realities. Space is physical reality into which elementary particles and massive bodies move and time i.e. physical time is run i.e. thick of clocks in space. This is a standpoint for further development of physics with Quantum Dynamics where dynamic equilibrium on micro and macro level is a fundamental law.

Timeless dynamism is inherent property of the universe. Ideas about some beginning are simply childish.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Darryl Jay Leiter wrote on Oct. 12, 2009 @ 01:40 GMT
Dear Stephan, Georgina, Tejinder, Cristi, and Amrit,

I would like to draw your attention to the summary of comments between myself and Jonathan in regard to the observer-participant MC-QED formalism", which are presented below. Since many of you have been skeptical about the ideas

present in my essay it would be helpful to me if we could we have critical group discussion on these...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amritz wrote on Oct. 13, 2009 @ 18:34 GMT
Dear Dr. Leiter

I read discussion and did not understand much. Language is very abstract and such discussions are sometime difficult because different persons understood same term differently.

I'm relating my research on consciousness to Prof. Penrose ideas, you can see in article

Consciousness as a Basic Frequency of Quantum Space

http://vixra.org/pdf/0910.0018v1.pdf

yours sincerely amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 17, 2009 @ 14:50 GMT
Observer and physical reality are parts of the same universe. Ultimate goal of physics is to bring them together. Observer and observed belongs to the same reality that mind can comprehend only partly. For deeper understanding of relation observer/observed activation of consciosness is required. Activation of consciousness means self-awareness of the observer.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Narendra wrote on Oct. 17, 2009 @ 18:22 GMT
Anrit with love and awareness we communicate what we experience in this world. Why our experiences differ. Oy is all a mind game. The mind is naturally wayword and constantly agitated. Yo calm it down, one requires meditation. Toga techniques have also been worked out by Indian Saint Patanjali some 3000 years back that helps too. As we raise our level of consciousness we come to know better and better relative truths about the universe we live in. We are unable to go outside this universe and so we can only get relative truths. That is what science is doing, using maths with Physics or vice versa.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 17, 2009 @ 20:08 GMT
Dear Narendra

Observer has potential to observe and experience him/her self. I see this is one of the Ultimate Goals of Physics.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 17, 2009 @ 21:05 GMT
Physics is a science of the universe. Models of physics are mental pictures of the universe. More this models care are adequate to the universe, better is our understanding. To build up models we use words, means terms.

In order to build up models that are adequate representation of the universe we have to examine fundamental terms. They have to correspond exactly to the physical phenomena in the universe that we can measure directly.

We can measure directly: mass of massive objects, medium in which are massive objects, means space, electromagnetic magnetic fields, temperature.....and other

We can not measure directly "space-time", "negative energy", "arrow of time", "gravity waves".....and maybe some more terms in physics have no direct correspondence to some physical phenomena that can be measured or experienced.

For all this terms we have to declare them "hypothetical". We can not operate with them and use them in physical models as a physical phenomena because this is leading us into building up unreal picture of the world.

My work in mainly on space-time and arrow of time. About space-time I say enough here about "arrow of time": it exists as physical reality in a form of numerical order of events that we measure with clocks. Smallest unit to measure numerical oder is "Planck time".

We should not see run of change in a linear way because they run in front of our exes in space. We see stream of physical change one after another because of map of space-time we have in the brain. In physical reality stream of change run in timeless space where we measure numerical order of stream with clocks.

Universe is NOW we want or not, we are aware or not. Tis is its very nature. Einstein says that "NOW" is out of realm of science. With discovery that neuronal dynamics is a basis for sequent experience of change NOW is entering the science in a form of "timeless space where time is run of clocks". So term "space-time" should be replaced with term "timeless quantum space".

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 17, 2009 @ 21:07 GMT
PS

We can not measure directly "space-time", "negative energy", "arrow of time", "gravity waves".....and maybe some more terms in physics have no direct correspondence to some physical phenomena that can be measured or experienced.

Observer can not be measured, observer can be experienced and so its existence is confirmed.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


nn wrote on Oct. 18, 2009 @ 00:18 GMT
Excellent, keep it up. i wish your ideas in the essay to succeed. I and you do not matter. However it matters what we think and do about it. Our selfless efforts are likely to be productive and our self-centerd ones are likely to be rejected. We are important but not i and you. Humanity should win and so also the cerator of the Universe and the humanity within IT.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 18, 2009 @ 09:40 GMT
nn I also wish my essay succeed. Because it is based on the elementary perception. There is no conclusions on the abstract level of the mind.

So there is no possibility to make a mistake. Basic physical terms x' needs to have direct correspondence to physical phenomena x.

Existence of x' must be confirmed on measure or experience:

x'--- x

If not physics could become mathematical philosophy.

yous amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 20, 2009 @ 07:02 GMT
Resume of my essay:

Awakened (conscious) observer is aware of experiencing change in the universe through the space-time as his/her mind map based on neuronal dynamics. He/she experiences material change directly as they run in the timeless quantum space where physical time is run of clocks.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 20, 2009 @ 21:21 GMT
In 1949, Gödel postulated a theorem that stated: “In any universe described by the theory of relativity, time cannot exist”.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_8_167/ai_n135
95656

Strange still in physics prevail idea of space-time being physical reality.

Why are we so intellectually not-flexible ?

Because until observer is not waken he/she is fixed with old ideas.

yours amrit

attachments: Experimental_Proof_for_Godel_Theorem_on_Time.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrt wrote on Oct. 21, 2009 @ 09:48 GMT
PS

sorry I attach wrong file

here is right one

attachments: Experimental_Proof_for_Godel_Theorem_on_Time__vixra.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 21, 2009 @ 16:24 GMT
my article is now online

http://vixra.org/abs/0910.0041

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 24, 2009 @ 11:09 GMT
Maybe for the next year we could write and discuss here on

"BRIDGING OBSERVER AND OBSERVED".

I see this subject extremly interesting as it connects physics,

neurofisiology and phenomenology.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Oct. 25, 2009 @ 09:02 GMT
Hi Amrit ,

Yes indeed ,a very interesting and vague subject .The perception depends of our referential indeed .

The neuro dynamic and its polarities is very relevant about the informations too and the captors.

Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 25, 2009 @ 09:51 GMT
RESUME

Barbour refuses existence of time, Elliot propoeses 4-th coordinate as a "coordinate of motion".

Physics is based on clock mechanisms and will remain so for ever. With clocks we measure motion. I believe that the most correct and adequate solution for time, clocks and motion is:

""Time is run of clock that measures motion in timeless quantum space.""

This solution is not mine. I "got it" from somwhere.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 25, 2009 @ 17:46 GMT
Taday I had discussion with one of the members here. He is convinced that "time dilatation" as slower velocity of clocks is a result of 4th coordinate of space-time shrinking.

Even if space-time would exists as a physical reality would not be possible to explainj how shrinking of space is related with slower speed of clocks.

It is quite amazing how we are attached to some fix ideas in physics that have no correspondence to physical reality.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 27, 2009 @ 09:27 GMT
One of the ultimate goals of physics is bridging observer and observed.

yours amrit

attachments: Bridging_Observer_and_Observed.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 28, 2009 @ 14:08 GMT
PS article "Bridging Observer and Observed" on PDF

attachments: Bridging_Observer_and_Observed_FQXI.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 28, 2009 @ 15:07 GMT
PS Searching on relation “observer-observed” observer discovers that he has ability to consciously distinguish between his mind’s models of the world and world itself. With self-observation observer becomes aware that the finest level of energy in the universe is consciousness as the basic vibration of timeless quantum space. A model of timeless quantum space corresponds in Indian Vedas to the concept of “sunyata”. Self-realization of the observer in physics is the scientific basis for a peaceful dialog between all religions of the world which all have the same goal. Self-realization has its verification in the experience itself.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Oct. 29, 2009 @ 01:28 GMT
Hi Amrit:

You are correct that: "One of the ultimate goals of physics is bridging observer and observed." The interactive nature of being, experience, space, and thought is undeniable. I will clearly demonstrate this in this post.

"It is the theory which decides what we can observe..." -- Einstein

"Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Einstein

James Clerk...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 29, 2009 @ 12:38 GMT
Dear Franck

Yes we expeience universe through the mind and so we can experience what we believe in. Because of that physics has invented experiment. Experiment proves relevance of the model with the world.

I can not give expert opinion about your theory of unification of GR and electromagnetism, because I'm not trained for that. My fields are phenomoenology, mind and consciousness.

Maybe some experts here will tell you more. I see gravity motion related to the change of density of quantum space and electromagnetism as a vibration of quanta of space. Because of that in any inertial sistem speed of light is constant. You take light as a phenomena A in a medium B as quantum space. If A has same speed for diffrent moving sistems in medium B this means that A is vibration of medium B.

Sure this is only my vision. My expertize is on time and process of "perception-processing in the mind-experience-observer". Here I'm sure.

You are expert for dreams. Maybe you keep this field as main, and about other you just comment. Physics is mature science, some big revolution is out of question. We can only make small improvments. FQXI is a right place for that.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Oct. 29, 2009 @ 14:11 GMT
Hi Amrit ,Frank ,

It's beautiful what you say ,

we think thus we are in fact and we perceive our Universe ,like a beautiful contemplation of the physicality and its creations .

Best Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Oct. 30, 2009 @ 13:38 GMT
Hi Steve

We all agree universe exists.

We all agree observer exists.

Some of us agree between observer and the universe is the scientific mind creating pictures of the universe.

Only few we agree conscious observer is aware of how much scientific mind pictures correspondes to the world itself. He distinquish clearly betwen physical world and mind pictures of it.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Eckard Blumschein wrote on Nov. 1, 2009 @ 21:31 GMT
Dear Amrit,

Some of your opinions were appealing to me. For instance I agree, real observers must be considered part of the processes under consideration, not outside reality.

The senses of an animal can only perceive influences from past events. In so far I agree: The usual assumption of a spacetime that extends from minus eternity to plus eternity is unfounded. However, I do not understand how velocity could replace temporal distance, i.e., distance from the actual moment. Why not distinguishing between measurable time-span on one hand, and abstracted and extrapolated ordinary time on the other hand?

Let me say it quite boldly: I cannot expect a fair rating from those who do not share my firmly substantiated insight that time reversal is just a simple mathematical artifact resulting from overlooking or deliberately ignoring the binding of the observer to reality.

Regards,

Eckard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 2, 2009 @ 10:35 GMT
Eckart

Time is not a fundament of motion, time is derived from motion. Velocity of an object v = d/t where t is "thick" of clocks. Clocks thick in timeless space, motion happens in timeless space.

Sure going back in time is possible only in a mathematical way.

I publish about that recently an article in Indian Journal of physics,

. Amrit S. Sorli, Time is Derived from Motion, The Icfai University Press, Journal of Physics, Vol.2, Num.4 http://www.iupindia.org/Physics.asp (2009)

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 2, 2009 @ 10:39 GMT
PS Abstract "Time is Derived from Motion"

Today in physics, there are two fundamental approaches to time. The first and the most common approach says that we use clocks to measure the time component of space-time, space and time being cofounded as the basis of physical reality. However, this approach has no experimental support. There is no evidence whatsoever that clocks measure one aspect of space-time, and in reality we cannot observe space-time at all. The second approach says time is cofounded with motion through space. This approach is supported by experiment and observation. We employ clocks to accumulate local internal motion, and then use the result to calibrate duration. This is then employed in the measurement of external motion or material change, and the comparative rate of such change. Our evidence tells us that this rate of change varies with gravity, being commonly known as gravitational time dilation. However, we can only measure space and motion, not time, and thus we must assert that the true basis of fundamental reality is space and motion rather than space-time. This means that space itself is in some respect timeless. Motion runs in timeless space.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


arendra nath wrote on Nov. 2, 2009 @ 12:43 GMT
Amrit, i just had a thought that space always existed but the universe birth triggered the time clock. Thus, there is non-parrallel aspect of space w.r.t. time. Time is related to the manifestation of energy into matter. On the other side, space stands unrelated to both energy and time.Homogeneity of space is however is matter for worry for me. Can space and time show inhomogeneity and then what are the respective consequences of the two happening independently. Can these result in the generation of mass and enrgy independently?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 2, 2009 @ 13:24 GMT
Narendra I see subject of time in a pragmatic way.

Osho says: “Real is what works”. “Time as run of clocks” works.

Barbour think to develop physics without clocks and time what I mean is not possible.Clocks and time are essential instruments of physics.

What I point out is that time is a measuring device for material change.

Time is not primary physical reality. Consequences are immense.

Space is timeless, as already Gödel proposed. Universe is timeleess, universe is NOW.

This is where physics meet Buddhism.

Yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 4, 2009 @ 09:35 GMT
A few days has remained to the end of essays votation.

Thank you all here which vote vision of a conscious observer which is aware of his/her inner linear neuronal time and aware that with clocks we measure motion running in timeless space.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 6, 2009 @ 09:36 GMT
Dear Reader

People vote my essay because they see sense in it. Sure many of my friends vote my vision: "Physical Time is Run of Clocks".

My essay is of high quality. It shows clearly that universe is timeless, that there is no physical time as a part of space-time as an arena of the universe.

Arena of the universe is timeless space where physical time is run of clocks. With clocks we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of material change. Unconscious observer experiences material change through the inner linear time based on neuronal dynamics. Because of that he sees time in physical world. Conscious (awakened) observer is aware of inner neuronal time. He experiences material change directly as they run in space. He is aware that clocks are reference mechanisms to measure materal change. This insight explain several experimental data which show that some physical phenomena can happen in time zero, means without even one "thick" of clock. Such physical phenomena are gravity, EPR experiment, immediate quantum energy and information transfer, see my essay or my other publications.

sincerely yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 7, 2009 @ 08:40 GMT
Sum of public and community votation of my essay is:

7,6 + 3,2 = 10,8

Experts in statistic would say that this shows some statistic significance because seems to be highest amoung all essays

I celebrate this result. It shows my vision is on right path.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 7, 2009 @ 11:53 GMT
Some more reflections

In timeless space physical events have no duration on its own. Duration is a result of measurment. This is quite impressive fact. Term "duration" has physical sense and value because of measurment itself.

Term "arrow of time" could be replaced with "arrow of change". In the universe change are physical reality and have a certain direction.

Immpressive is that grandma, son and grandson are born in the same timeless space and that travel in time is out of question. So grandson can never go into past and kill his grandma.

"Clocks/time" run slover in faster inertial system and in stronger gravity. Relativity of time as a measuring system and relativity of velocity of change is preserved.

Nothing happens in time, all happens in timeless space where before and after exist as numerical order of an event.

There is no contradiction in this vision. We have to abandon idea in physics that change run in time, we have no evidence for that. Time/clock is a reference system for measuring change. Time is not a medium of change, time is a measure of change.

"Time is Clock Run" functions. What functions is real. Functionality of scientific theory is the most important proof for its rightness.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Nov. 7, 2009 @ 13:05 GMT
Hi Amrit you win ,congratulations

second Mr Petkov 9.7

3 Mr Dijksman ,,Joakin D M,5 Ray Munrue...after with 9.2 Mr Cirkovic er Mr Elze...9.0 P Jakson and Mr Prati ..8.9 Mr Grgin ....mainly.

Now what is the equation and parameters for the results ,I don't know ,

happy for you dear Amrit .

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


S D wrote on Nov. 7, 2009 @ 13:07 GMT
Florin too has 8.9

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 7, 2009 @ 17:29 GMT
Dear Steve

When I was 30 it cames into my mind that universe is timeless. I wrote a book in Slowene lanquage "The End of Time" back in 1990. From 1990 on it took me 19 years to get that in timeless universe physical time still exists and it is run of clocks. This vision of time is in accord with experimental data and is pragmatic, it works. This vision requires "conscious observer" aware of inner neuronal time. When I sended my essay to FQXI I did not know yet of reserch done on "neuronal time". Actually already Godel mention "intuitive" time.

In physics we see through our mind. Mind determinates our experience of the universe. Conscious observer reaches beyond the mind into timeless nature of the universe. This fou sure is one of the ultimate goals of physics.

yours sincerely, amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 8, 2009 @ 09:06 GMT
Measuring Physical Events with Natural and Artificial Clocks

Rotation of the Earth around axis and rotation of the Moon around Earth have been first natural clock. They served as a measuring reference system for plants growing. This first measuring formed in human brain neuronal time that has a cyclic form. Mayas and old Greeks experience universe and nature through cyclic neuronal time. With measuring plants growth has developed in man a sense of duration.

Christian-Jewish civilization has introduced idea if linear time. This idea has transformed cyclic neuronal time into linear neuronal time. Because of that in Western civilization we experience universe and life in as linear.

Neurophysiology confirms that our consequent linear experiencing of physical events is based on neuronal dynamics.

- Hitchcock. C. M., T-computers and the Origins of the Time in Brain, NeuroQuantology (2003); 4: 393-403 https://www.msu.edu/~hitchco4/Smh9.pdf

-Catalin V. Buhusi, Warren H. Meck, What makes us thick?, Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing, Nature reviews, Volume 6, October 2005

With construction of artificial clocks idea has arisen in physics that clocks measure time as a physical reality in which motion happen. This idea has no experimental support. With discovery of inner neuronal time observer becomes aware that motion happens in space only and that physical time itself is run of clocks. This is the next step of physics: reaching beyond inner neuronal time and experience motion as it happens in the timeless space.

For better understanding of physical world we have to understand how our brain/mind process information about physical world we receive in senses.

Conscious observer is absolutely objective. He experiences universe directly without neuronal time interference. He is aware that duration of physical events is result of measuring them.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 8, 2009 @ 19:32 GMT
Dear Florin

People all over the world voted my essay because it is a brake-through in physics. It shows clearly that conscious observer is reaching beyond neurophysiology-cal limitations of human mind. Conscious observer is experiencing motion directly as it runs in the universe. This experience is the key for development of physics. It is on FQXI to valuate my work. Also my community votes are good. If my essay is so popular must be some salt in it.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 9, 2009 @ 11:16 GMT
Dear Reader

People are free to vote as they like. Also my essay got some publioc and community votation 1.

Regarding Barbour vision of time and mine there is a quite of difference.

He says that there is no time, that time is an ilusion. He try to develop physics without time.

My vision is timeless universe where time/clock is a measuring reference system. My vision is conscious observer aware of inner neuronal time. My theory on "Conscious Observer" is complete and works, it functions. My essay is about conscious observer and his distinquishing betwen models of the world and world itself. Research on time is just an application of the conscios observer as a research tool.

Why nobody mention this here, why so much negativity ? I would like a constructive debate on "conscious observer" and his potential in physics.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 9, 2009 @ 17:39 GMT
Why Godel is right ?

In Special Theory of Relativity space and time are intrinsically linked, united into one manifold called “space-time”. The three coordinates X1, X2 and X3 are spatial the fourth one X4 is temporal. Gödel introduced idea that X4 is spatial too. Profound analysis of the fourth coordinate shows that X4 is composed out of “c” light speed, imaginary number “i” and time “t” that represents “thick” of a clock:X4= ict. Time “t” that we gain with clocks describes numerical order of material changes. Clocks are reference systems for measuring frequency, velocity and numerical order of material changes. Gödel is right: fourth coordinate X4 is spatial too. Space itself is timeless. Mathematical time “t” is only an element of X4 and represents physical time that is run of clocks in timeless 4 dimensional space.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 9, 2009 @ 19:48 GMT
PS

If Einstein would publish in 1905 a paper in Analen der Physic where he would interpret fourth dimension of space as a product of light speed and run of clocks, this today would be basic statement of physics.

If I would wrote an essay on FQXI where I would propose idea of forth dimension of space being time all would be against, would say that I have no basic knowledge about foundations of physics.

This is possible because of unconscious observer.

Conscious observer is the future of physics.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Eckard Blumschein wrote on Nov. 11, 2009 @ 14:43 GMT
Dear Amrit,

You wrote:

"If Einstein would publish in 1905 a paper in Analen der Physic ...".

Anal refers to the anus. Annum is the year. Physik is the German word for physics.

This does not matter. However the year 1905 is history. Now, there is no possibility that someone would do anything in this unreachable year, not even Albert Einstein. You meant, if he had published ...

You perhaps confused the tenses. The tense of a verb is the form which shows whether you refer to the past, the present, or the future.

In that you are in good company. Physicists like your idol Einstein even denied "the division into past, present and future".

You are claiming that time has to be replaced by velocity unless on follows the usual spacetime approach. I would like to strongly object unless we agree on restricting time to the only measurable time, i.e. to past time. Of course, on the abstract level we would need future time too.

Regards,

Eckard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 11, 2009 @ 18:14 GMT
Dear Eckart, you say: You are claiming that time has to be replaced by velocity unless on follows the usual spacetime approach. I would like to strongly object unless we agree on restricting time to the only measurable time, i.e. to past time. Of course, on the abstract level we would need future time too.

No time has not to be replaced with anything.

Our vision should be replaced: we do not live in time. We live in space only. 4-th coordinate is spatial too.

Time/clock is a measuring system merely.

yours amrit

attachments: Fourth_Coordinate_X4_is_Spatial_Too.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Nov. 11, 2009 @ 21:23 GMT
Eckard

So what if Amrit confused the tenses? Perhaps English is not his first language... and in any case, you also made a grammatical error with:

"You are claiming that time has to be replaced by velocity unless * on * follows the usual spacetime approach"

Interesting that you criticise someone else's grammar with bad grammar of your own.

Another thing: why do you end a sarcastic post which clearly has no regard for the author of this essay with the word 'Regards'?

Amrit

I agree - Time is a conceptual tool that we humans use to measure the rate of change in the spatial universe. My experience is that this sense of time can be stopped by becoming more conscious. It seems that time - as a physical reality - is really an illusion.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Nov. 11, 2009 @ 21:36 GMT
Ps - to those of you that disagree with this, think deeply on the following:

We can all agree that 'time' consists of past, present, and future.

The continuous flow (which is what we mean when we say 'time') is broken when past and future are not there. Past can be removed - it is not a physical reality. It exists only in memory. Memory has no physical reality. It is just an idea, and a very unreliable one. Future is what? Imagination. Worse than memory. So what are we left with? Only the present moment is tangible. There is nothing else. Science needs to wake up to this. BE HERE NOW. The gulf between science and spirituality is diminishing. Amrit is doing a good thing with his work...

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 12, 2009 @ 08:41 GMT
Thank you anonymous

It is not a question of who is right,

it is a aquestion what is right.

Right is that that we live in space only and time is a measurment system.

I hope physics will take that fact in account.

yours sincerely amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 12, 2009 @ 09:06 GMT
PS

if you are interested on collaboration on the subject bridging science and meditation, write me, you can also see my article here: "Bridging Observer and observed".

sorli.bistra@gmail.com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Eckard Blumschein wrote on Nov. 13, 2009 @ 22:19 GMT
Dear Amrit,

I did not intend a personal attack, and I apologize for my typo. My computer is sometimes rather slow and omits letters.

An anonymous supporter did deny the reality of the past. I reiterate:

All physical influence that contribute to integral effects are linked with the past, my mother my father, etc.

Past processes left traces, even very old fossils.

Nobody can change what happened.

Even what I am just doing belongs to the past, admittedly to the near past.

Anonymous, I ask you how many attoseconds spans the present?

Perhaps we all agree that the future is a mental construct with uncertain real background.

Do birds have consciousness? I observed they often when they were clever enough to open a nut by dropping it from the hight on a hard road.

Regards,

Eckard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 14, 2009 @ 10:34 GMT
Dear Eckart

It is amazing and real that in space there is not past and future. In space is only change. We grow older in space only and with clocks we measure that.

The only time in space is NOW. And this now is eternal.

Eternity is contained in NOW.

In physics this as expressed with timeless space where time is run of clocks.

I believe that this insight will have immense influence of technology. It will make possible to create devices for taking energy directly from timeless space.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Eckard Blumschein wrote on Nov. 14, 2009 @ 16:51 GMT
Dear Amrit, dear Anomymous,

You did not answer my questions:

1) How many attoseconds is the timespan that Anonymous calls present?

2) Do birds have consciousness?

Did I get Amrit correct when I interpret his credo so that "time is a measurement system"? Isn't this pretty similar to Einstein's utterance "time is what clocks show"? Anyway, I would like to reiterate that it is absolutely impossible to measure future time.

I refuse to speculate whether or not space is eternal. Admittedly, I also prefer to be skeptical towards the religious idea of a creation by Him and/or a unique Big Bang.

However, if you Amrit believe having found something new and possibly important for the technology of power supply, then you are obliged to explain it. Go on please in order to avoid being suspected a charlatan. I am an old engineer having a lot of experience with power electronics, inventions and even reverse engineering.

Regards,

Eckard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Nov. 14, 2009 @ 20:45 GMT
Eckard,

I am the same anon, sorry but i don't care to leave my name.

The present does not consist of attoseconds. An attosecond is a measurement of time i suppose. I agree with Amrit that time is a measurement of change or movement in space. But the present is nothing to do with movement in space. The present is infinite, eternal, and immeasurable. You could say that it consists of no attoseconds, or you could say that it is made up of an infinite number of attoseconds. Both statements would be correct, i believe. For me, the present consists only of consciousness. It has no relationship with what we call time. Really, what we call time is only past and future. Because in the act of measuring, it no longer exists!

Your statement about the past being connected to cause and effect - this is only true when you believe in cause and effect, and think of the present in terms of time. To me there is no single cause of anything. Everything is interconnected to such a degree that nothing can be 'singled out' as a cause. What is the cause of me typing this? Is it my idea about time? My education caused this? My parents? Their parents? The culture that my ancestors came from? Did the keyboard have any part in this cause? The materials that made this keyboard? The sun that is the source of the energy that created these materials, created my fingers and my thoughts? - Everything is the cause of everything else. This is the truth.

You asked if a bird has consciousness. Of course, it does! Everything has consciousness. There is nothing else but consciousness. Sure, varying degrees of consciousness, but nonetheless... and actually birds are much cleverer than we give them credit for. They are able to do many things that we can only dream of. Opening nuts is nothing for them... Humans are meddling fools compared to the wisdom and perfect intelligence of nature.

With respect

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Eckard Blumschein wrote on Nov. 14, 2009 @ 23:07 GMT
Anon,

You wrote:"An attosecond is a measurement of time i suppose."

I quote from a paper by Amrit:

It can be said that certain physical phenomena are timeless, since no measurable

time (no run of clocks) elapses for them to happen. For example in the article entitled Attosecond Ionization and Tunneling Delay Time Measurements in Helium by Eckle et al, a conclusion is drawn that "an electron can tunnel through the potential barrier of a He atom in practically no time" (14).

This reminds me of Nimtz and a recent comment by Zeh on one more sensational claim if I recall correctly also by Eckle. An attosecond equals to 10^-18

seconds.

Cobuild defines: "Your consciousness is your mind or your thought."

From this I conclude that except for exotic persons like Penrose c. has nothing to do with physics: "the scientific study of forces ans qualitiessuch as heat, light, sound, pressure, gravity, and electricity, and the way that they affect objects."

I do not hide that I also feel embarrassed by utterances like:

The gulf between science and spirituality is diminishing.

... bridging science and meditation

Eternity is contained in NOW. (I, Eckard B., understand what Amrit meant)

Conscious observer is the future of physics

People all over the world voted my essay because it is a brake-through in physics.

My essay is OK ...

My essay is of high quality.

Experiencing in linear time is result of inner time that belongs to the mind.

(Amrit overlooks that our inner time adapted to rotation of the earth, not the other way round.)

I agree with the comment by Jonathan Dickau.

Eckard Blumschein

Consequences are immense.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Nov. 15, 2009 @ 07:32 GMT
Eckard,

You are stuck in old paradigm. Sorry, to say so, but it's really true. The world is changing very fast now. Old paradigm liked categories, fragmentation. Separation. As long as you look at the world as a lot of separate 'things' in space, you will never understand. New paradigm says that all is one. Sure, there are many varieties, shades, colours, wavelengths, vibrations, etc, BUT all are united somehow, and intrinsically share the same essence.

To me, your quoted 'definition' of physics is so out of date that it's funny. "the scientific study of forces ans qualitiessuch as heat, light, sound, pressure, gravity, and electricity, and the way that they affect objects." You will spend your whole life studying this, and die a frustrated man, really. There is no truth in this, there is no joy.

Science is the search for underlying reality. Spirituality is the search for the experience of this reality. Hence my statement "gulf between science and spirituality is dimishing". This gulf is only in our perception. Don't be embarrassed. Just examine sincerely your ideas and see from where your embarrassment comes.

Finally, if you think that consciousness has nothing to do with physics (even in your narrow definition), how do you explain the placebo effect?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Eckard Blumschein wrote on Nov. 15, 2009 @ 09:15 GMT
Anonymous,

Since English is the fourth language I learned, I appreciate your understandable style. If I look back upon my life, it's sometimes with a sense of shame.

I recall Stane Metelko who came from Ljubljana to Magdeburg, once upon a time. My boss asked me to help Mr. Metelko to write a dissertation. "Please do just reformulate what he wrote into understandable German". I was educated to help, and I did my best. Mr. Metelko came with a comparative study of a well known variant A and a variant B. In the end, I convinced him that B was wrong. Dr. Metelko was so kind surprising me with a little gift. My boss was invited to publish something.

For this and other reasons I might be biased. So you might judge yourself: "Conscious observer is the future of physics.°

°My essay is of high quality."

"Consequences are immense."

Isn't such style an embarrassment for FQXi?

With pleasure I will reply to what you wrote:

Your statement about the past being connected to cause and effect - this is only true when you believe in cause and effect, and think of the present in terms of time. To me there is no single cause of anything. Everything is interconnected to such a degree that nothing can be 'singled out' as a cause. What is the cause of me typing this? Is it my idea about time? My education caused this? My parents? Their parents? The culture that my ancestors came from? Did the keyboard have any part in this cause? The materials that made this keyboard? The sun that is the source of the energy that created these materials, created my fingers and my thoughts? - Everything is the cause of everything else. This is the truth.

Claiming the truth is not my style. I agree that no effect has a single cause. Look at the family tree I used for illustration in my M291. However I disagree with your at hoc statement that everything is the cause of everything else.

"Science is the search for underlying reality."

-- By reasoning.

"Spirituality is the search for the experience of this reality. Hence my statement "gulf between science and spirituality is dimishing". This gulf is only in our perception."

-- Really?



Eckard Blumschein

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 15, 2009 @ 10:07 GMT
Dear Eckart Dear Anonymous

My essay is based on elementary facts not on mathematical formalism and so I say is of high quality. Physics is based on experiental data, math description is only a support.

Consciousness is a basics frequency (this is only a thesis based on Penrose research) of quanta of space QS. QS change electrical potential from positive to negative in a Planck time. QS are noncreated units of energy. Their basic frequency is consciousness itself.

When we will discover more of QS we will be able to create electric polarization of QS and so produce energy out of space. Tesla was searching on that.

With being able to change density of quantum space we will also rule gravity. About density of quantum space and gravity see my articles on vixra.

Has birth consciousness? Yes birth has consciousnerss. All that exist has consciousness. Man has a great potential to discover consciousness, to become "Conscious Observer". My work is about that. Might be mistakes in it. Important is general direction is rigt.

yours amrit

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 15, 2009 @ 11:39 GMT
PS

Isn't this pretty similar to Einstein's utterance "time is what clocks show"?

Yes, division between time and clocks creates misunderstanding that time is beyond clocks run. "Clocks show other systems motion, behaviour". If Einsten would clearly declaire that time/clocks run is a reference system only, a lot of throuble would be saved.

Why I say "immence

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 15, 2009 @ 11:50 GMT
Why I say "Consequences are immence".

I spend two yers in Asia talking with different "enlightened" people. All report that time is an illusion, that they live in eternal now and here. Are this people mad or there is some "scientific value" in their experience. I discover it is. These people step out of "inner neuronal time" with "awakening of the observer". Buddhist teaching is based on "conscious observer".

Sure "inner time" is formed on the day/night, on earth rotation.

Steping out of iner time is an immence experience. Physics has potential to integrate this experience. Physics is the same all over the world. "Conscious observer" is the scientific basis for planetary civilization. Conscious observer is behind any religion belief, national or ratial indentification.

"Conscious Observer" is the best physics can give to the world to raise peace and harmony on the planet.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anon wrote on Nov. 15, 2009 @ 21:08 GMT
Eckard:

"Spirituality is the search for the experience of this reality. Hence my statement "gulf between science and spirituality is dimishing". This gulf is only in our perception."

-- Really?

yes really! Experience means whole thing. Not just reasoning, thinking, analysing, rationalising... but also feeling, perceiving directly, being conscious and AWARE of. Mind can only take us so far, because it is very limited indeed. To experience this reality we must transcend mind. And I think you said in a previous post that consciousness is mind and thoughts - note that it is not. Consciousness is far far greater than mind.

For me the day is coming when all Scientists are spiritual and all spirituality embraces science.

But if you don't agree I am interested to hear what Spirituality is in your opinion?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Eckard Blumschein wrote on Nov. 15, 2009 @ 21:37 GMT
Dear Amrit,

You wrote:

Consciousness is a basics frequency (this is only a thesis based on Penrose research) of quanta of space QS. QS change electrical potential from positive to negative in a Planck time. QS are noncreated units of energy. Their basic frequency is consciousness itself.

Penrose reminds me a bit of Lighthill. Both British mathematicians are/were perhaps excellent in mathematics rather than physiology. I did not read "The Emperors New Mind". However, Lighthill was definitely wrong with his energy transfer from base to apex of cochlea.

Would your musing be still valuable if it did not at all relate to brains of animals?

Incidentally, you certainly meant bird when you wrote birth.

It would facilitate everybody's understanding if you did reveal what QS stands for.

Did you achieve anything in excess of Penrose's ideas?

Uncle Al persistently demands to perform a comparatively simple experiment.

What experiment would you like to be performed in order to confirm your ideas?

I doubt that speculative physics can immediately raise peace and harmony.

Someone said the world would be better without a Teller Ede. Edward Teller was indeed difficult when his daughter asked him: "If you are hating all people this includes you too?" and he replied: "Yes I hate myself too".

I was among those who might have survived because WW2 was over in Europa before the first bombs were built.

Peace is not available without serious effort.

Regards,

Eckard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 17, 2009 @ 16:49 GMT
Dear Eckart

peace = sonsciousness

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Nov. 27, 2009 @ 09:54 GMT
conscious observer = consciousness

Through every scientist eye is observing the same consciousness. Mind is between paerception and experience as a kind of filter. Conscious observer is fully aware of that. Conscious observer experiences universe as it is: "Ding an sich", would say Kant.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Dec. 12, 2009 @ 16:29 GMT
Hi Amrit. Do you not agree with the following? How do your see your essay as being consistent or inconsistent with the following please?

Since dreams make thought more like sensory experience (including gravity and electromagnetism/light) in general, the idea of "how space manifests as electromagnetic/gravitational energy" is not only demonstrated in dreams (as I have shown), but this idea is then ALSO understood to be NECESSARILY central to an improved understanding of physics/experience in general.

According to Jonathan Dickau, my idea of "how space manifests as electromagnetic/gravitational energy" is "right on" as a central and valuable idea/concept in physics.

Also, how do you account for the following:

Do you understand the GIGANTIC significance of the following three statements taken together?:

1) The ability of thought to describe OR reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience.

2) Dreams involve a fundamental integration AND spreading of being, experience, and thought at the [gravitational and electromagnetic] MID-RANGE of feeling BETWEEN thought AND sense.

3) Dreams make thought more like sensory experience IN GENERAL (including gravity and electromagnetism).

Now, also consider the following:

These are the essential parameters/requirements regarding the demonstration/proof of what is ultimately possible in physics.

1) Making thought more like sensory experience in general.

2) Space manifesting as gravitational/electromagnetic energy.

3) Balancing/uniting scale.

4) Exhibiting/demonstrating particle/wave.

5) Repulsive/attractive.

What is ultimately possible in physics cannot (and should not) be properly/fully understood apart from this great truth:

The ability of thought to describe OR reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Dec. 14, 2009 @ 18:58 GMT
Dear Franck, you say: Since dreams make thought more like sensory experience........I do not get that realy. Could you explain.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Dec. 24, 2009 @ 09:19 GMT
Time is a Measuring System Based on Light Speed

attachments: Time_is_a_Measuring_System.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jim George Snowdon replied on May. 10, 2010 @ 02:39 GMT
Dear Amrit,

We use the Earth`s duration of rotation, as the primary measurement baseline in establishing our units of duration, such as hours and weeks.

In my post on September 10th, I said, "Events do have duration. We have duration and motion in our timeless universe. In our conscious experience of duration, we assume time is passing."

While our planet rotates in timeless space, it`s rotational motion has ceaseless affect on our environment! The motion is real, it`s effects are all encompassing. We use this same motion, as the measurement baseline for our time keeping. Given the constant overwhelming affect of rotation on our planet, it`s understandable that conscious inhabitants would elect to assume time is passing, rather than duration is elapsing.

We are permanently in the present. Everything that has ever happened, happened in the present. Remnants of all those happenings are still here with us, in the present. While it seems difficult to disprove time exists, it is possible to prove it`s unnecessary, and not foundational.

It`s possible to explain the nature of time in terms of rotation, duration, and consciousness.

In my post on the thread of my essay, in the nature of time essay contest, I said, "A kind of proof is available in the fact that we are engaged in an essay contest about the nature of time, in two thousand and nine. This strongly suggests that no one has ever found a shred of evidence that time exists."

Yours,

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Dec. 30, 2009 @ 20:55 GMT
TIMELESS UNIVERSE

here is my research proposal

yours amrit

http://www.linkedin.com/newsArticle?viewDiscussion=&art
icleID=99889563&gid=2615569&trk=EML_anet_nws_c_ttle-cDhOon0J
umNFomgJt7dBpSBA

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


sridattadev wrote on May. 18, 2011 @ 19:48 GMT
Dear All,

I found this interesting forum and article which are similar to what I have experienced in life and documented at the below links

Theory of Everything

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


sridattadev wrote on May. 18, 2011 @ 19:59 GMT
Conscience is the cosmological constant

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


CMR wrote on Feb. 22, 2012 @ 20:05 GMT
Peter Lynds has been here before:

http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/622019?ln=en

http://cdswe
b.cern.ch/record/622019/files/ext-2003-042.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Kamilla Kamilla wrote on Apr. 10, 2016 @ 22:04 GMT
This is my first time visit here. From the tons of comments on your articles,I guess I am not only one having all the enjoyment right here!

192.168.1.1

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


muneer ahmed ahmed wrote on Feb. 12, 2018 @ 11:46 GMT
It was thinking about whether I could utilize this review on my other site, I will connect it back to your site though.Great Thanks. Car Title Loans

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


muneer ahmed ahmed wrote on Feb. 12, 2018 @ 11:50 GMT
I real glad to uncover this web internet site on bing, just what I was searching for.Manhattan Capital Inc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


muneer ahmed ahmed wrote on Mar. 5, 2018 @ 10:41 GMT
If more people that write articles really concerned themselves with writing great content like you, more readers would be interested in their writings. Thank you for caring about your content..

e-liquid

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


muneer ahmed ahmed wrote on Mar. 5, 2018 @ 10:43 GMT
If more people that write articles really concerned themselves with writing great content like you, more readers would be interested in their writings. Thank you for caring about your content

e-liquid

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


muneer ahmed ahmed wrote on Mar. 7, 2018 @ 11:41 GMT
Incredible articles and awesome design. Your blog entry merits the greater part of the positive input it"s been getting.

https://mothersday2018.org/

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


muneer ahmed ahmed wrote on Mar. 7, 2018 @ 12:13 GMT
It was a very good post indeed. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it in my lunch time. Will surely come and visit this blog more often. Thanks for sharing.

مهاجرت به انگلستان

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


muneer ahmed ahmed wrote on Mar. 11, 2018 @ 13:03 GMT
Your post is very helpful to get some effective tips to reduce weight properly. You have shared various nice photos of the same. I would like to thank you for sharing these tips. Surely I will try this at home. Keep updating more simple tips like this. booklet design

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Xmen74152 Lora Lora replied on Oct. 7, 2019 @ 10:03 GMT
Thank you so much for this wonderful Post and all the best for your future. I hope to see more post from you. I am satisfied with the arrangement of

your post. You are really a talented person I have ever seen.

Norton.com/setup

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Charles Reis Reis wrote on Apr. 7, 2018 @ 11:11 GMT
hiii...... Get Apk Market Free Download

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Xmen74152 Lora Lora wrote on Oct. 7, 2019 @ 10:03 GMT
Thank you so much for this wonderful Post and all the best for your future. I hope to see more post from you. I am satisfied with the arrangement of

your post. You are really a talented person I have ever seen

Norton.com/setup

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.