If time’s arrow points
In entropy’s direction
We are all time machines.
If time’s arrow points
In entropy’s direction
We are all time machines.
I have been having some overlap in fields while thinking about the nature of time. Time gives us some of the more interesting paradoxes in Western Science; The Twin Paradox, Time Dilation, Instantaneity. Once again I would like you to consider the possibility that we adhere so tightly to our “beliefs” that it blocks us from seeing the obvious.
Let me point out a few of these beliefs:
These give some insurmountable problems when trying to deal with the concept of time. Let’s try a different point of view.
Let’s start by realizing that everything vibrates at some subdivision of the speed of light (c) which appears to us to be a constant. This is Eternity. When we can traverse the Universe in an instant we experience Eternity. Let’s see this once again as the aether. This was part of what Einstein was trying to resolve with the idea of “hidden variables”. How does one resolve instantaneous action with the concept of time and the concept of the speed of light being a constant and insurmountable.
In order to truly be able to get a grasp on Kozyrev’s work and related findings, certain new analogies for physical matter are required. Rigorously, Kozyrev’s work forces us to visualize all physical objects of matter in the Universe as if they were sponges that are submerged in water.
In all of these analogies, we should consider the sponges as having remained in water for a long enough period of time that they are completely saturated. Bearing this in mind, there are two things we can do with such sponges underwater: we can decrease the volume of water that they contain or increase it, by very simple mechanical procedures.
1.Decrease: If a submerged, saturated sponge is squeezed, cooled or rotated, then some of the water inside of it will be released into its surroundings, decreasing its mass. Once the sponge is no longer disturbed, the pressure on the millions of tiny pores is relieved, causing it to again absorb water and expand back to its normal resting mass.
2.Increase: We can also pump more water pressure into the sponge in its rest state, such as by heating (vibrating) it, thus causing some of the pores to expand with more water than they can comfortably hold. In this case, once we relieve the added pressure, the sponge will naturally release its excess water and shrink back down to its normal resting mass.
Though it would seem impossible to most people, Kozyrev showed that by shaking, spinning, heating, cooling, vibrating or breaking physical objects, their weight can be increased or decreased by subtle but definite amounts. And this is but one aspect of his amazing work.
Please note, at this point we don’t have to concern ourselves with the validity of the above stated model. We are merely testing it as a hypothesis and it will either work or not.
I would like to state that, at this point, I don’t believe in the concept of “infinity”. The idea that anything goes on forever; time or direction wise doesn’t compute with me. That should make it obvious that I don’t believe that the Universe is infinite. I think most modern physicists ascribe to this view also. Unless, of course, one wants to equate “infinite” with “God” and basically other incomprehensible concepts.
Our very definitions of point, line, area, volume, as examples of 0, 1, 2 and 3 dimensional concepts, just don’t exist, even conceptually. Can you perceive of a one sided plane surface? We throw in the idea of infinity as an axiom to be taken as stated, much as the idea of 3 dimensions is taken as axiomatic rather than as the misconstrued standard that it has proven to be. None of these things works consistently, or conceptually.
What we have, at the base line are, location, direction (angle) and vector (the length and direction from one point to another). With these basic, quite intuitive, concepts, we can express the complexities of our Universe in ways unprecedented with our 3 dimensional “Standard Model”.
This should become part of a heading called “Mind Messers. ” or something like that. Mull this one over.
Our bodies, indeed, our entire physical world, is made up of “particles” none of which can actually be seen, by-the-way, but which exhibit very definite and consistent patterns of behavior due to largely unknown or misunderstood forces. So, every atom in our bodies which in turn make up the molecules, enzymes, proteins, cells, organs, organ systems etc. are all operating at full tilt; somewhere near the speed of light in some cases. All of that activity supplies blood to my highly evolved (thus far) brain which then uses this computer to write these words which, as soon as they are put down begin to ever so slowly breakdown via entropy into the same randomness from whence they came.
Now, if time’s arrow is the direction of entropy and/or vice versa, what happens to time while I (all those atoms which comprise “me”) am creating via syntropy; making ever more complex devices from the chaos. Does time reverse? Does it pause? Does that creative time ever get “paid back” is some mysterious way?
Perhaps a good analogy is a plant. It takes in the sunlight water and certain minerals and replicates the patterns encrypted in the DNA of its seed to become the fruited plant which we then harvest, breakdown via cooking, chewing and digesting to repeat the process.
I’m putting this out because I find it is triggering many interesting and sometimes conflicting ideas of what we are and what it is, exactly, we are going here. I heard one of the many pundits of evolution say the other day that the purpose of any evolving civilization should be to get off the face of the planet they are evolving on. It’s not a stable place to be. One big solar flare in the wrong direction and puff…there goes earth’s atmosphere. Who cares about the CO2? But, this is the subject for another time. Just consider whether time goes backward if we are being creative. It seems logically that it should. The related physics question (you may remember this one from high school too) says that if an astronaut goes off at the speed of light and his twin brother stays on earth, when the astronaut twin gets back he would be younger because time slows down as your speed increases, hypothetically stopping when you got to the speed of light but, and here’s the tricky part, when the astronaut twin stops won’t the light he has been speeding ahead of catch back up with him? Would he age faster on the return trip or as he slowed down? And, per relativity, how would we know which twin was, in fact, moving and in which direction? All of these questions require incredible kludges and suspensions of disbelief to even begin to make any sense but then strangle in their own complexity.
I think there’s a better, easier and more intuitive way.
It’s called Synergetics.