Reality in the context of Physics

Click here to edit subtitle

About time dimensions

The object universe doesn't have a time dimension being only the youngest iteration of a sequence of configurations that can be imagined but do not have substantial existence. This structure is important for overcoming Grandfather like paradoxes. The time line along which the sequence of configurations can be imagined is imaginary though it can still be useful to illustrate during which iteration an event occurred. Potential sensory data spread within the Object reality environment provides the semblance of a time dimension as it encodes events that have occurred 'over time' within it. But it is just sensory data spread within Object reality space. The output IR. basic or subjective is a space time output because it contains manifestations formed from data taking different lengths of time (iterations of the Object universe ) to arrive together or very close together, the further away the object the further back in time the origin of the data forming the image, and in that sense it has a time dimension.


If we consider Block time; that 4D geometric object has a dimension which is the time dimension as well as its space dimensions. The Object universe however is not spread over time but is only the youngest configuration of objects and relations within it. So it does not have time as a dimension, and is unlike the Block universe in that respect. However there is passage of time as the configuration is always changing - the Object universe's contents are in continual motion. But only the most recent arrangement has substantial existence. This is like Presentism but subtly different as it is about what actually exists rather than what is seen to exist -Now, the Object reality rather than the Image reality. A series of former configurations of the Object universe could be imagined along a time line but the sequence and the line do not actually exist unlike the Block universe model. The time line is imaginary but the change in configuration of the universe is not. The time line can be useful for considering the historical sequence but there is no substantial past or future. This is important as it prevents Grandfather like paradoxes. Yet the distribution of potential sensory data within the Object universe allows relativity, non simultaneity of events for different observers and resolution of other paradoxes. The OR.(Object reality)data time (events encoded within the potential sensory data gives the different Basic and subjective IR.(Image reality )times.

 Yes it is absolute not relative and uni-temporal meaning it is the same time everywhere. That one time is synonymous with the existing substantial configuration. It is the change in configuration that gives passage of time. That passage of time does not have an existence independent of the changing configuration of the universe and is not a dimension of the 3D configuration. So without paradox: OR. configuration time may be regarded as foundational absolute time and might also be considered not to exist as it is just a temporal description of the overall spatial changes in a substantial configuration.

Two futures

It is helpful to have two different versions of “the future” within the explanatory model. One is the not yet received sensory data that already exists in the environment, which can become an experinced present (or present output) when recieved and processed. In this explanatory model that is called the pre-written future.


The pre-written future

The data was produced when there was interaction between the actualised objects or fermion particles and the environmental medium/a in which they exist. This could be emission or reflection of EM waves or the production of pressure waves which will be interpreted as sound or release into the environment of other data such as chemicals in the air that can be detected by artificial detector or organism.The time between production and receipt will depend on the type of data, distance from source and reference frame. This gives Einsteinian relativity and non simultaneity.This may have formerly been thought of as being the past since the event producing the data has already occurred unobserved. However in this model the past is that which has been experienced as the present and may be stored in memory, or already exists in records. If the direction of time, with respect to observation, is thought about it is the pre-written future that is becoming the present and then becoming the past in records and memory. (Which is the opposite direction to that in which time has been thought to progress and the arrow of time has usually been imagined.)


The unwritten future

The other future is open and non existent. The imagined nothingness prior to actualisation. That is called the unwritten future in this explanatory model. This future is necessary to allow partial non determinism and free will. It can be imagined as what will be but isn't. As it does not exist there can be no time travel into that future. Likewise as the past does not exist except in records and memory there can be no time travel to the past. This understanding of time overcomes the twins and grandfather paradoxes. The time dimension only applies to the electromagnetic and other sensory data in the environment not existing actualisations outside of the fully simultaneous unitemporal-Now.

What exists unobserved has an arrangement and that arrangement consists of scales, masses, separations, orientations, which give the forces that will act to give the next arrangement. So it is the former arrangement becoming the next in sequence. This is the traditional direction of the arrow of time. What was to what is. That has traditionally called past to present but past has a different meaning within this explanatory model, as can be seen on the diagram. The past only exists as records including memory in this model. This applies to what is happening unobserved and so is non relativistic. Not what is observed, which is prone to non simultaneity and even different orders of observed events for different observers. It gives an imaginary sequence of arrangements which might be the “preferred foliation” necessary for QM models.Different from the sequence of presents fabricated by an observer from recieved data, which is affected by observer position and motion relative to the objects observed.

This is not fully determined by former arrangement of a structure as there will be times when balance points occur and the “direction” in which the outcome proceeds will be due to the slightest perturbation from the internal or external environment. This might be said to be the locations where “God plays dice”, in an otherwise deterministic unobserved reality. The sequence of former arrangements of the Object universe are giving the actualisations and the open future is only imaginary. Interaction of the actualisations with the environment are giving the data which is the pre-written future which will become the observed, detected or experienced present-now.


The Paradoxes

This explanatory framework  overcomes the temporal paradoxes. The grandfather paradox , barn pole paradox, Andromeda paradox and twins paradox. 


The grandfather paradox: Without a time dimension it is possible to see that it is impossible to travel in time and cause a paradox such as the Grandfather paradox or auto infanticide paradox. The mistake is assuming that the distribution of sensory data (EM) that will produce manifestations of reality is actually those events, material interactions, in space. This is a category error. Substantial objects made of atoms and manifestations produced by the processing of sensory data belong to different facets of reality on different sides of the reality interface.

For some reason it was decided that space-time exists externally to the observer and is not just "mind space", a construct that is fabricated by the function of the sensory system and brain (and other reality interfaces). I do not know if that was a deliberate decision made by Einstein or his possible indecision on the matter was overtaken by the assumptions of others. Whatever the reason for the assumption of the space-time continuum as an external reality, and not a fabrication from received data only, it is incorrect. That does not make GR or SR incorrect but incorrectly interpreted.

I have just read today about a scientist who has spent his life since age 11 trying to build a time machine to warn his dad of a heart attack. He is using lazer rings to try and create disturbances in the space-time continuum , even obtaining large sums of money to pursue a feasibly study of his goals.Scientist building a time machine Unfortunately this kind of research is misguided, due to the inbuilt category error, that I point out, not having been identified.
It also doesn't alter time ( it seems from the article that the scientist's hypothesis is that it is space-time 'Out there' and so disturbing space is also disturbing time).I disagree. It is uni-temporal space within which there is potential sensory data giving space-time output when processed. Evidence for that being that that allows the barn pole type and Andromeda paradoxes to be fully intuitive and Grandfather paradox to be negated without contrived prohibition rules or many worlds world line jumping.

Data within the EM radiation  remains after the event from which Image reality manifestations (observed/experienced reality) can be formed. Even so, actualised concrete objects can not be constructed from received light. They are a different category of reality. So past events themselves ie the configurations of concrete elements of Object reality are not within the hypothetical space-time continuum or the pool of electromagnetic potential sensory data. And can not be visited by time travel. The arrangements of matter and particles that were the source event may go onto form other relationships in the uni-temporal Object universe. 

No time travel to the substantial past is possible because the former configurations of substantial matter and particles are not perpetual but are changed into the new configurations of the new uni-temporal Now. Disallowing Grandfather type paradox. Though if it was possible to receive light long after it was emitted it would be possible to see images of the past, reflection echo like is a possibility or collection of the signal and replay back to its source. Without faster than light speed it isn't possible to outrun em signals, slow to below light speed and then view the events of the past. With faster than light speed that would be possible but is not time travel,its just receiving different potential sensory data and making a different experienced present,still within uni-temporal Now the existing configuration of the substantial Object universe. Just as viewing ancient star light is not time travel but is making a manifestation or Image from ancient em sensory data.

The barn pole paradox: and similar bug rivet paradox are due to the assumption once again that a manifestation is actually the (actualised) material object in space rather than just fabricated product of EM data interception and processing. Depending upon observer position and relative motion different data wil be obtained from the environment and amalgamated into the output manifestation.  I have in many posts pointed out that we never see substantial objects themselves. Always emergent reality outputs of EM data processing. The analogy can be given of a building observed by a near observer and a far observer; Each sees it as having a different height to the other. The substantial Object itself in Object reality does not change size at all how ever the observers look at it. Each observer receives a sub set of EM data from which their manifestation is fabricated and in this (house) case of varying size the visual angle gives the size of the object on the retina and consequently the image presented to the visual cortex.There is a widespread problem of not differentiating substantial objects made of atoms,and the emergent Image reality manifestation of an object. All are called by the name of the object. Swapping of observer perspective is not a problem as shown by the house size analogy above. Different observers see different things depending upon their relation to the substantial object ( that affects which sensory data is received to form the manifestation of the object that is seen.) As another analogy consider the perceived length of a pole like object seen head on and same pole seen from its side held horizontally in front of the observer standing midway between the ends. IMHO the paradox comes only from not differentiating object from emergent image. Non simultaneity of perceived events can account for both different perceived sizes of the objects (Images) and different reckoning of the opening and closing of the doors.
As I understand it, the barn pole problem is about non simultaneity of events for different observer reference frames. 

This is a link to a good visual illustration of the paradox.

 http://www.rdrop.com/~half/Creations/Puzzles/pole.and.barn/index.html 


The barn pole paradox :Non simultaneity illustrated with colour changes © Mark L. Irons

Quote" The hidden assumption in the apparent paradox is that when we envision "the pole", we imagine an actual pole. In our daily existence poles don't change from moment to moment, so our mental model of a pole is of something uniform, something always the same at every moment for all observers. Once we recognize and break that assumption, it becomes easier to comprehend how observers in different frames can disagree about an object's appearance." © Mark L. Irons, last updated 10 August 2007 

I find this presentation easy to understand. As I see it each colour relates to a different time or iteration in the sequence of configurations of the Object universe; because the pole illustrated is going through a regular sequential colour change. The manifestations produced by each observer are constructed of data from different "temporal"origins ( Object universe configuration origins,IE different CO-data).The manifestations differ in colours and length. The same applies to both pole and barn. Changing from one observer perspective to the other does not alter the source object at all but alters the manifestation observed.

The manifestations are variable in form because different data can be amalgamated to fabricate  the form of the manifestation. The manifestation may appear to be a solid material object but it is not. It is like a virtual reality. Fabricated from received and processed data. 

The Twins paradox:  Both barn-pole and twins ignore the unobserved reality that exists simultaneously beneath perception. Taking observation of time dilation or of length contraction to be what is happening to the actualized object itself. The observed "object" (manifestation) is regarded as the object (actualization).  This is category error. Everything substantial , made from atoms , exists simultaneously not at different times. So external universal time is not passing differently for the twins despite how they see each other's clocks compared to their own. Any difference in ageing will be due to differences in biological ageing. Which is to do with differences in  metabolism and health resulting from differences in gravity, diet, exposure to pathogens, exercise, sleep quality and quantity,  natural sunshine exposure and radiation levels. Space travel has been found to be very detrimental to health. Bone loss, muscle wastage, and radiation damage to eyes and increased cancer risk for example are all correlated to advanced age and also space travel. Any slight difference due to exposure to different forces will be counteracted by the biological ageing effect of space travel.


Re.the Andromeda paradox. 

This explanation applies to a universe in which there is a foundational uni-temporal, absolute space Object reality (This is like Present-ism but preceding the observed present which is the output of sensory data processing and thus delayed relative to uni-temporal Now Object reality:and there is an an emergent space time reality that co-exists within Object reality as another distinct facet of reality.
The Object reality or source reality, and Image reality experienced present manifestation are not synchronized. When an event is observed via its manifestations is variable, but when an event happens in the source Object reality is definite, and uni-temporal as that event having happened in Object reality is true for all locations.
The observer walking towards Andromeda would receive the potential sensory data sooner than an Earth bound observer. So even though no invasion data is yet received as Andromeda is too far away it can be said that for the walking observer the potential sensory data emitted from the invasion events on Andromeda are nearer to him than the Earth bound observer. This does not however mean the source event occurred sooner. The source event occurs only once and the time of that occurrence (iteration of the Object universe within the imaginary past sequence of iterations is unique and unchangeable).
Here is another explanation of the same paradox.....

The Andromeda paradox: 

2.5 million years after the events occurred on Andromeda they could be observed. Walking towards Andromeda the data will be received sooner. Which means for the walking observer the battle fleet has already been launched but for the stationary observer on Earth battle plans will only just be being made.However If the same thing is done but 2.5 million years earlier prior to the possibility of observation first the battle plans are drawn up and this is simultaneous to both Earth men regardless of their position in the universe and then the fleet is launched and that is simultaneous to both Earth men regardless of position. Because the unobserved reality is non relativistic but there is sequential passage of time (sequential change of universal arrangement).

Only observed (Image or output) reality relying upon data transmission is relativistic. So the paradox is based upon a false assumption that unobserved Object/foundational/Source) reality is relativistic and that there would be non simultaneity of occurrence of the -Source events- on Andromeda for the two men, rather than just non simultaneity due to differences in when -sensory data- is received.

Re.the Andromeda paradox.  This explanation applies to a universe in which there is a foundational uni-temporal, absolute space Object reality (This is like Present-ism but preceding the observed present which is the output of sensory data processing and thus delayed relative to uni-temporal Now Object reality:and there is an an emergent space time reality that co-exists within Object reality as another distinct facet of reality.
The Object reality or source reality, and Image reality experienced present manifestation are not synchronized. When an event is observed via its manifestations is variable, but when an event happens in the source Object reality is definite, and uni-temporal as that event having happened in Object reality is true for all locations.
The observer walking towards Andromeda would receive the potential sensory data sooner than an Earth bound observer. So even though no invasion data is yet received as Andromeda is too far away it can be said that for the walking observer the potential sensory data emitted from the invasion events on Andromeda are nearer to him than the Earth bound observer. This does not however mean the source event occurred sooner. The source event occurs only once and the time of that occurrence (iteration of the Object universe within the imaginary past sequence of iterations is unique and unchangeable).

Response to video, Time travel, Worm hole, billiard ball' paradox, Timelessly. (re Paul Davies- New scientist article) by Matt Welcome Marsden  
The paradox is about a worm hole  in which a ball enters  and exists back in time to hit itself entering the hole. 
My reply: I don't want to entirely eliminate the idea of the 'time tunnel' but to present a different idea of what it is and how an object would interact with it. I'd say that there is potential sensory data in the environment and its not completely unfeasible that it could be disturbed in such a way as to form a tunnel. The object only exists Now though, and passing through a tunnel of potential sensory data would not affect the time at which the object itself exists. As it is only Now it wouldn't meet itself or need to be spaghetti-fied. The potential sensory data with temporal spread within the information continues to exist Now but where the object was and is Now do not both exist. So no meeting itself, unless it is a long object already, that fits all of the way through the tunnel of em information. The 'wormhole' entering object is just encountering data pertaining to different -Now configurations of the Object universe, the older on exit compared to younger on entrance. Yet it is always within the only foundational time that I call uni-temporal Now. 

This paradox like the other temporal paradoxes is dispelled by recognition of the need to differentiate material objects in foundational reality, potential sensory data in that environment, and outputs formed from sense-able information.

 
Re travelling on a light beam : thinking about the thought experiment 
If an event (A) is encoded in a set of EM data that is propagating at light speed and the man travels with it at light speed, he is keeping pace with the encoded event (A) It is not being superseded by younger, more recent EM data that would up date the man's present experience. It is his experience of a changing present that stops. Despite this there is still passage of time external to his experience, the sequential change in configuration of the Object universe, which includes change in position of EM sensory data.

I think there is a  a presumption in this thought experiment that  he cannot simultaneously keep pace with the light beam and receive EM from elsewhere, that would give him changing present experience.I may be mistaken  about that presumption . Any way  EM being waves can pass through each other, the light beam is not like a solid object that would exclude others from that space.  So "time" carried by the light beam is stopped relative to the man travelling with it  yet he can experience time passing via the sensory data obtained from without the light beam he is riding I
f we have a sensor at rest receiving a bombardment photon data that is travelling at c that will give an output passage of time. The image of a nearby clock produced from the photon data detected by the sensor would show marking time as you put it at one second per second. Instead of considering the man travelling with a photon stream how about if we consider the photon stream alone to be encoding the time on a clock. The data is unchanging, it is not being updated and so the time encoded does not change." Clock time apparently stands still". That's two different photon streams; one with changing data content and one without changing content; one showing passage of time and one not.
The updating of the sensory data from which the present of an observer at rest is fabricated will be happening at light speed. That is to say the rate of photon data arriving is the speed of light but there has to be processing time added to that to get to the rate at which the present that is experienced is intermittently updated. Which is very much slower. See David Eagleman's FQXi 
talk. "What is time to the brain"... He provides evidence that human experience is an another level of emergent reality beyond mere amalgamation of sensory inputs according to time of arrival. There being additional delays and synchronization of sensory data from different senses giving causal 'story' consistency.The experience of passage of time is variable for a human observer. 

When talking  of time in relation to a "real physical particle" one is now no longer talking about the perception of time, time within the emergent reality of the observer, but passage of time in external substantial reality. These are different categories of time. Particles themselves do not experience a present, the emergent Image reality, they just always are at uni-temporal -Now what ever speed they are travelling. (uni-temporal-Now is the temporal analogue of the existing (youngest)configuration of the Object universe)

Yet for a traveler at relative light speed (relative to an observer deemed to be rest )time passes normally. He gets hungry, he gets bored, etc. because physiologically there is still change occurring. Worth mentioning I think, his velocity is only relative to something deemed to be at rest.It could be something moving away from him at high speed and so his absolute velocity is much less than c. Photons travelling within the apparent rest frame of the high velocity traveler behave just like any other photons and would be measured to be travelling at the speed of light. Perhaps it needs to be accepted that the speed of light is always the speed measured by the local observer; and THAT speed can not exceed the speed of light. A far observer would not be able to measure the speed of those particular photons themselves, because he is not there but far away.

That's two different photon streams; one with changing data content and one without changing content; one showing passage of time and one not." The important difference is what the observer is doing relative to the EM data as the observer's motion determines whether the data content is changing relative to him or not. Being at rest relative to his surroundings receiving data traveling at c relative to him (changing data and corresponding experienced passage of time) OR traveling with the EM data at c that is consequently unchanging in that reference frame.(No experience of passage of time from that data.) Time can be seen to be passing differently depending on reference frame because that kind of time is emergent from the data content of the EM received.

While light beam traveler and stationary observer are not becoming separated in foundational, uni-temporal time because of their motion and consequently different EM data receipt. They both always stay within the configuration of the Object universe that exists, not one in the future relative to the other because he has seen time passing faster.  Now as regards the "stopped" photon. That it is stopped is the relative perception of the observer travelling with it. Yes from that perspective the photon ceases to have a frequency or wavelength because the observer is travelling with the wave keeping pace with it. But the photons in the beam are not themselves changed. There is no Basic IR. or subjective IR.Passage of time that can be formed from the photons in that reference frame.So in that respect there is no time. However the photon beam is still carrying OR. data time that could give Basic or subjective IR. time output to observer's crossed by it's path not travelling with it. Also there is still the foundational OR. configuration time: Object universal passage of time in which these scenarios are happening, that is independent of relative perceptions and data transmission.

That time is both stopped and not stopped is only paradoxical if no differentiation between kinds of time is made.

A note about order 

Actualization has to come before manifestation because data must be transmitted to the detector, (which is not instantaneous) and then the manifest reality must be formed by the observer from the received data, (which is not instantaneous). The manifestation that is observed is created by the observer from the received data and does not preexist that occurrence.(Cf. wave function collapse.) The actualized but unobserved reality must preexists the observed manifestation enabling data to be available from which the manifestation of reality is formed.
Relativity is only concerned with the manifestation of reality, so can not account for such things as causality, non determinism, it does not have an open future.Quantum physics is concerned with probabilities becoming actualized and manifest reality and does not fit with space time. It is dealing with P stage becoming A stage and attempting unsuccessfully to fit with space-time M stage.

Having the whole sequence of stages P, A , M, R, allows the relationship between QM and relativity to be seen in a new way. What is happening at the P to A stage of reality will not fit observation of the M stage, because it is not the same phenomenon at all.Sequential actualization allows passage of time. There is no passage of time in relativity as such only observer perspective giving the manifest reality. 

It is a mistake to regard the here and Now /present, IE What is seen to be here-Now or what is seen to be present, as a singular time in space. That's because it is amalgamated from poly temporal data (easier to say than multi- temporal). Far more intuitive when astronomic observation is included. Near cat on wall, more distant trees and a night sky for example. Each sample of sensory data is a sub set of all of the sensory data spread out in space over time (IE over iterations of the object universe)from an observed object, being only that part received by the observer. The sensory data received together, does not all have the same temporal origin in space, giving an output with images representing different uni-temporal times (iterations of the Object universe).

 The differences in sizes of objects when close to observer and far from observer are an indication that the amalgamated output image is formed from projected sensory data. Visual angle determining size of image on retina and visual cortex and hence perceived size.Wikipedia, Visual angle. A meter ruler appears smaller as it is moved away from the observer as the visual angle decreases. In the case of human stereoscopic vision two amalgamated images are mentally combined to give the effect of 3D. It is clear that neither the sizes experienced nor the temporal mixture of the image are an identical representation of the object reality, the actual substantial source objects themselves existing externally to the observer. And being what it is, a fabricated output from an amalgamation of data originating at different distances and hence also times, it is altered by motion of observer or motion sources of data input, both of which alter the way in which the observer receives sensory data from which to fabricate the observed present. Where something is seen in uni-temporal time (IE related to which iteration of the Object universe) does alter as does apparent size. 

The here and Now /present, IE What is seen to be here-Now or what is seen to be present is not the division between what has existed and what will exist but only the output of that data received and processed by that observer. Another observer moving through space on a different path or moving with a different speed will receive different sensory data and thus have a different present experience. Apparent simultaneity is a question of what data is processed into output together or very close to together. 

The division between what has existed, the imaginary substantial past,and the imaginary substantial future is uni-temporal-Now or the one and only existing configuration of the substantial Object universe. That is not the visible universe constructed from received EM radiation data but all that substantially exists simultaneously including all EM potential sensory data within that configuration. All experienced presents, whatever the image content, occur within the uni-temporal Now. There is no other time to exist at. The content of all presents experienced is images of substantial objects and events that have already occurred in Object reality and so the substantial configuration and substantial content of uni-temporal Now precedes the image configuration and content of all presents.

A simple illustration of the Doppler effect
Quote" Think about if you were walking along a path and dropping a cookie every second so you could follow the return path. If you walk slow, the cookies will be closer together than if you walk fast. If you run along, still dropping a cookie every second, the cookies will be further apart still; they will in effect be red shifted." Vern from the naked scientists.com Similarly imagine a cookie collector walking towards the distributor or running towards him.

Neither movement of distributor or collector alters the speed of distribution which remains one cookie per second nor does it alter the speed of the cookies which is 0 m/sec on the ground. Even though the distribution of the cookies in the environment has altered in the case of moving distributor, and the way in which sensory data is collected alters in the case of the varying speed of collection- the frequency with which cookies are encountered also increases if the collector runs. It wouldn't be quite right to say relative to the collector the speed of the cookies has increased, as they remain stationary one once on the ground. What has changed is their distribution in space over time which alters frequency of encounter. Altered speed of encounter (frequency experienced ) does not alter the rate of distribution (the frequency of the source.)

Now imagine light photons rather than cookies. Same scenario but the photons will not lie stationary like the cookies but will travel at the speed of light. If we imagine measuring that, we could imagine measuring the speed of an individual photon or the speed of one wave crest, which will remain the speed of light. Even though the distribution of the light in the environment has altered in the case of moving distributor, and the way in which sensory data is collected alters in the case of the varying speed of collection. 

A possible explanation of the Inequality of matter and anti matter
There is a predominance of matter rather than anti matter in the  universe. Rather than this being due to the way in which the universe was created it is likely to be due to the way in which these particles move. It is sometimes said that antimatter is the equivalent of a particle moving backwards in time. However within this explanatory framework that is impossible. All things exist simultaneously and, with the changing Object universal arrangements (iterations), the objects  move along their universal paths (comprising changes of location at all scales.) How they move is the result of all kinetic energy minus potential energy, as potential energy is always minimized. That continual change is the foundational origin of Object universal passage of time within this framework . Therefore the equivalent of going backwards in time within this framework is to move against the default Object universal motion that is minimizing potential energy. Going against the flow is difficult, going with the flow is easy. Which makes antimatter going against the flow of the universe  far rarer. Being exceptional particles produced in exceptional circumstances rather than the norm.