Reality in the context of Physics

Click here to edit subtitle

Time kinds, within reality and the explanatory framework 

About the kinds of time necessary for relativity without paradox

There needs to be at least 4 kinds of physical time acknowledged and differentiated in physics, though there are more kinds of time if we include different representations of time such as time that only exists mathematically, internal biologically time, as kept by circadian rhythms adjusted by light exposure times: important for biological organisms, and "Father time" that only exists symbolically and mentally.

The kinds of time important for physics are:

1. time in foundational Object reality, that is passage of time synonymous with the sequential change in configuration of the Object universe. OR.configuration time. Any highly regular sequential change with unchanging accuracy of repetition can be use to represent this such as clock time but only very close to the position of a stationary observer, to avoid significant data transmission and processing delay and affects of motion upon the timekeeping of the clock. This can be likened to "Proper time".

2. time information carried by potential sensory EM data primarily (but also other forms of sensory data ) in Object reality, OR. data time.

3. The time as experienced by an organism or displayed by a processing device. Which is Image reality time. It may be helpful to split that time into outputs that retain the data receipt order and those that do not necessarily.

That's a Basic IR. time and a subjective IR. time.

 Object reality(OR) configuration time is not affected by gravitation or motion, unlike Einstein's proper time. time and subsequent Basic IR. time is affected due to the curving of the EM data paths within a gravitational field and the Doppler effect. If substantial atomic clocks themselves are running slow when in motion as shown by a permanent change in time shown compared to a relatively stationary clock it is necessary to separately categorize clock time, for moving clocks. 

Light is potential sensory data from which emergent space -time manifestations can be formed. Rate of production of the em waves is not altered by movement of the source or observer but the rate of receipt does change, giving the Doppler effect change in frequency.

"Time" is not slowing down. That would cause some parts of the uni-temporal Object universe to exist at different times to other parts. However there is very slightly less change/alteration at the atomic scale(to do with configuration)than would be expected for an un-accelerated clock and for other bodies. If these experimental results are to be trusted. Atomic clocks are very sensitive devices  that may have been affected by the handling required during  the Hafele–Keating experiment .  There does seem to have been a large window for experimental error at least in the early experiments and there is some controversy regarding the results obtained from the raw data.

The light clock argument

It can be argued that the light clock argument of Einstein is incorrect for two reasons;

Argument 1. because an observer could co- move with the clock and then both clock and observer could consider themselves stationary. Therefore the material clock itself  can not be affected by merely the motion. 

Though the Hafele–Keating experiment  appeared to support that it is. Finding a change to the time shown when the clocks reunited. There is discussion of alternate reasons for this finding in the paper about the explanatory framework on viXra, link here or below these two numbered arguments.

Argument 2. Light is a periodic phenomenon. Period is not affected by translation. That is mathematical fact. It is a mistake to think of the light as a straight line  phenomenon. That straight line isn't actually the path taken. It can be imagined more like a coiled spring.  Whether extended or compressed according to relative perspective the path along the spring stays the same.

Re. Einstein's light clock. The light traveling between the mirrors is not moving in a straight line like a ray, but undergoing wave motion. Following an oscillating path that is the same whether there is relative translation or not. The notion that the light takes a longer path when the clock is moved is based on the straight line assumption. Instead it can be thought of as a fixed length of periodic motion with a fixed frequency, extended spring like in the translated reference frame. Following the path along the spring it is the same length whether the spring is extended or not. It is the same 'spring' in both reference frames and so the same length along the 'spring'. This means the speed of light is the same in both reference frames , even though it appears that when the clock is moved the light is traveling further in a straight line at c , making the period of the clock longer. 

Gravitational time dilation and the RICP explanatory framework (amended)

The problem: Accounting for non reciprocal measurable time differences in different gravitational potentials, on top of assumed reciprocal signal latency due to same distance of separation, without alteration of “time itself”.

Ideas rejected as useful for the solution of this problem

The light both entering the atmosphere and coming to Earth and leaving is considered by most people to be traveling in a straight line. We are taught in school light travels in a straight line. Changes in density of the atmosphere to do with composition and temperature becoming less dense with altitude is one reason the light may curve as there is an altering refractive index. This is well known and undoubtedly already taken into account by scientists and space communication technicians.

Worth considering

The Earth is rotating creating an accelerated frame of reference in which the approaching light is spiraling in, with a diminishing wavelength and corresponding increasing of frequency and and leaving light is spiraling out, with an increasing wavelength and corresponding longer frequency.

An exaggerated illustration to demonstrate that assertion The following visual aid can be drawn to help the comprehension of what is occurring.

The first task is segmenting a circle so that there is a hemisphere divided into 6 segments. (Or a whole circle segmented into12 if you prefer.) An eye can be drawn outside each segment looking directly in representing the view of an outside observer moving with the rotation of the earth or inside each segment looking out representing the view from the co-rotating Earth bound observer. Draw a small circle in the centre to represent the Earth.

For light entering the atmosphere and coming to the Earth draw a small straight line to represent the light getting progressively nearer to the centre. Start by placing the first line in the middle of the first segment with one end touching the perimeter. For a 12 cm circle a 1cm line can be drawn, 1 cm further in for each segment. So line 1 touches the perimeter and line 6 touches the centre of the circle. The same can be done for light leaving the Earth. Line 1 touching the centre of the circle and line 6 touching the perimeter. It can be seen that there is disparity between the outputs of received signals at the different locations.

A smoother path could be obtained by having many more segments and shorter lines but the approximation is suffice to demonstrate the principle. The in and out going lines and segment transitioning lines could also be combined into vectors to give a smoother more natural light curve but the rawness of the illustration helps with the visualization of the important components of the phenomena.


Looking at the two spirals drawn: The Earth receiver getting the red shifted signal making the timekeeping of the distant satellite seem slow and the satellite receiving blue shifted signal making the time keeping on Earth seem fast. This is explained as follows.

Outgoing signal :The distance per unit time (whatever unit or event is being used )represented by the line, it can be seen that the vertical distance from the centre straight out is the same in each segment , and this in the non rotating inertial view, i.e. just adding up the straight line lengths, would give a constant distance over time estimation. However if the centre point of the lines in each segment are joined up to give an approximation of the lights motion it can be seen that 'heading out' each transition across a segment is a larger distance than the previous transition. The light is traveling progressively further per unit time (whatever unit or event is being used )and so the wavelength must be getting longer though the reason is not obvious to the observer only aware of the (in -out direction )straight line path.

Incoming signal : The distance per unit time (whatever unit or event is being used )represented by the line, it can be seen that the vertical distance from the centre straight out is the same in each segment , and this in the non rotating inertial view. If the centre point of the lines in each segment are joined up to give an approximation of the lights motion it can be seen that 'heading in' each transition across a segment is a shorter distance than the previous transition. The light is traveling progressively less per unit time (whatever unit or event is being used )and so the wavelength must be getting shorter though the reason is not obvious to the observer only aware of the straight line path.

What is happening in these scenarios regarding time: The observed relative rate of change by comparison ( a measure of the amount of spatial -relational change that is seen to be occurring); or in plain English the clock time, for the distant clock observed via received EM signal, is different for the different observers. Earth observer getting a blue shifted EM signal regards the time of the sender to be faster than time on the Earth observer's own clock. The satellite observer receiving red shifted signal regards time on Earth to be slow compared to his own clock. Does this mean there are differences in time itself in the two different locations over and above reciprocal latency due to transmission time? It is only so if the time in each place, allowing for that lag lag, is regarded as being directly correlated to the time shown by the clocks. It is important to note these are differences in the output, derived reality of the different observers within the same and only sequence of configurations of the Object universe. That is to say the Object universal time parameter is unaffected. The effect is relative output from EM radiation receipt ( used for comparison with locally produced 'image' of own clock ) allowing judgment of relative difference in observed passage of time (Image reality).

Using this explanatory framework we can say that the light is just taking the shortest path. The curved path over time is visible by seeing it from an accelerated reference frame because of the rotation of the Earth. Thus it is not necessary to conclude that the bending of the light path is caused by warping of space-time due to the gravitational mass of the Earth in external reality. The reference frame in which objects are being observed must be considered. Straight line paths become curved when seen in an accelerated (non inertial reference frame). Consider a straight path drawn as a line over a circle . Now imagine the circle as a planet with an observer stationary on its surface, as the planet is rotating (the circle can be segmented as before to help visualize this.) From the observer reference frame the straight line is a parabola as distance of the line from the observer is decreasing and then increasing as the planet rotates. In contrast a curved path can be seen staying equidistant from the observer and thus appear straight. To simplify that curved or straight is a matter of relativity, how something is being looked at.

Problem: the above explanation of non reciprocal alteration to signals does not explain the alteration of time keeping of (substantial matter) clocks held as proof of Einstein's ('alteration of time itself') time dilation.

Some thoughts pertinent to this conundrum

Premise: The substantial objects of Object reality are not formed or directly affected by derived relative reality (including image reality; this 'what is seen'. Though a living agent might affect substantial objects in reaction to perceived Image reality.)

On the basis of that premise, if there is a permanent alteration to the time shown on two formerly synchronized clocks, that have either been subject to different gravitational potential or travelling at different velocities, making them out of synchronization when brought together, there must be another process or processes occurring that affects substantial matter, rather than only relative perception due to affects on EM radiation transmission. As the difference in time shown on the substantial experimental clocks is found to persist when they are reunited it has to be rooted in their substantial reality not different relative output realities from EM information receipt. It is not necessary to conclude that it must be differences in “time itself”, unless “time itself” is given the definition of being (only) what the clock measures.

Quote “Basically a clock consists of four items: something that generates events at a regular interval (the oscillator), a counting mechanism, some method to calibrate the rate of the events, and a time

setting mechanism. In a fundamental sense, we do not tell time, but only count events. On a low

level, we deal in time intervals, not time. The zero of our time system is arbitrary and set by

convention – or some committee. This origin, along with a definition of the second, defines a

time frame. The rate that the events occur must be calibrated. This means that there must be standards.......” James R. Clynch. Precise Time and Time Interval Clocks, Time Frames and Frequency 2003 Department of Oceanography Naval Postgraduate School

Quote:The principle underlying the cesium clock is that all atoms of cesium-133 are identical and, when they absorb or release energy, produce radiation of exactly the same frequency, which makes the atoms perfect timepieces. Encyclopedia Britannica.

Quote:The oscillation frequencies within the atom are determined by the mass of the nucleus and the gravity and electrostatic "spring" between the positive charge on the nucleus and the electron cloud surrounding it. Jason Schanker SCICOM MIT


A cause of change in the number of 'events' generated or events measured needs to be investigated.

It could be an effect on any of the components that generate the time intervals, regulate them or count them or the system as a whole.

Quote :”Considering the Hafele–Keating experiment in a frame of reference at rest with respect to the center of the earth, a clock aboard the plane moving eastward, in the direction of the Earth's rotation, had a greater velocity (resulting in a relative time loss) than one that remained on the ground, while a clock aboard the plane moving westward, against the Earth's rotation, had a lower velocity than one on the ground.” Wikipedia

Consider those two atomic clocks flown in opposite directions around the globe. Plane A travels in the direction of rotation of the Earth, plane B flies against the rotation of the Earth. To the hypothetical accelerated reference frame of an observer at the centre of the Earth (or a distant observer stationary above the spatial co-ordinate of the starting point of the two planes (not geostationary above the start position on the Earth), plane A is seen to fly a greater distance with the movement of the Earth than the plane flying against the rotation of the Earth.

Thought 1: Plane A gets an easier task moving with the mass movement of the atmosphere whereas plane B has to work harder to overcome the inertia of the plane-atmosphere system, both components resisting change.

Quote: “Unfortunately, an atom or molecule does not vibrate, or-putting it more accurately-emit or absorb energy at one frequency only, but rather over a range of frequencies. The narrower the range, the more accurate the spectrum line will be as a time standard. The range or width of the spectrum covered 4,y the spectrum line is determined by several factors. Among the most important of these are the violent collisons between the atoms or molecules which disturb the vibration, causing a broadening of the spectrum line. The thermal motion of the gas atoms also gives rise to what is called a Doppler broadening..” …...the signal will be absorbed when the frequency or vibration rate of the radio wave is exactly equal to the frequency of vibrations corresponding to the spectrum line....”This

phenomenon can be made use of in making an atomic clock. If the cy[c]lic or vibrating mechanism giving the beat of the clock is made to generate a radio wave, the absorption of this wave by the gas will be at a maximum when the vibration rate of the wave and the clock is at the right frequency, and weaker if it is off frequency; this is the basic mechanism involved in control, although details of execution may vary. “Harold Lyons, 1950 The atomic clock A universal standard of frequency and time. (My emphasis).

Thought 2: The need to have precise frequency matching to generate an accurate event together with sensitivity to disturbance could tie together a lesser number of events and greater instability of the clock on the anti-rotation journey. The higher frequency for the plane with the greatest velocity, exceeding the Earth rotation, in the Earth rotation direction, also needs mentioning. It could be due to the increase in mass of the atomic nuclei used for time event generation, due to additional inertia (resistance to change of motion ) at that higher velocity. That might have a dampening effect on the noise causing imprecise frequency matching. Giving a cleaner faster matched frequency generation and consequent faster rate of the clock.

Thought 3. It is possible that there could be an effect produced by different external gravitational potentials on the fundamental time keeping process described especially since gravity is a component mentioned in the timekeeping vibration by Jason Schanker.

In conclusion :

There are two different classes of phenomena occurring both attributed to time dilation. One class of phenomenon is the difference to the derived output reality, seen as difference in the rates of change by comparison, t, because of the way in which EM information is received in different reference frames. The second class is alteration of timekeeping due to an effect upon the substantial timepiece or timepieces, as discussed above. This class of alteration needs further investigation.

There is no alteration of the passage of Object universal time. The clocks are not differently time travelling. There can be no going into a substantially real future ahead of the uni-temporal -Now as only uni-temporal -Now, the current configuration of the Object universe exists. Nor slipping into a substantial past as there is no substantial past either. That it is so also prevents the Grandfather paradox. But relic EM radiation from which derived, relative Image reality can be formed when it is received and processed into output allows perception of events that have already occurred. Non simultaneity of events is due to differences in where and thus also in which configuration of the Object universe the information received.

Travelling with a light beam. Thoughts on Einstein's thought experiment. 

 Now as regards the "stopped" time. That it is stopped is the relative perspective of the observer travelling with the light beam and the potential sensory information it contains. Yes from that perspective the photons 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 Image Reality, or subjective Image Reality passage of time that can be formed from the photons in that reference frame. So, in that respect (for the co-moving 'observer') there is no apparent external time. (his heart will still be beating and he will still be breathing -so there are internal clues that (foundational) passage of time is still happening). However the photon beam is still carrying  'data time' (time encoded within the information) that could give subjective IR. time output to observer's crossed by it's path not travelling with it. Also there is still the foundational 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.


What is time to the brain ? Perception of time delation,FQXi Talk by David Eaglemen This is great. David Eagleman mentions the very different processing of different types of sensory data. Eg.Sound sensory data being processed more quickly than visual sensory data. He presents a number of different kinds of data input types that cause perceptual time "delation", including anything novel or looming, which presumably require more analysis than the familiar and non threatening. So the perceived time delay may relate to greater brain activity than the suppressed activity accompanying familiar stimuli. He mentions the neurological matching of sensory data occurring within 80ms resulting in perceptual synchronization of stimuli in the output reality.

Not only is there the Object reality of passage of time, the sequential change in configuration of the Object universe; and the effect of an observer or observers receiving different sensory data input with different Object universe configuration origins- giving space-time maps that are 'temporal 'amalgamations; there are also processing affects that can alter the temporal sequencing that would be output from data receipt time alone. This gives another type of emergent reality compared to the device such as a camera that does not think about relevance or have to compile sets of data from different stimuli that are synchronised in the output to give a credible causality "story'. Causality could have survival implications to a living organism, and there is an advantage to studying novel stimuli carefully which could be threats or resources that aid survival or reproductive success.

Therefore the Prime reality interface of a human being is qualitatively different from non living reality interfaces, that lack complex processing capabilities that further affect the space-time output Image reality.( That is subjective temporal experience, IE the content and duration of events within the experienced present in the case of a human's Image reality output ). It is likely that the complex stimuli processing of human beings is shared by other sentient higher organisms and perhaps even less complex organisms. The extent of "temporal adjustment", synchronization of stimuli and 'delation' within the animal kingdom would be interesting to investigate.

It is necessary to add the neurological effects to the output that would be obtained from sensory data receipt times alone or the output that would be obtained by a device treating all sensory data input in the same way *. This leads to yet another higher level of emergent reality * IE with out adding and diminishing delays, according to the particular stimulus, or causing synchronizations of outputs pertaining to stimuli received at different times.

David Eagleman asks what is t in our equations? I think from his very enlightening talk it is very important to segregate the Object reality of passage of time and the Image reality of time produced by brain processing of sensory data input.

From David Eagleman's work it can be seen that the Image reality produced depends upon the type of reality interface and possibly even the individual. Sensory data receipt alone does not always alone determine the temporal (Object universe Configuration origin ) amalgamation that is output. The sequence of sensory data input is modified by the complex processing prior to output leading to the experienced present in the case of the human Prime reality interface and quite likely all sentient's reality interfaces, aiding survival.

Wave particle duality
Interestingly the explanatory framework with two different facets of reality implies a wave matter duality underlying that. The matter component is the objects made of atoms, where as the wave component is the sensory data produced through interaction of the object with the surrounding environment.

For a man that is his substantial body made of atoms AND the potential sensory data emitted from his body and clothing spreading out in space around him. That can be intercepted by an observer at one of a variety of positions or by several different observers at different positions around him and be formed into a manifestation or manifestations of the man. Each manifestation giving a representation of an aspect of the topology of the man as it is made from the subset of data received by that observer at that position and time.

Both the man made of atoms and the wave sensory data are real phenomena and in everyday conversation both the Object man made of atoms, forming blood flesh bones and organs and the image manifestation of the man that is seen would be referred to as 'the man' or more likely the man's name as he is a person. There isn't in general parlance differentiation between the two phenomena, the two aspects of the wave matter duality.

For a single particle such as an electron it is likely the interaction of the effect of the particles own motion with the effect of the vibration of the atoms of the apparatus that gives the waves able to interfere and thence influence the final destination of the particle. Once again interaction of the matter with the surrounding environment.

The given framework has a place for atoms unlike the space-time continuum which only includes the observed product of intercepted em waves, thus missing one complete facet of reality.
The higher level, biological affects, giving a sentient being's reality interface output, a further level of emergent reality, can be added to any simulation of conversion of source Object reality to Image reality via sensory data receipt alone, or including only a simple processing time equally applicably to all sensory data, as might apply to an inanimate device.

A thought about unifying the physics of perception
Since relativity and optics deal with the emission or reflection of light and how it is received and output of that, why aren't the two branches of physics combined, giving a complete depiction of relativity. The various relations of observers to potential sensory data in the environment and the outputs obtained, varying in "TEMPORAL ORIGIN" and in SCALE and GEOMETRY. For example there is the physical equivalent of foreshortening, used by artists to represent what is seen. The dimensions of an object's manifestation being shorter along the line of sight relative to across the line of sight Eye of the Beholder: Johannes Vermeer, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, and the Reinvention of Seeingand And clearly the more distant an object( the source) the smaller it ( the manifestation) appears to be.

Re your questions Akinbo's  May. 17, 2015 @ 11:04 GMT "Can something be seen without light?" It depends on what you mean by 'things' and 'seen'. Light is needed to form visual representations of objects that are in external reality. However sound can also be used as by dolphins and bats and some blind humans.Visions and hallucinations that give the appearance of things that do not exist as objects in external reality can also occur. Not formed from data from the external environment but internally generated.

Re. Akinbo's Q2.  May. 17, 2015 @ 11:04 GMT"Can light be seen without something?" Light can be seen without receiving it from the external environment. If the visual cortex is stimulated that can be sensed as sensations of light called phosphenes.Visual sensations produced by intracortical microstimulation of the human occipital cortex Lights associated with migraine and epileptic aura are also internaly generated. This is all fascinating to me and suggests that what we regard as light is usually the output of stimulation of the retina and thence the brain, not a quality of the carrier of the sensory data itself. The representation that is generated allows us to navigate, it provides illumination. Without processing the presence of external visible wavelength electromagnetism and objects reflecting it can not be seen.

It would probably be good for clarity in physics to refer to un-received light as (visible) EM and the visual sensation, the observation, as light. I used to reliably refer to external visible EM as 'EM' or 'em' but light is used by physicists in general parlance and so I have become less pedantic. However there is a significant difference. Visible EM in the external environment (Object reality) is not the sensation of light (Image reality). So I should acknowledge their belonging to different categories of reality by using the different names.

Some history about understanding time

It was Mc Taggart who introduced the terms A, B and C series of time in his paper "On the unreality of time", which I have listed in the references. He said that for there to be change there must be a sequence of positions. That sequence of positions is the C series. If one considers the sequence (of spatial positions) then in temporal terms there are earlier and later ones in sequence, which he called the B series. He also identified another kind of time by which we identify events which is past, present and future. He realized that for the A series to exist there has to be a B series.

I have merely added the observation that Space-time only provides the A series. So it must be incomplete. I do not consider this to be merely a personal opinion but a statement of fact. Time does not pass in space-time but just -is- as a geometric dimension and is inseparable from the space-time fabric. The A series is not duration but a completely different kind of 3 fold categorization. Future(not yet experienced), present (current experience), past (former experience).

I do not consider it mere speculation that my experience of external reality occurs when photon data stimulates my sensory system and my nervous system forms a representation of that external reality. The biological process of vision is very well known and has been the subject of a great deal of scientific research. Optical illusions demonstrate very well that what we perceive depends upon the biological interpretation and not what exists externally. There is plenty of evidence that mind altering drugs and mental illness effect the perception of external reality. It is the biological organism that co-creates the external reality that is -experienced-. So it can not exists independently of that biological process.

You are mistaken if you think I am saying that nothing exists exteriorly  prior to manifestation of the generated image reality. I am saying that the experienced image reality only exists at manifestation and it is not the same as the foundational reality with concrete existence. That which does exist can not be perceived -as it is- because of the transmission delay of data and the processing that occurs prior to experience. The reconstructed image reality is observed instead.

I agree that there has to be something real that provides the data for the image reality to be formed. When referring to a human being as the reality interface, then the produced image reality is the conscious experience. You and I are are not in disagreement on that point but have just worded the argument differently. I have already addressed your second assumption on your own thread.

With regard to the C series.  Whether one is considering form  and configuration in space or position in space it is still only a spatial consideration, not including time. The important point that I was trying to make is that the C series is non temporal sequential order.
I might be helpful to give some of Mc Taggarts thoughts in his own words,which makes it clearer. So a selection are quoted below.

"let us call it the C series -- is not temporal, for it involves no change, but only an order."

"A series which is not temporal has no direction of its own, though it has an order."

"It is only when change and time come in that the relations of this C series become relations of earlier and later, and so it becomes a B series."

" More is wanted, however, for the genesis of a B series and of time than simply the C series and the fact of change. For the change must be in a particular direction. And the C series, while it determines the order, does not determine the direction."

"We may sum up the relations of the three series to time as follows: The A and B series are equally essential to time, which must be distinguished as past, present and future, and must likewise be distinguished as earlier and later. But the two series are not equally fundamental."

The Unreality of Time By J.E. McTaggart, 1908

Published in Mind: A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 17 456-473.