Crazy Time Thoery?

[Crazy]

Hi Everyone,

 

This is my first post on science forums and I say now that I am not an expert in such things. However I had this crazy idea and just wanted some opinions. Here goes:

 

Why does time have to be another dimension like height, width or depth? I’m proposing that time is actually a force like gravity. Let’s consider what we apparently know about gravity for a moment. We know that gravitational fields are created by the presence of matter and that those fields are short ranged and relatively weak. We also think that gravity acts in a single direction, i.e. a pull towards the centre of the mass that creates the field.

 

So why do I think time is similar to gravity? Well we can safely say that we know time to be linear, therefore it could be considered a force that acts in a single direction on the atoms of the universe. Now if time is a force, there needs to be something that creates the force. What if this something is mass? It would make sense to think that every atom in the universe creates its own time field that pushes that atom through time… or a process of aging as I like to think. Now common sense indicates that the more mass in an area, the larger the time field and hence faster the passage of time for that mass and anything within a certain undefined range. This would suggest that the opposite, i.e. close to zero mass or indeed zero mass would possess no time field at all and would thus exist indefinitely.

 

Now of course the opposite could be true with smaller masses causing a greater time field (faster passage of time) and huge masses slowing time down. This could explain why atomic particles exist for very short periods of time, although it would in theory suggest that photons should not exist for any length of time at all, which is clearly not the case.

 

Imagine an experiment with 3 identical cloned babies. One is allowed to grow up normally on Earth, the second grows up on the moon, and the third is taken into deep space away from large masses to grow up. I wonder what each would look like after 50 years...

 

Anyways, flame away people!!

 

-Crazy-

[cwes99_03]

Sorry Crazy but as your name suggests, i suggest that this be placed in the appropriate forum for such ideas on this website. Namely the strange claims forum.

[Jay-qu]

Moved to strange claims

[InfiniteNow]

Interesting.

 

I'll have to think about it for a while. There may be some valid points here, and the problem may lay in the fact that it's just tough to articulate in a manner that accurately represents what you're thinking.

 

The question remains, what is being pulled into your "time well," and also you would be better advised to fit the idea into the currently accepted theories... or at least explain the same things they do in a more refined way.

 

Newton had a theory of gravity, and Einstein didn't negate it, but made it better. Likewise, you need to ensure your concept does not negate any existing (repeatedly demonstrated to be accurate) theories of time, but only makes them more refined.

 

Remember too, a theory makes predictions which can be tested. Can you make any predictions with this?

 

 

Open minds are much better than closed ones, so keep thinking. :lol:

[cwes99_03]

Let me attempt to reword that because you said a very important think there Infy and then a later statement seemed to revoke the earlier one.

 

There may be some valid points here, and the problem may lay in the fact that it's just tough to articulate in a manner that accurately represents what you're thinking...

also you would be better advised to fit the idea into the currently accepted theories... or at least explain the same things they do in a more refined way.

 

This is the most important thing that needs to be stated over and over in the strange claims forum.

If you are going to suggest a theory, then be sure that you've thought your theory through to some degree. Work it out. If old well seated theories need to be revoked, be sure to have evidence that your theory explains everything their theory explained but only in a different way.

 

So many people in this forum just throw out crazy ideas. Occasionally they may be on to something but one of two things happen to make them fail.

1) they don't articulate their idea well

2) they say that someone else is all wrong, but don't show how their theory will work with all the empirical data

 

If you can't do the first, well then you are in trouble regardless where you go.

If you can't do the second, then this is going to be a very long thread and you are going to have to approach it as, "Would someone help me work out this theory to see if it fits empirical evidence?", not "Hey everyone read this. I have a theory that will prove Newton didn't know what he was talking about?"

[Crazy]

Hi again,

 

Firstly thanks InfiniteNow for your words of encouragement.

 

As I said in my post I am certainly not an expert in things Physics, and this post was really just to satisfy my curiosity. I was hoping that I would get a few opinions thats all, like "this really can't be the case" or "its worth thinking on it more".

 

Cwes your right in that I really have no kind of data or evidence to back up my theory but I should have stated that I was looking for help with the 'empirical data' so to speak. I know that there must be alot of posts like this... it was just an idea that's all that, if anything, I thought might make all you clever people search new avenues that maybe haven't been discussed :eek2:

 

I'm going to continue to think on this and maybe I'll be able to word my ideas better in future.

 

Cheers

-Crazy-

[arkain101]

very identical to how I proposed actions out of time and actions in time behave.

 

I said matter is in time and changes flow/force of time and things that are massless like light etc, are not in time and dont force it, age, and behave differently.

 

So I like your further thoughts on it being tied with forces.

 

but very clever observations indeed!

[cwes99_03]

Crazy meet Arkain.

He too has felt the "wrath" of my posts asking him to type his thoughts more clearly. I haven't kept up on many of his posts, but I think he took it to heart. I think he is a great thinker and the two of you may be able to work on these ideas you have to form a nice concise theory. Have fun you two.

[arkain101]

I dont even recall you very much actually... lol..

 

I didnt take much to heart, I only got frustrated that you present an idea, and no one responds to the topic, they do take the time to point out technical errors and I'm thankful for that, but I get the feeling the big picture gets missed many atime.

[Crazy]

Hi Arkain, good to meet someone who may share the same views as I.

 

I've had a bit more of a think on this theory and I'm going to attempt to explain it better. Please let me know what you think...

 

Most peoples current understanding of time would be something along the lines of "well it took 10 minutes to cook dinner" or "light takes 8 minutes to reach Earth from the sun". Valid points. However to me, these statements simply tell me that in those time frames a number of events took place on an atomic level, i.e. atoms were heated that caused the food to become cooked, and the light photons where blasted out from the sun with enough energy to reach Earth.

 

Ok, let's forget these time frame references for a moment. Consider an individual particle. I'm going to say that this particle creates what I will call a 'time field'. Just as all mass emits a gravitational field enforced by 'gravitons', I'm suggesting that mass also emits time fields enforced by 'timeons'. I know, I couldn't think of a better name to give them.

Now suppose, that the timeons pulse, and that on every pulse, the particle has a chance of undergoing some sub-atomic change. The quicker the pulses of timeons the more chance there is of the particle undergoing changes due to chaos theory. With me so far?

 

Now suppose that the size of the time field is dependent on 1) the element and 2) the size of the particle. If the particle were larger I would think that the time field it generates would be larger. It would therefore take longer for the timeons to pulse and thus there would be less chance for a change state to occur. So the particle is now undergoing the process of aging at a slower rate.

 

Now I'm wondering whether the cumulative effect of all time fields generated by individual particles creates an overall time field for that object. Much in the same way as the individual gravitational fields of particles combine to create an apparent large scale force.

 

I've been trying to relate this to other theories such as Einsteins Theory of Relativity. Now correct me if I'm wrong but does that theory not suggest that as an object increases in velocity, its mass also increases? And time slows down for that mass. Well applying my theory to that effect would suggest the same result of time slowing down. I.e. the mass increases, so the time field increases, and the less chance of change states occuring within the system, so time appears to slow down.

 

I would therefore assume that particles with no mass are not affected by time fields and thus undergo no change states internally. That's not however saying that any of the particles I've discussed don't get affected externally by other particles.

 

Ok, I've ranted on a bit now... can I get any opinions so far? I

 

Cheers

-Crazy-

[cwes99_03]

I dont even recall you very much actually... lol..

 

I didnt take much to heart, I only got frustrated that you present an idea, and no one responds to the topic, they do take the time to point out technical errors and I'm thankful for that, but I get the feeling the big picture gets missed many atime.

Well apparently you missed the big picture of the arguments I pressed against you. You need to be a better presenter of information, which includes your typing and English skills (not the language but the structure of the language). Which includes the above example, one freaking huge run on sentence connected by several irrelevant commas.

I had hoped you had improved, but apparently when I stopped reading your poorly thought out and worded presentations so did everyone else who had a similar complaint.

[arkain101]

hmm oops, I agree thats rough... but hey it was a rushed in the morning post. Im sorry. I will have to work on that for sure.

 

It is difficult sometimes when your mind is exploding with diagrams and thoughts, I get ideas and inventions everyday. None the less, I agree. If want to share my views I should present it more professionaly.