The Theory of Temporal Relativity - Part I

[EWright]

As science strives to bridge the gap between the micro of the quantum and the macro of the cosmos, we must of course examine at what point the laws between these two dualities break down. But perhaps more importantly, we must ask what binds the two together into one harmonious universe; what is the common denominator? The answer, it seems, should be the one thing that permeates the whole of the universe on all levels: the macro and the micro; the three known physical dimensions; as well as the past, the present and the future, with the most uniformity and consistency. Special Relativity is based on the fact that we measure the speed of light as a constant and as the maximum obtainable speed in the universe. However, there are no physical properties of light that cause clocks of faster moving objects to run slower; and so the notion of the speed of light as a determining factor as to why this happen, should be reconsidered.

 

This paper is not intended to dispute the accuracy of Special Relativity. I believe the predictions are accurate, as tests have shown. Rather, my purpose here is to suggest that there is a fundamental property of the universe that is more directly responsible for relativistic phenomena than light, and which is also the true constant and limiting-factor for the speed of light. I also believe that unrealized dynamics of this fundamental property may hold the solution to some of the unanswered questions in physics, as I will discuss in subsequent articles; but first a basis for these discussions is necessary. What follows is the first step in my attempt to more thoroughly define the nature of time and its applications to physics and cosmology, in what I call the Theory of Temporal Relativity.

 

Temporal Relativity (Part I)

 

Isaac Newton believed that time was constant, while Albert Einstein warped time to mold it into a universe in which light travels at a constant speed. I would argue that both are correct. While that may seem implausible at first, consider my argument that time is actually multidimensional - both constant and variable. And these two types of time, as well as others I will define, are completely different things.

 

The logic for reintroducing an absolute variable of time is simple: On the largest scale scientists have assigned a single verifiable age of 13.7 billion years to the whole of the universe. This age is based on precise measurements of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) using NASA’s most sophisticated equipment to date. This single universal age demands that essentially all matter and energy contained within the framework of the universe have existed in some form for this precise amount of time; no more or less is possible on a universal scale. After all, there was only one beginning of time according to most major theories and there is only one present-time for the whole of the universe as well. Therefore one absolute measurable amount of time, has passed from the birth of the universe until the present. However, to express this age we use a unit of time to say the universe has existed for 13.7 billion years.

 

It is these measurable man-made units of time that are variable, as described by Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity. However, Einstein described these units as variable relative to light speed. Temporal Relativity, on the other hand, describes them as variable within the framework of, and relative to, the larger fixed universal-time frame described above. Within this framework matter, energy, units of length, and units of time all advance in time by moving variably through universal-time, based on their relative speeds. Universal-time, on the other hand, advances in measurable units of time, but does so at a uniform rate for the whole of the universe, which is supported by the consistent age and uniformity of the CMB. Essentially, universal time is the very axis along which measurable units of time contort.

 

Now, armed with a general understanding of these two dimensions of time, let’s examine where the differences originate from and how they came to be. All theories must address the beginning of time as best they can, and Temporal Relativity attempts to do just that by introducing two additional and practical dimensions to time. The first of these is what existed before the beginning of time as we know it - that is, a singular dimension of time that I refer to as absolute-zero time.

 

This is a static period before time as we know it sprang into existence, in which all dimensions of time existed equally with no arrow toward the future, but with the potential for such direction. At this point all time and energy existed in a completely uniform state. Such a starting point is essential in order to currently apply one attributable amount of time to the universe as a whole. This homogenous state can apply to a singularity type of object, which could have given rise to a big bang; or it could apply to an infinite expanse that is void of matter, as in Brane Theory. It is not relevant to discuss how long such a state may have existed, because no measurable time existed - time had no forward direction. However it does make sense to assume that the potential for measurable-time and energy existed at absolute-zero time. Any catalyst that would disrupt this homogenous state would simultaneously give rise to time as well as an imbalance in, and release of, potential time and energy. Such a catalyst could come in the form of contact with a neighboring brane (Brane Theory), decay or imbalance in the “singularity” (Big Bang Theory), or the phrase “Let there be light” (Creation).

 

Whatever the catalyst, one thing is clear: since zero-time, the past has moved into the future at a rate that has now amounted to 13.7 billion years as defined by our measurable units of time. This means that universal-time, while moving toward the future, must do so at a particular rate or speed. This may seem contradictory, since the definition of speed is generally measured in terms of time itself. So how can we define the rate of time in terms of a rate of speed, which by definition depends on a distance traveled over a specific time? This is possible because we are defining universal time in terms of its smaller measurable units of time.

 

The relationship between these two brings to light another dimension of time, the rate at which the future unfolds or present arrives, which I call the future-time horizon. Fortunately, nature has provided us a measuring stick with which scientists have already measured and verified the rate at which the future becomes the ever-glancing present. And what they have unknowingly found is that the future arrives at a continuous and precise speed of 186,000 miles per second. Thus, the yardstick by which we measure time’s horizon is the photon, and the reason light travels at this constant speed is that it is limited by the constant rate at which time unfolds. So in essence, time is the medium upon which light flows.

 

With the understanding that the future-time horizon arrives at this constant speed, the physical reason faster moving objects experience less time becomes clear with no need for light as a contributing factor. That is, the faster an object moves in relation to the rate of future time, the less of time’s affects, or aging, it will experience; and thus, the less measurable-time it will experience. This can be likened to the stress on a boat moving against the flow of the river, compared to a craft moving with the flow. Thus, the faster an object is traveling, the more it is moving with, or keeping up with, the flow of future-time; and the less severe the rush of measurable-time against it will be, or the less it will age. Stated another way, measured-time’s variability results from the relative speed of motion between two objects or observers within the universal framework. This also explains why our measurable units of time vary between different observers traveling at significantly different speeds but remain constant for each locally.

 

In regard to current physics, it’s important to understand that the rate at which Temporal Relativity states that time unfolds is precisely the same constant figure at which we measure the speed of light. Therefore any experiment that confirms Special Relativity as it relates to light speed, must also confirm Temporal Relativity to precisely the same specifications. This means that Temporal Relativity already holds true for any experiments, predictions or observations relating to Special Relativity. However, it is my position that Temporal Relativity is capable of explaining the cause behind some phenomena more accurately than previous theories. I will shed light on some of these additional phenomena in the days and weeks to come.

[EWright]

Please feel free to join in the discussion on this topic being held HERE in the science forums.

[Shoushou]

It has been a great explaination in fact,,,

 

So I can say, as a conclusion, that time is constant relative to the speed of light, while it's variable relative to other moving objects..that's why it's multi-dimensional as u mentioned (it's variable & constant at the same time)

 

I can also say that the speed of light is the speed at which the future arrives..

 

but remains unclear the practical meaning of the variability of time..is it the speed at which events happen??? is it the ordinary feeling of a person when doing something quickly that he feels that clocks are moving slowly & vice versa??

 

I guess I could grasp it very well..:D

 

thnx alot...

[Glenn Lyvers]

I wonder what will happen when we find something that moves faster than light? - Odd thought but it is meant to bring up the idea that, despite our best efforts to understand these issues, we may be completely wrong. If so, we would be in good company, as history is riddled with theories which seem to fit, but which were later discovered to be in error. And as is often the case in such matters, it is because we strive to make it fit, one man building on another mans work until it becomes a mess of supportive data based on error, crumbling when a new puzzle piece which was "actually" discovered arrives.

 

This being said, your article was a good read.

[maddog]

Apparently my thinking has similar lines as the start of this thread. I have treated my speculation in this area of time being thought of as a 2x2 spinor

 

t1 0

0 t2

 

(I wish I could remember the <math> constructs when I need it)

 

Thus creating two realities: one (t1) being the outward reality we are normally aware of and the second (t2) being of an inner reality that remains hidden.

 

You can think of the outer as Objective Reality (viewable) and the inner as Subjective Reality. My feeling is the inner form does not have the same "speed limit" of light c as the outer one. Any virtual particles in a Feynman diagram don't require specifics of them. Thus, there time sense can run backwards (allowing for spacelike properties).

 

I have been reading Road to Reality by Roger Penrose and have discovered that David Bohm had similar ideas. He had created the "Pilot Wave Theory" as an Ontology apposed to the Copenhagen interpretation in QM (aka Schroedinger's cat).

 

maddog