On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
> All, > > All, > > Once we accept the obvious observable fact that we share a common present > moment when we are together we need to take the next step and establish > that we also share a common present moment when we are separated in space. > Only if we can prove that can we establish that the present moment is > universal, that the same present moment is shared across the universe. > > Obviously we cannot establish this by direct observation due to the finite > speed of light, but it is easy to prove with the following argument. > > Step 1: Two observers stand together with the same clock times on their > watches and shake hands. By direct observation they confirm they share both > the same actual present moment time, and the same clock time. > > Step 2: One observer makes a 1 year space flight at relativistic > acceleration while the other remains where he was. During this period both > observers continuously exist in their own actual present moment, and their > clocks appear to progress at a constant proper time rate. > > Step 3. The traveling observer returns and shakes hands with the observer > who remained behind. Again, by direct observation they both confirm they > both share the exact same actual present moment time but their clock times > are no longer the same. Their actual present moment times are the same, but > their clock times are not simultaneous. > They can interact, despite being in different times, because the time dimension is length-contracted to be zero-length (as they are travelling through the proper time dimension at the speed of light). Any photon's "now" is forever, so photons emitted by the electrons of someone in a different time, still interact with the electrons of the person whose hand they are shaking even though they're in a later time. Jason > At this point it is obvious that actual present time and clock time are > two different things. Both observers confirm this by direct observation. > > Now the question is can we confirm that both observers also shared the > exact same actual present times during their separation in space? Yes we > can and the argument is simple. Both observer's actual present times and > their clock times were continuous during the 1 year they were separated. > There was always both some actual present moment and some actual clock > time. During the separation period each observer was always continuously > extant in time as both actual present time and clock time progressed. > > Now since both observers started at the same present moment of time and > ended at the same actual present moment of time and since each observer > always had some present moment during the separation it is obvious that at > every point in each observer's actual present time there must have been a > corresponding point in the other observer's actual present time. In every > point in each observer's actual present moment the other observer must have > been doing something at the same actual present moment time. This is > because there was never a gap in either observer's present moment, a moment > when they didn't exist in their present moment, thus there must be a one to > one mapping of actual present moments even when the observers were > separated. > > Think of two points on a sheet of graph paper, one vertically above the > other. Join the points by one straight vertical line and one curved line > which will be of greater length. The vertical grids will correspond to the > passage of present moment P-time while the different lengths along the > lines will correspond to their clock times. Note that while clock time > passes at different rates on the two lines, P-time, the vertical distance > between the grids, passes at the same rate across both lines. And there is > ALWAYS a corresponding point on both lines that represents the same present > moment time where the lines are intersected by the same grid line. > > Thus there is always a common present moment no matter how observers may > be separated in space. > > This is also confirmed by the fact that the observers left from the same > actual present moment and returned to the same actual present moment. The > observer who traveled has a clock that reads less than a year passed while > the observer who stayed behind has a clock that tells him a year has passed > BUT their actual present moments are simultaneous (because they can > observably confirm that by shaking hands both before and after the trip) > and thus must also always have been simultaneous during the period of > separation. > > This conclusively proves that observers inhabit the exact same actual > present moment both when they are at the same place and when they are > separated in space. Thus we must conclude there is a common universal > present moment that all observers inhabit, and thus that that common > universal present moment is the only moment anything exists in, that it is > the only locus of reality. > > This conclusively proves that there are two kinds of time, clock time > which is measured by clocks, and the actual universal present time moment > (P-time) that is common to all observers, and that clock time and P-time > are only synchronous in non-relativistic situations. Clock times vary with > relativistic circumstance but P-time doesn't. It remains simultaneous for > all observers in all circumstances. Everything continually inhabits the > same actual P-time present moment. > > I don't think the argument can be expressed much clearer and more > obviously than that. If it still isn't clear then so be it. > > Edgar > > > > On Sunday, December 29, 2013 9:39:30 AM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >> >> Pierz, >> >> A lot of meat in your post. Thanks! I'll answer most of your questions.... >> >> Yes, observers observe they are in the same present moment by the >> simultaneity of events. Exactly, but the important point is that is the >> simultaneity of actual events, not of clock time readings. Observers can >> simultaneously shake hands even if their clocks have different clock times >> (their clocks are not simultaneous). Actual versus clock time simultaneity. >> Two completely different things! >> >> That's the absolutely critical point to understanding my thesis. >> >> ACTUAL simultaneity (2 observers shaking hands) IS self-evident. Do you >> dispute that? You can't... >> >> The experiment that proves my thesis is the hand shaking. Absolute >> incontrovertible proof of actual simultaneity. >> >> That is how to operationalize P-time. By actual simultaneity. It CANNOT >> be measured by clock time as proven above. >> >> >> The P-time now of Caesar is long gone. Unfortunately for you, you can >> only share the same NOW as Edgar, not Caesar! :-) >> >> Yes, P-seconds should be calculable from Omega. Differences from the >> clock time age of the universe can account for things like inflation, >> Hubble expansion etc. >> >> However please note that the whole notion of 'the ~14.7 billion year age >> of the universe', of an age of the universe, that is the same for all >> observers means that cosmology DOES accept the notion of a single common >> universal present moment since cosmology assumes that age of he universe is >> going to be the same anywhere in the universe for every observer. >> >> That's very important confirmation of the notion of a single common >> universal present moment. Cosmology accepts my thesis of a common universal >> present moment of existence. >> >> Edgar >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sunday, December 29, 2013 12:35:01 AM UTC-5, Pierz wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, December 29, 2013 2:19:57 PM UTC+11, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >>>> >>>> Pierz, >>>> >>>> The common universal present moment is defined and measured simply by >>>> observers observing they are in the same moment at the same time. >>>> >>> >>> How do they observe that they are in the same moment except by the >>> simultaneity of events in their perceived time-space environment? >>> >>> >>> >>>> It is self-evident >>>> >>> >>> really? It is anything but self-evident that different moments in clock >>> time are "the same moment". I don't even know what what means. Sure it's >>> 'self-evident' that the now I experience is present everywhere. But that >>> self-evident truth was qualified by relativity, which was the actual great >>> leap forward in our understanding of time. >>> >>> and experimentally proved >>>> >>> >>> again - really? You can't even tell me how to measure "P-time" so I fail >>> to see how any experiment has or can prove such a thing. If this is >>> physical, scientific theory as opposed to a metaphysical speculation about >>> "the eternal Now" a la Eckhart Tolle, then you *must* be able to provide >>> some means of measuring your proposed physical quantity or entity. Again I >>> ask: how will you prove this sharing of a moment other than by blustering >>> that it is "self-evident"? >>> >>> >>>> that they can be in the same present moment even if their clock time t >>>> values are not simultaneous. And it's not just an event, as some have >>>> maintained, its the standard mode of existence of everyone throughout their >>>> lives to share the same present moment with others. >>>> >>>> Clocks? We don't need no stinkin clocks! Clocks don't measure P-time, >>>> they measure clock time..... >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> P-time doesn't fail. >>>> >>> >>> The *concept* of P-time fails as far as physics goes, as far as I can >>> tell, because you can't operationalize it. You can only make exasperated >>> noises that no-one else "gets it" except you despite it's being so obvious. >>> >>> >>>> It can't. It is simply impossible for anyone or anything to escape the >>>> present moment. That's the basic fact of our existence for goodness sakes! >>>> The present moment is the locus, and only locus of reality. Without a >>>> present moment there could be no reality. The presence of reality manifests >>>> as the present moment.... >>>> >>> >>> Fine so far as it goes. The Now is ever-present and unchanging while >>> phenomena, including clocks, move through it as it were. In some sense, all >>> things happen Now and nothing will ever occur anywhere except Now and we >>> all share it. That's the Now of Eckart Tolle's "The Power of Now". The >>> problem is when you try to insist that this is a concept relevant to >>> physics. Let me ask: do I share the "Now" with you as you were an hour ago? >>> Do I share the same "now" as Caesar at the moment of his death? In the >>> metaphysical sense, maybe. But not in any way that is relevant to physics >>> and measured time. *Which" moment are we sharing if not a moment we can >>> measure with a clock? If you just say "the current present moment, for >>> goodness sake!" you are merely demonstrating that your concept is a >>> tautology. >>> >>> >>>> Your last paragraph fails because it is all about measuring CLOCK time, >>>> not P-time. It's irrelevant to the discussion of P-time. >>>> >>>> P-time is the radial dimension of our hyperspherical universe back to >>>> the point of the big bang. The surface is our 3-dimensional universe >>>> >>> >>> 4-dimensional - there's the whole problem! >>> >>> >>>> in the present moment which is the locus of reality and all that >>>> exists. As the P-time radial dimension >>>> >>> >>> Wow, so time P-time is single dimension orthogonal to the 3 dimensions >>> of space that proceeds at a constant rate? It sounds *just like* good old >>> clock time did in Newton's day! In fact just like our natural, naive >>> intuition of time before an immense amount of deep thought and hard work on >>> Einstein's part revealed that intuition to be mistaken. >>> >>> >>>> extends happening occurs within the present moment and the current >>>> state of the universe in continually computed. This is experienced as >>>> 'proper time' which is always the same no matter at what rate clock time is >>>> running. >>>> >>>> The only way P-time can be measured that I know of is from Omega, the >>>> curvature of the universe, from which we can compute the radius = P-time >>>> dimension. Anyone know what that equation would be? >>>> >>>> >>> So a measurement requires units. If P-time can be calculated from the >>> "curvature of the universe" (itself problematic, since space-time is warped >>> and curved by gravity and is not a simple sphere), then what units will >>> result? P-seconds? Is there any way to convert P-seconds to normal, >>> good-ole clock seconds? If there's no use the P-time measurement in any >>> other equation with other physical quantities such as time, distance, mass >>> etc, then one has to wonder what on earth good it is. >>> >>> >>>> Edgar >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Saturday, December 28, 2013 8:33:23 PM UTC-5, Pierz wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Everyone else has made excellent, well laid-out arguments against your >>>>> position Edgar, but I will throw in another perspective. You ask whether >>>>> two observers 'share the same common present moment'. However you don't >>>>> define what that means exactly. If I imagine your scenario of two >>>>> observers >>>>> who aren't me then of course they seem to share the same moment, >>>>> regardless >>>>> of how far apart they are. To say they "don't share the same moment" would >>>>> be like saying that one exists and the other doesn't at some point in >>>>> time, >>>>> right? But this is really begging the question about what a "point in >>>>> time" >>>>> is. You seem to be relying on an intuitive sense of time that is not bound >>>>> to anything measurable (the hidden point of my tongue-in-cheek 'U-time'). >>>>> How need to define what you mean by "sharing the same moment" and you need >>>>> to show how it is to be measured. I submit that the only method of making >>>>> such a determination is by means of something that measures clock time. >>>>> For >>>>> example, a clock! And you already agree that clocks will show that the >>>>> observers don't precisely agree about the simultaneity of events. >>>>> >>>>> In fact, to make the whole situation clearer, it is better not to use >>>>> observers or people as the objects said to share the same common present >>>>> because observers persist in time and this makes things less clear. >>>>> Instead, you should ask the same question about a momentary event like a >>>>> pulse of light from a diode. Do the diodes themselves share the "same >>>>> present moment"? Yes, whatever that means! Do the flashes occur >>>>> simultaneously? Well you know the answer depends on the inertial frame of >>>>> reference. Substituting a mental event (the thought "I am here now") for >>>>> the light flash, we can see that two thinkers cannot have that thought at >>>>> an objectively identical moment. All events can be timed using clocks, >>>>> which after all cold be anything that has a regular cycle. There is >>>>> nothing >>>>> in space-time, including mental events, that is not an event that can be >>>>> timed in this manner. What is confusing you is merely the persistence of >>>>> the observer and the impossibility of imagining that both observers don't >>>>> exist at any point in time you can imagine. But *what* observer? The >>>>> observer is constantly changing, and the only way to see if they share the >>>>> same moment is to time the changes in each using clock time. P-time is an >>>>> ad hoc postulate to save your intuition of an all-embracing moment. It >>>>> fails when you try to operationalize it. >>>>> >>>>> Please, rather than reiterate your intuition, refute this point. >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, December 28, 2013 10:57:18 AM UTC+11, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> All, >>>>>> >>>>>> I haven't made any progress getting the idea of a common universal >>>>>> present moment across so here's another approach with a thought >>>>>> experiment.... >>>>>> >>>>>> To start consider two observers standing next to each other. Do they >>>>>> share the same common present moment? Yes, of course. Any disagreement? >>>>>> >>>>>> Now consider those two observers, one in New York, one in San >>>>>> Francisco. Do they share the same common present moment? In other words >>>>>> is >>>>>> the one in San Fran doing something (doesn't matter what) at the exact >>>>>> same >>>>>> time the one in New is doing something? Yes, of course they do share the >>>>>> same present moment. Any disagreement? >>>>>> >>>>>> Now consider an observer on earth and an observer in some far away >>>>>> galaxy. But with the condition that they share the exact same >>>>>> relativistic >>>>>> frame in the sense that there is zero relative motion and the gravities >>>>>> of >>>>>> their planets are exactly the same so that clock time is passing at the >>>>>> exact same rate on both their clocks. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now are these two observers sharing the exact same present moment as >>>>>> well? Note that we just extended the exact same relativistic >>>>>> circumstances >>>>>> of the previous two examples so there can be no relativistic >>>>>> considerations. Do these two observers also share the exact same present >>>>>> moment as well? Yes, of course they do. Not only do they share the exact >>>>>> same present moment but they also share the exact same clock time t >>>>>> value. >>>>>> Any disagreement? >>>>>> >>>>>> OK, if you agree then you have to take a partial step towards >>>>>> accepting my thesis of a common universal present moment. You now must >>>>>> agree that there is at least a common universal present moment across the >>>>>> universe for all observers in the same relativistic frame. >>>>>> >>>>>> Agreed? >>>>>> >>>>>> Edgar >>>>>> >>>>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
