Dear Edgar,

  The concept in Kitada's theory of local time that may resemble your idea
of an absolute present moment is the universal mapping of QM systems (via
their centers of mass) to each and every point of a space-time manifold.
All uncountable many of them. This creates a Fiber
Bundle<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_bundle>like structure, but
it is subtly different.
   It does not strictly obey Fiber Bundle Construction
theorem<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_bundle_construction_theorem>
in that there is never a trivial isomorphism to map between an
arbitrary
pair of "bundles" (here entire separable QM systems) unless the pair of
systems are decomposable from a single QM system. Decomposition of QM
systems <http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/QM/tensorproducts.pdf> is hard.
We can think of it as entanglement relativity, monogamy, etc. The reason is
that QM systems have different rules than classical systems (such as GR!)
Thus two semi-independent domains.
  There is no "connection" that allows one to connect them up in a unique
narrative, but one does get a "present" moment at each position of
space-time that can be matched up with those of its neighbors (using
abstract constructions). But there is no such thing as a global covering
bundle or "cover space <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covering_space>"
allowed as the centers of mass are like any fixed point, by definition,
infinitesimal points that cannot be "blown up" to infinite size...


On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net> wrote:

> Stephen,
>
> Speaking of parsing correctly, I presume you meant WRITE rather than read?
> :-)
>
> Anyway glad we agree block time is nonsense. So what's your idea of time
> that is not "BS", and that is not a "cartoon with many lacuna"?
>
> A quick summary please?
>
> Edgar
>
>
>
> On Saturday, January 18, 2014 2:06:04 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
>> Dear Edgar,
>>
>>  LOL! You don't parse what I read very well... I have been saying that
>> block time is a BS idea. Time is not like that at all. I have a model of
>> time that works great in physics, but not many know of it. BTW, I do
>> appreciate your concept, but it is a cartoon with many lacuna. It needs a
>> lot of formalism and polish to even be said to work.
>>
>> For one thing, your notion of a computational space makes no sense at
>> all. Sorry.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>> Stephen,
>>
>> I agree with your criticism of Bruno's UDA. It has no explanation for
>> becoming, for anything ever happening. I've also pointed this out.
>>
>> However, this is equally true of block time, which you seem to believe
>> in. In block time there is no convincing way anything can ever actually
>> happen.
>>
>> On the other hand my model solves this fundamental problem by positing an
>> actively computing reality in a present moment of p-time as the fundamental
>> level of reality.
>>
>> Edgar
>>
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, January 18, 2014 11:54:15 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>>
>> Dear Bruno,
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Bruno Marchal <mar...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 17 Jan 2014, at 20:38, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>>
>> Dear Bruno,
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Bruno Marchal <mar...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 16 Jan 2014, at 04:44, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>>
>> Dear LizR,
>>
>>    But stop and think of the implications of what even Bruno is saying. 
>> *Space
>> is completely a construction of our minds.* *There is no 3,1 dimensional
>> Riemannian manifold out there*. We measure events and our minds put
>> those together into tableaux that we communicate about and agree on,
>> because our languages, like formal logical system, force the results to
>> obey a set of implied rules. We formulate explanations, formulate models
>> and look for rules that the models might obey. Hopefully we can make
>> predictions and measure something...
>>
>> <div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,s
>>
>> ...
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/TBc_y2MZV5c/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>



-- 

Kindest Regards,

Stephen Paul King

Senior Researcher

Mobile: (864) 567-3099

stephe...@provensecure.com

 http://www.provensecure.us/


“This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of
the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain
information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and
exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as
attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message
immediately.”

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to