On Friday 23 Sep 2011 6:16:30 am Udhay Shankar N wrote:
> Erm. I don't have either details or theoretical background to say more
> at this point, but does anyone else have any thoughts?
> 
Well the only thing I can recall about a layman's view of the theory of 
relativity is that at the sped of light, time comes to a standstill - i.e zero 
and mass becomes infinite. Using a "logical" extrapolation of that anything 
that travels faster than light should have a mass heavier than infinity and 
time should become negative. 

Somehow this brings to mind Minkowski's space time. All in all it consitutes 
gobbledygook to me. Enjoy:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Consciousness_Studies/The_Philosophical_Problem

>The physical theory of relativity consists of four dimensional geometry plus
> the assumption of causality and the assumption that physical laws are
> invariant between observers. It should be noted that space-time could
> contain preferred frames of reference and is not, by itself, a theory of
> relativity. The assumption that physical laws are invariant between
> observers leads to the postulate that nothing can travel faster than c
> metres per second. This means that the constant c, which in Minkowski
> space-time is the conversion factor from seconds to metres then has a new
> significance as the maximum velocity.
>
>A result of c being a maximum velocity is that nothing can travel from
> regions of the light cone that are spacelike separated to the observer at
> coordinates (0,0,0,0). This is problematic for observers if time is real
> because, as Stein (1968) wrote:
>
>“in Einstein-Minkowski space-time an event's present is constituted by
> itself alone.” (Stein 1968).
>
>However, to each of us it seems that the present is characterised by many
> things simultaneously. As will be discussed below, this simultaneity of
> present things also results in the appearance of phenomenal space. But in
> Minkowski space-time with real time the plane of simultaneity is entirely
> space-like separated from the observation point. If real time is accepted
> it would appear that we cannot have the space of phenomenal experience.


shiv


Reply via email to