The 1st law

"Energy can neither be created nor destroyed"

Time = Energy

Thus all time - Past, Present, Future, exist simultaneously.

Anyone wish to elaborate further?

 

sounds like a cool concept, but where do you get time = energy?

 

Well, this is exactly razors first law. I would say that the past and the future are both artifacts of the present. They are both living tissue. The only time any thing happens is now. If it is not happening now it is not happening, nor did it happen.

 

Time can be manipulated. Approaching the speed of light time slows more and more.

For example, if I was able to travel at the speed of light around the earth time would stand still for me while years could pass of earth.

If it was possible to go faster than the speed of light time would reverse.

 

I was elaborating that Time as the fundamental rule would encompass all energy. Everything is energy.

I would define the number one rule as Energy, energy is infinite, as is time,
so either of these "terms" would work.

But I feel that science is stuck at this one question-
Is time/energy actually infinite?

 

New concept? your delusion knows no bounds!

You call that perspective a law? no, the FIRST law? Tell me, how did you test your hypothesis? What predictions can be made with this law? how does this law apply to a number of phenomenon?

Your "law" cannot be used for predictions, it cannot be falsified. Your "law" is nothing more than a statement that you wish to call a law. It's pseudo-intellectual babble at its finest, enjoy pretending you're a thoughtful person.

What a sad state of the world, if your daughter is a psychologist and does not know the difference between a hypothesis, theory and a law, or perhaps you stateted your opinion differently to her than you did us?

At any rate, she sounds like a worry, if she thinks she can make such a drastic diagnosis of strangers on an internet forum, not something one would expect from an educated psycholgist at all.

Occam, my poor naive friend, just because it cannot be proven false or contradictory does not mean it is a law. As i said earlier, prove that aliens don't exist in a far away universe that will never come into contact with us.

You can't but that sure as hell doesn't make it a law.

All you have done is made an empty statement, and you seem to think that if it isn't contradictory to other scientific laws and can't be proven wrong that it is a law, sorry you have to work a lot harder to discover a scientific law.

So i ask you, how did you test your hypothesis? is it even testable? Now you have tested it, what predictions can you make with it? can you make any predictions with? Ok so now you can make solid predictions with it, you now have to show how this "law" always applies and is unalterable!

But you can't do that because because you can't test what isn't falsifiable and you can't make predictions with an empty statement.

Your first law = FAIL, it's not science.

 

1) Energy cannot be created or destroyed.
2) Time is Energy

3) Past present and future exist simulatneously.

Sorry i don't see how 3 must follow from one or two. It seems to me with that argument, the only conclusion forced by the premises is that Time cannot be created or destroyed.

1) Energy cannot be created or destroyed.
2) Time is Energy

3) Time cannot be created or destroyed.

 

Yes you are correct, the reason I put that in there was just to highlight the concept. That thought alone always produced powerful effects on me, especially in a bemushroomed state.

 

Everything started somewhere, everything holds it all together.
We can slap rules on it based on our limited observations and experiments; but it's a laughable arrogance to really make such far reaching assumptions in anything but theoretical musings.

 

What about the big bang?

 

A rational benchmark of time as far as we have observed. We are only satisfied when we can trace something to it's beginning. Though on are search for a beginning we may fail to ask "What ended before this began?" Though if we do ask then we are led down a path of tracing another beginning. These questions are as Infinite as energy and time.

^

 

Who's says there must be something that ended? ....and if the universe did come out of something else how do we know it would be anything like what we see around us now? Time is dependent on the contraints and laws of the universe. Without the universe time doen't exist.

 

This. Just this. All of it.

 

this is the portion of Razor's thought that intrigues me .
what is the human problem ? do i have a problem with
causality ? i really don't know . what ? how much time
shall be until i am resolved through understanding ?
to receive an enlightening reply must i endure Razor's eternal time reality ?

ya , i spose .
.
.

 

i'm left with 'sposing .... could it be , Razor , you've been considering the commonly human reality schiz of a separate heaven inhabited by ancestors . a theological christian view of this can be exasperating . it may imply no responsibility toward what is deemed a temporal reality . contrarywise - a curse upon those people who would destroy the earth , say John the Revelator .

maybe the trouble is an if-then ( a causal) statement that
reasons from the unknown . it's not a very natural idea .
children hate it .

 

NONE have shown that time .. Duration processing by law.
Has beginning or end.. NONE.

You waffle on.. but show PROOF that there was a point where TIME/duration started.
For it could not have been the bang. for LAW must exist to allow the bang.. thus something was before...
DOH,,
To tikoo and all others.. I did not invite you here.. If the thinking is to large.
please leave

My post was a counterpoint to the infinite aspect of space which has no validity. Gravitic tensors detremine space as a folded ball
to put it simply.
Time. The duration and processing of dynamic events.. things that happen.
Is not so easy.
Mass/extension is inert.
It is 'observed only through dynamic phenomenology.'
'Things that happen because they happen'
They occur because law says electrons orbit / atoms vibrate and valencies are held to.
These electrons /atoms could not exist without laws to say they MOVE.
There is no quantum dynamics without movement through duration.

Duration/ processing by law IS time.
And it has no beginning . or apparrently. end.

Ockham
Ps causality. = process. A process cannot be unless it is where it is and law applies.
WHere it is is because it WAS 'there' before it was now.
thats it.

Too deep?
I'll personally tatoo 'NO DIVE" on your forehead.

 

Agree

 

Monkey


And this is a wonderfull effect of LAW.
Duration is PLASTIC.
Objects at near lightspeed process at slower rate than those not at near light speed. Mass actually 'lives slower' at 99.9 C. The SF gurus use it all the 'time' hehe
This has been shown in experiment to be valid.
Einstein IMAGINED it..WOW

WHY does it slow down.. Does it friction with the fabric of space.
Does it warp the ubersphere of this universe. Is C the controlling factor/ yes/ but WHY.
These questions and more at 5 in the CNN national report

 

Tikoo

What the hell does heaven, ancestors, christian view, john the revelator,
acausal statements which cannot exist or children have to do with my post?

I posited a position on Duration/time.
Religion has NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT
Dont play the . 'i'm smarter' game.
be smart
Argue from fact.. not desire. All are welcome.

Leave now or be a Jesuit. i have huge respect for Jesuit order..
Thinkers for 'a' god... How many crashed and burned/immolated for their imagination and integrity. near all. heroes

Ockham

 

You guys are taking a very complex concept, a question without a definite answer, one that can be argued forever and be analayzed in very interesting ways, and you are going nowhere with it lol. Instead of encouraging and sharing knowledge you discourage it. A complete waste of a thread and of my time. Thank you. To the OP try to be more straight forward next time instead of creating a handful of incomplete sentences. No offense, you sound like a cool guy.