Black holes? and time travel

"Noway, time is relative....math is universal, language of the universe."

Math can be a description of the universe, but it often falls short. it's a human language.

There are NOT 3 deminsion- there are 4.

 

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.....

I got evicted from my maths class at age 11.......I hate maths..but i will try and hang in there with you....

I did watch a documentary that explained how the whole universe could be mathematical....saw how pythagoras got his theorum ect;

In my simple terms....the best way to put it is...then what number am I ?...I exist, I am. What number do my beliefs represent ? meaning how do you calculate things that can only be felt, like spirituality...?

I still think that maths is like time in as much as it is a miraculous tool that works...

So I cannot yet agree with...."nothing can exist without math..."

 

Perhaps some day values will be assignsed to the elements of "you" and the appropriate equation set-up to add humanity into some great unified reality theory that explains it all.

Perhaps- but not today!

 

yes, and I know and I have fun trying to find out....and while there is NO answer. at least the question of the universe is still creatively, imaginatively and openly the domain of all those who wonder at the marvel and mystery of it all..........


strawpuppy

 

Perhaps universal among intelligent species at a certain level of knowledge. But it has no indepedent standing- besides, there may be other possible systems for describing the same phenomenon.
-----
I do think there is an obtainable answer, though.
But I suspect it will be of a statistical and quantum nature and not absolute or infinite.

 

ps.

More than 4 deminsions is only a mathematical abstraction at this point. They may not exist.

Length, depth, height, and duration are, however, easily observed.

 

Everything you say is assumption- it might as well be religion. Belief.

theortical physicist assume extra-demension to explain things thay have no fact based explanations for. There's no evidence, accept suppositon. they allow for it, they don't demonstrate it.

believers assume god to explain things thay have no fact based explanations for. There's no evidence, accept suppositon. they allow for it, they don't demonstrate it.

how about a math system constructed by three limbed, 15 fingered creatures?

Base 15?

 

and once phostigen was firmly believed essential. and aether...

someones who's thinking in numbers of a different base is dealing with a different system that describes the same thing.

French and chiness are both made with the same apparatus- are they the same language?

they describe the same phenomena in different ways.

what else might be out there?

 

because of this stuff getting all over my head, and because I still have not been knocked off my original theory..(cause I think I've solved the problem of creation..) I joined up with a bit of a headier crowd...now this debate is sort of raging on a more "academic' theme...

I'd like you guys to see it cause it seems to me you have brains....
I'm also giving this thread to those guys....

I'm really learning a lot here..

heard of "virtual particle" comming from a void ?

http://forums.philosophyforums.com/showthread.php?t=9832

 

And below is the link that will tell you how black holes evaporate....:H Hummm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle

 

I checked out those post.

you miss one thing that is best described by math:

(1) + (-1) = 0

something can come from nothing-provided it's opposite also emerges. The sum total reamains nothing.

 

Yeah, i checked it out too....Wierd, still trying to get my head around it...especially the make up of virtual particles...

Well, I shall have to ponder the particles whilst staring at the stars...Going camping for two nights up in the mountains...

Hope you all have a nice week-end

strawpuppy

 

I think we agree on everything....It's such a big topic, that it is probably open to question, even by those on the leading edge...

It's just that I think I have reached a time in life that I ought to get something fixed in my head about the answer to "The BIG Question".....I'm probably Agnostic:
1ag·nos·tic.....Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know .
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god:......And hopeless at maths.....

But as to an answer to the begining of this thread:

All I can say is my that my head has been spinning around the galaxy so much, that I will have to give it a rest for a while and get my feet back on Terra Firma.....but now that the question has been raised....It would be great fun to explore it all over again once all that I have learned so far has sunk in and sorted itself out....

Thanks....

Love you all

strawpuppy

 

Holy cow you guys are insane.

This is a very interesting topic I have stumbled onto, I think. If the 3rd Dimension (us) is created and viewed as x, y, and z, What is the 4th? W?

would W be defined as space?

So x, y, and z have a set amount of values, but can be noneexistant as well. How can they be negative? Black hole? A force churning inside of itself?

Maybe a blackhole is rather something running on the negative side, and what we view is the inside out of space "W".

Very true about the math thing as well, Math is the universal language (Atleast It seems that way to us).

You would think that if you had one of something, and two of something else, we would have three objects.

Another life form may call "one" as zeepbo and "two" as yumzeeh, and the answer, of course, would be quanhti.

But what if things exist on a plane "W" that do not have an object base (Like What we count).

Energy? In its own form? What happens when you have ganzaps (otherlife forms alarm clock, hehe) in 1 hand, and another one setting elsewhere and you put them together? They fuse and become a bigger Ganzap. But then I guess this theroy is off because we just used math once again, even in the merging of energy. Math, may be called anything, but the "concept" is what is universal.

Just my two cents

 

Midnight

Well said..
Occam sees no 'dimensional aspect' to the idea of time...
Thats just cliched crap.
[its a 'for want of a better conceptual handle']

Dimensions are facets ,, occam thinks ,, of extension.
Not duration.
Co-existing facets. [with the 3 we interpret]

Occam

 

.

 

Shaggie

No. those physicists cannot.
For there is no verifiable human theory of time..
There is only duration as our senses percieve it.
What is duration.?
Our perception of change and the change that allows perception.
Motion fills all requirements for such alteration of reality
[to allow perception of change and the change that allows perception]
Change occurs due to motion.
Ergo.
Motion IS time.

Occam says time is MOTION.
[motion being driven by the objective laws of reality]
And it fits, with all observation.
If none can show this to be false.
If any can show an example of time, where there is no change, no motion.
Then do so.

Otherwise, time IS motion.

Occam

 

.

 

Sorry for the delay- I disagreed with something that ran me over!

------
That statement is as Universal as it get.
It applies to everything!

 

The general flow of Time can reasonably and usefully be viewed as a measure of the general increase in Entropy.
It takes energy to create motion and change position.
If all is truly quantum, than that energy is expended in Q amount- thereby increasing entropy by T amount at a time(sorry!). I believe this allows for the expansion of the Universe into the "future" alone.

Of course this implies that adding energy to a system is the equivilent of taking it back in time. But we all know that's not the case.