What form, let's assume a physical body, does time have? Your opinion. - page 43
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Agreed. Man has assigned some kind of physical quantities to segments of time. It seems that time is measured, but only in one direction, but in fact time has other coordinates, so it has a form. How does one represent this form?
Events (processes) from the future (B) move into the past (P) through the present (H), with P being made up of "bricks" of H:
"Pie" or slice of space and time is folded as follows, where B is the white area on the left, in the middle is H and on the right is P, with the sum of H+P forming history (AND):
It turns out that space is a kind of spiral and time is the boundary of space. Or vice versa?)
"Time" is a PROPERTY of space to propagate perturbation with a CONTINUOUS SPEED.
All other uses of the word "time" refer to lexical homonyms. In this regard, it would be very useful to define exactly what you mean when talking about "time". Otherwise, if you get confused, you may go oh-so-far in your conclusions (inventing a "time machine", for example).
"Time" is the PROPERTY of space to propagate perturbation at a CONTINUOUS RATE.
...
A very, very controversial statement.
Unlike the speed of propagation of an electromagnetic wave in a vacuum, otherwise called the speed of light and considered to be the limit of perturbation propagation, the speed of gravity measured to date exceeds it by at least 30 orders of magnitude. It may end up being infinite altogether.
A very, very controversial statement.
Unlike the speed of propagation of an electromagnetic wave in a vacuum, otherwise known as the speed of light and considered the limit of propagation of a disturbance, the speed of gravity measured to date exceeds it by at least 30 orders of magnitude. As a result, it may turn out to be infinite.
Well, here we are hopelessly locked into the following logic:.
The whole world as we see it is an immutable example of the infinite power of a Causal-Consequential dependence of the current state of the medium on the previous one (I can't even imagine right now what the opposition to this statement can be (I think to myself with interest)). And it seems obvious that the existence of cause and effect links is not possible in conditions of instantaneous propagation of perturbation (because then, all events, both causes and effects, must happen ONE TIME).
So, perturbations of the medium, carrying real state information, do NOT propagate instantaneously (with finite velocity). At the same time, the presence of other velocities... of other types of perturbations, those which do not take part in formation of values of medium's parameters, are quite logically admissible (even infinite).
...The whole world as we see it is an immutable example...
Categorically... =) And who told you that the world visible to us is the world? Let me explain with an example.
I can assure you that this insect is not even aware of a drop of very real dew on its eye. The organs of touch are not there, the weight of the droplet is small, the temperature is the same, the refraction for ultraviolet is comparable to the resolution of the eye, etc. There is simply NOTHING to notice the droplet.
Now man: Thewhole world visible to us is a narrow spectrum of electromagnetic radiation. Yes, people have, of course, learned to register other frequencies with equipment, but again only electromagnetic waves. So we perceive only small portion of true picture of the world and try to judge as a whole.
So who told you that the world visible to us is that world?
I cannot even imagine now, what would be the objection to the given statement (I think myself with interest))
I will satisfy your interest (if I haven't already)...
Causal dependence is observed in all the world visible to us EXCEPT(!) human decision and group interactions of particles in plasma (there is an assumption that it is the same field of fish).
Just think: with enough initial information and enough computational power, you can know exactly how the first raindrops will fall on your room window. This is because the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection, the force of action equals the force of counteraction, etc. So, thanks to cause and effect relationships, everything is predictable... except? ;-)
Put your hand into the bag of sunflower seeds and pick one. Got it? Good! Now answer yourself: why this one? Was it bigger? Closer? More comfortable? Oh, bollocks...
I'm not getting into quantum teleportation and other advanced science right now, but instantaneous interactions have been around for quite some time.
And it seems obvious that the existence of cause and effect relationships is not possible under conditions of instantaneous perturbation propagation (because then, all(???) events, both causes and effects, must happen ONE TIME).
Categorical... =) Who told you that the world we see is the world? Let me explain with an example.
Not quite the picture I was looking for, but still beautiful.
I can assure you that this insect is not even aware of a drop of very real dew on its eye. The organs of touch are not there, the weight of the droplet is small, the temperature is the same, the refraction for ultraviolet is comparable to the resolution of the eye, etc. There is simply NOTHING to notice the droplet.
Now man: Thewhole world visible to us is a narrow spectrum of electromagnetic radiation. Yes, people have, of course, learned to register other frequencies with equipment, but again only electromagnetic waves. So we perceive only small portion of true picture of the world and try to judge as a whole.
So who told you that the world visible to us is that world?
I'll satisfy your interest (if I haven't already)...
Causal dependence is observed in the whole world visible to us EXCEPT(!) the human solution and group interactions of particles in plasma (there is a suggestion that these are the same field of interest).
Just think: with enough initial information and enough computational power, you can know exactly how the first raindrops will fall on your room window. This is because the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection, the force of action equals the force of counteraction, etc. So, thanks to cause and effect relationships, everything is predictable... except? ;-)
Put your hand into the bag of sunflower seeds and choose one. Did you get it? Good! Now answer yourself: why this one? Was it bigger? Closer? More comfortable? Oh, bollocks...
I'm not going to get into quantum teleportation and other advanced science now, but instantaneous interactions have been around for quite some time.
Instantaneous interactions?! Ha-ha...
I have had enough of stories of official science about the Earth on three whales; about revolution of the Sun around the Earth; about an origin of kinds from Darwin; about "the Big Bang" of incomprehensible what and incomprehensible where, etc., etc. And themselves - still crawling through the air on primitive jet engines and, with self-loathing, showing the public, as the greatest achievement, dumb-headed robots barely able to stand on their feet.
You have cited the behaviour of MACROSYSTEMS in the absence of information about them from a level where the point in question is as much smaller than an electron as the Earth is smaller than the solar system. Macrosystems at such a level as your "particles in plasma" are not suitable for our topic. Time lives in much more fundamental levels of distance.
Time is the duration of processes and for each process it is different and flows from zero to infinity, until a new steady state is reached. No process, no time, as the great Newton said. All processes in nature proceed in the differential, sometimes not yet fully explored, domain. Moreover, time also "flows" in the differential domain, just as all processes in nature proceed in the differential domain. For simplicity, a reasonable man began to measure time in the linear part and constructed a unit of its measurement from half-life of each element (google it and you will find all necessary information, but it is not about that now) or as a part of period of earth's rotation around the sun. The measured time is a representation of time (present time of processes) in Laplace transformations. Uniqueness of Laplace transformations is that, differential equations are transformed to linear and differential time of processes is not an exception. I find it difficult to define time, but, in my research I have come across a quantity inverse to time, say i=1/t, which represents the resistance of the system to the flow of the process and this quantity is called impedance (i) of the system. Now we have to think, how do we go from impedance to time? Would defining impedance as the resistance of a system to the flow of a process help to define time in any meaningful way?
I think we are trying so hard to understand the role of time in nature, only to wonder if time is really the main factor in the case of Forex. I have my doubts about that. Because the price is formed, first of all, as a result of the deeds, desires, actions and counteractions of its participants, depending on the objective laws of economic development of countries and regions.
Time is the length of time that processes take...
That's what I'm saying: "time" is a PROPERTY of space to propagate perturbation at a CONTINUED rate. The fact that "...the course of processes..." has its "...duration..." - and is a consequence of the CONSEQUENCY of the rate of propagation of change.