Alternative Cosmology Theory
Time's Paradigm is a philosophy of science paper with a unique approach to the study of time. This summary below, briefly outlines arguements for cyclical time progression, thus bringing into question true light speed and a single Big Bang event, among other extraordinary insights.
Time's Paradigm: Read on line or download the full article in pdf.
"If a clock stops at light speed,
does that mean Time stands still?"
No, it simply means that there is
something wrong with your clock.
See the home page for an overview and Table of Contents.
Time's Paradigm in a NUTSHELL:
To suggest that something started from nothing is peculiar, at the very least. However, that is what most in the scientific community believe to be the likely explanation for the beginning of our Universe: Existence all began with a massive explosion - The Big Bang. Yet, nowhere else in physics is this allowed to occur. Things don't just appear, they don't just happen; there is causality.
The more likely explanation is...
Time cycles, as do all progressive systems, the consequence of which is that all matter in our Universe will eventually return to their state of origin, and the cycle continues. No loss of energy in the Universe, no catastrophic beginning or apocalyptic end, because there are no ends in a cyclical model. All matter through time already exists, as if a giant, revolving wheel whose parts are all connected and, so, able only to flow in one direction. Such systems drive themselves; they are autonomous, contained and independent; lacking infinities and finalities.
Conformal Cyclical Cosmology was introduced by the reknown physicist Sir Roger Penrose, and similarly asserts that time must cycle. However, his proposal suggests that there are sequential Big Bang events, whereas this Alternative Cosmology Theory argues from a philosophical standpoint that matter may be constantly coming into existence, throughout the Universe. Recent quantum correctional theories for General Relativity point to the 'singularity' before a Big Bang, and are also asking if there really was a beginning of existence - in other words, time.
Fluid progress is only possible in cyclical models, where no points along the way are isolated and so identifiable as individual entities. This resolves Zeno's Paradox of motion. If all considered points are unrealistic, then flow is possible. Otherwise, 11.59 would never become midnight.
A simple, cyclical measuring device, like a clock or compass, has no ends and, therefore, all points around it are uncertain. If we don't know exactly where we are on it, we can pass through it from one moment or angle to the next, (The Uncertainty Principle). Cyclical processes thus ensure continuity and immeasurable flow; whereas, linear models impede progress.
Linear models have defined ends because, in their view, nothing exists beyond them, and thus any point between them can be precisely extrapolated - leading to the infinite impossibility of progression. Unless.., it is conceived that the two ends are not relative to anything in between. In this model, progress throughout is perceived to exist while the two ends are understandably unattainable.
In physics, velocities are described on a linear scale, like a speedometer, from zero to the speed of light. At the beginning of the last century, in order to explain certain cosmological conundrums, light speed was established as being invariant, the other end was deemed irrelevant. Light was then seen to travel at a constant speed regardless of any observer's inertial frame of reference, and the conundrum was resolved - the luminiferous ether could be put to bed.
While it is perfectly understandable that mathematicians need points to establish fact and express our understanding of existence in any reasonable fashion, their reference should only extend so far, see the supplement: Prime Numbers Busted.
The assumption we have that acceleration is a linear progression is analogous with our ancient belief that the World was flat. It is clearly not. It is round, as is time and, also, space. A linear model with invariant ends is merely a pseudo-cyclical phenomenon.
The cycle of time, space and, for that matter, acceleration is introduced as follows: All bodies in the Universe emerge into existence at light speed, from where they begin a constant deceleration toward zero velocity and dimensional non-existence. Not all matter emerges at once, no big eruption such as a Big Bang, matter is continuously evolving. Inertial energy is at odds with the pressure that space exerts on any body, and gravity wins, so decline is inevitable. As acceleration is a cyclical process, both these ends, zero and the speed of light, are intrinsically the same - just as the end of one day, midnight, can be described as being the beginning of another.
In fact, there is no such thing as zero velocity or the speed of light as an individual phenomena. It will be shown that, stationary objects in the Universe must be travelling at light speed, and that a big bang could not have been the beginning of existence.
We are in cyclical decline, as described above, we can only attempt to arrest deceleration, not reverse it; cyclical processes only flow in one direction. We can accelerate off in this direction or that, and influence deceleration, perhaps even reduce it to near frozen by reaching what we believe to be relativistic speeds, however that is just us approaching zero velocity from the point of view of the Universe. Reversing time and motion, beyond arrested deceleration, back up to true light speed - where we all began - would make sense on a linear scale where negative momentum can be implied, but is quite unrealistic on a cyclical platform.
Moreover, to stop our positive deceleration would constitute the identification of a defined point, which would render progress impossible and create the assumption that we were travelling at the speed of light. Vis a vis the CERN declarations on colliding particles, see part 6. Travel.
We and all physical objects are as if marbles rolling down a hill from light speed to no speed, that, if forced to stop anywhere, will wrongly assume we have been accelerated back up to the top of the hill again. No body of matter can ever accelerate to universal light speed - it is in our past. (Although, later, it is postulated that, if we consider travel a journey in time rather than space, superluminal velocities may be achieved! See below.)
We accelerate and travel distances relative to one another, but as far as the Universe and light is concerned we aren't moving at all. We observe light as constant because we are all stationary, from the point of view of the Universe. Time is of no consequence to either, it concerns only matter. So, locally, we can proclaim understanding of an invariant light speed, but in the wider Universe this notion is redundant.
Look at it like this: Suppose we cut the circumference of a clock at midnight and stretched it out on the table like a ruler to form a linear time piece. If we said that neither end was relative we could then progress from one moment to the next throughout the day. But as we approached midnight we would never be able to reach it no matter how hard we tried, because it would continually recede.
Now, take our linear model for acceleration and wrap it around in a circle, like a clock. Each so called 'point' around it will be a velocity, which we could crudely imagine as perpendicular to the deceleration of the circumference we described above. In the same way we can look at cyclical time and say that, any point around it is our perceived clock speed perpendicular to the flow. In fact, as both these cyclical models are one and the same, velocity on one side, opposes clock speed on the other; as one increases the other decreases. Assuming clock speed to be a synonym for the energy associated with atomic/molecular functionality, we then have equilibrium.
A cyclical model for acceleration and time, such as this, allows for relative variations in velocity anywhere around it, however the only true progress being made is that around its circumference.
We created non-relative ends out of necessity, when we do not need to set such limits, if we consider progress of any kind to be cyclical. Time, space, trajectory and acceleration, must all be cyclical phenomena, as are all things that proceed. Bodies in the Universe could not move were it not so!
Matter in Contraction:
Zero Kelvin; the speed of light; the edge of the Universe; three dimensions; the Big Bang, and the beginning of time; these are all limits set for our convenience and understanding, but they cannot exist. If physics requires that they be integrated within our equations we will never be able to reach them; and, as a result of trying, these formulas will break down.
Alternatively, if we consider these limits obsolete by virtue of cyclical flow, we will surpass them and the shackles we had imposed upon our progress will no longer constrain us.
Time did not begin with a Big Bang, nor might there have been only one such event, matter may be coming into existence continuously. Matter progresses through time from a uni-dimensional, non-functional and massive state at the speed of light toward a dimensionless state of immensely rapid functionality at zero velocity, in one direction only. But neither end exists individually. Upon reaching zero, matter becomes redundant and its energy re-emerges at light speed, just as smoothly as night turns to day. Thus, our journey continues through time and space without cessation in constant deceleration. No energy lost, just a change in purpose.
Energy is transferable. Clocks speed up if we decelerate, our metabolism increases, because particle functionality gains energy from reduced forward motion; less interference from physical motion in the macro World means atomic particles have greater mobility.
This internal energy transformation is not entropic. The second law of Thermodynamics does not apply. The motion of atomic particles clearly includes forward motion, their paths being altered, elongated or twisted; they will be completely restricted at light speed, whereas at slower speeds particles will spin and interact more freely. When a body's forward motion practically ceases, particle functionality becomes supreme, and atomic perfection is reached.
Temporal Perception and Space Travel:
The past and the future exist together in their entirety, therefore there really is no such thing as motion. We do not physically move; existence is a solid, tenseless block (part 1. Destiny). We only progress through time. As we pass from one moment to the next we perceive that we have moved physically.
All matter in the Universe is in collapse through time (UC) inversely dependent upon our velocities. This is how we perceive the difference between one moment and the next; not by a change in position, but by a change in size. The rate at which we contract depends upon the amount of inertial energy we each possess to counter collapse. The faster we go, the slower we contract, or the more mass we appear to take on as Special Relativity puts it. Being conscious of time and our whereabouts is due to sensory receptors. So, as we shrink, we are aware only of bodies whose material representation is proportional to ours, at any given moment. Figuratively: we cannot see the past or the future from our perspective.
This contraction is a cycle, from immeasurably big to immeasurably small; in other words, a collapse from the speed of light (c) to zero velocity or stationary (z), as pointed out above. It is manifested as the simultaneous and equal reduction of each of our three dimensional planes, through a fourth - adequately illustrated by the Hypercube.
Can we calculate this contraction? We may. The text book 'light clock' illustration used to verify time dilation in rockets at relativistic speeds can be used. If we make a progressive reduction to all material objects (mirrors) and the space between them by a factor of the Divine Proportion, (Fibonacci's Golden Ratio), dividing them by 1.61803399.., the photon is observed to travel the same distance by both parties.
There is only one rate of reduction possible in which both the occupant and the outside observer concur. Such a coincidence is hard to ignore.
An astronaut, on an eight year, round-trip voyage at relativistic speed, would likely return to Earth in just a matter of months. The standard view for the above scenario is, of course, that the astronaut returns to Earth in eight years having hardly aged but a few months. Both models are equally bizarre. One relies on the relevance of (t), the other, (c). Both are plausible, yet only one has a satisfactory outcome for space exploration: the first.
In the second model, the astronaut on a pre-programmed flight path will, in deed, return to where the Earth is after eight years, but will not be able to see it or interact with it, because it has shrunk over the years considerably more than she, and will, proportionally, be outside her range of perception. While, in the first model, the astronaut will, having had her collapse slowed due to great speed, and with this knowledge, take control of her return trajectory to intersect Earth at the proportional moment for her size; which is just a few months after departing.
Breaking the Light Barrier:
If our perception of time slows down at high speed, why should we be bound to adhere to the faster clock speed of slower moving frames of reference, and return to their perceived present moment eight years ahead of ours? That suggests a 'constant universal clock' forcing everyone to be aware of the same 'now' moment and thus upholding the limit of (c). And yet, 'simultaneity' is a corner stone of Special Relativity, demonstrating that no two observed moments are the same, giving rise to a contradiction if we must all be aware in only one moment and that being at the same moment as others.
If acceleration is cyclical we can dispense with such notions. The infinity paradox of (c) is eliminated, distances become invariant due to the proportional nature of awareness in contraction and we can progress at our own pace through time. Our present moment of awareness is simply dictated by the energy required to resist collapse.
So, in the first model, those on Earth who welcomed the astronaut home after just a few months, would have to accept she travelled many times faster than the speed of light, intersecting the path of a distant star long before she was predicted to do so, and then returning just as fast. They would not have been able to observe this phenomenon, because light and associated emr waves would not have been able to keep up with her.
However, when the influence of UC is applied, with a reduction factor precisely that of The Golden Ratio, we see that the astronaut does not need to travel all the way to our supposed rendezvous eight years away, as we on Earth demand, only photons of light must abide by such rules. She is not contracting as we are. She can travel exactly the same distance as we imagine she would, in her time, and be back in no time.
If there was a universal clock, then from the perspective of other frames of reference, the astronaut would not travel faster than light. However, the reality is different.
We can only perceive things that travel well under the speed of light, so, in essence, the subjective interpretation could be that (c) is a limit. However, that does not stop our astronaut from travelling, relative to her passage through time, at much greater speeds. We can measure electrons, protons and muons travelling at near the speed of light, but we are only measuring their energy levels at impact to determine velocity, not their true speed. If our space traveller was smashed into a wall, she would also read energy levels at near the speed of light, even though she was actually travelling at surreal, superluminal velocity! It's simply a matter of Time.
The core scientific principle of this paper can be reviewed here and is called "Universal Contraction". Time is, however, a complex subject, whose parts this paper discusses in greater detail in the links below. Or visit home page for an overview and Table of Contents.
please click to view or download TIME'S PARADIGM the full 1.3mb article in Adobe pdf
pt1. Destiny - pt2. Time - pt3. Infinity - pt4. Dimensions - pt5. Velocity - pt6. Travel - pt7. Wrapper
To post a comment: Find us on Facebook
For the Author, please follow: Contact
Time's Paradigm, website: Sitemap
Top of Page
A new theory of time. Work in progress. Copyright: A. Graham, 1988 - 2018
No unauthorised use of the material published or the concepts described herein is permitted.