in-depth phil. of sci.
Home | Destiny | Time | Infinity | Dimensions | Velocity | Travel
A Compact Outline of Arguements for a Contracting Universe
"If the opposite of somewhere
TIME'S PARADIGM - In a Nutshell
To suggest something started from nothing is peculiar, at the very least. However, that is the quiet assumption voiced by most in the scientific community: 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.
Time cycles, as do all progressive systems, the consequence of which is that all matter in our Universe will eventually return to a state of origin, and the cycle continues. No loss of energy in the Universe, no catastrophic beginning nor 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, thus 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 renown physicist Sir Roger Penrose, and similarly asserts that time must cycle. However, his proposal suggests an oscillation of one Big Bang event encompassing the entire universe, whereas Time's Paradigm posits from a philosophical standpoint that matter may be constantly popping in and out of existence, in local sequences 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.
Linear vs. Cyclical Models.
Fluid progress is only possible in cyclical models, where no points along the way are isolated and thus identifiable as individual entities. This resolves processional paradoxes. If all considered points on a chart 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 as such all points around it are uncertain. Because there are no defined points for relevance our exact whereabouts on it cannot be ascertained, so we can freely pass 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 the view of their designers, nothing exists beyond them. Having defined ends means that 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 these models, 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.
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!
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.
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. Neither is time nor space. A linear model with invariant ends is merely a pseudo-cyclical phenomenon.
A Cyclical Model for Velocity
All matter emerges into existence at the speed of light (c), followed by a constant and proportional deceleration toward zero velocity (z) and dimensional non-existence. As velocity is a cyclical process, (z) and (c) are intrinsically the same, just as the end of one day, midnight, can be described as being the beginning of the next.
It is argued that zero velocity cannot exist independently, stationary objects in the Universe must -- ironically -- be travelling at light speed.
Time did not begin with a Big Bang, nor might there have been only one such event, matter may be coming into existence continuously with multiple "bangs" large and small. 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.
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!)
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 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.
Moreover this model states as follows: We can 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.
Our Awareness of the Present Moment
The past and the future exist altogether in their entirety, therefore there really is no such thing as motion. We do not physically move; existence is a solid, tenseless block. 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 the rate of 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 frames of reference.
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. (PS. The outside observation is from Earth with Earth bound clocks, this Golden Ratio being related only to Earth).
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, but she has photos to prove it.
When the influence of UC is applied, 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.
How Does Cyclical Time Affect Us?
Our perception of progress in time is due to Universal Contraction. All matter is in collapse, and as we reduce in size we are aware only of those things that remain proportional.
Illusions are everywhere. They are the affirmation that existence is real. If everything were ordered and understood there would be little need to question... anything. That the world continues to surprise and delight us with peculiarities, keeps us guessing, asking questions -- is the notice we are alive.
If everything perceived where absolute and unquestionable, it would be unlikely that progress could be made, at all. It is doubtful that anything we see is fact and more reasonable to assume that all things we see are an illusion. From the perspective of one, a line is straight, from another, it is curved. Which is right? Neither, and both.
A fourth dimension through which we find ourselves all physically contracting is peculiar but not unrealistic. It is the perspective, or depth perception, necessary to see into three dimensional progression. Not unlike the third dimension our brains demand when looking at a painting on the wall.
And so, through this giant Cycle of Time, we slowly shrink. Our senses dictate awareness and we perceive 'now'. We are aware only of those things proportionally equivalent to us now. We perceive what we have evolved to perceive.
We flow from the speed of light to the speed of zero, one and the same place; we shrink from gigantic to tiny as we fight with motion against the energy of space; though we are unaware, time accelerates as we journey. And we find that a Universal Clock does not bind us all to one present moment, that we can be aware anywhere on our time line; as a result, restrictions and limits imposed on our passage through the Universe no longer constrain us. We can travel as fast as we like.
But, perhaps more important still, solid time means that all things are connected. It is this which tells us that space -- a void of nothingness -- does not exist; that space is an essential part of connectivity. Not really an unprecedented conclusion; after all, String Theory is big on connections. Moreover, many people would find it difficult to agree that we are all just ships passing in the night -- even those from the A Camp.
Connection means the riddance of infinity, and the absence of moments or points in time. Now, photons of light and associated electromagnetic radiation can be understood as the binding together of existence, a weave of elastic threads that create a tapestry between points of stationary value; and we, the mobile bodies in the universe of macro status, are given freedom to wander within its confines.
In other words: there is no Grand Unified Theory! The macro world of relativistic happenings are bed bugs in a giant, quantum mattress.
An acorn is a ball of energy, which bursts out and up into the world. It slowly climbs skyward, then begins to send out branches here and there, in seeming chaotic and random fashion; when, in fact, it is an extraordinary and beautiful concept, full of meaning and reason. Many hundreds of years later there stands a mighty oak tree - it worked; wow, it works, though nobody quite knows how or why. What is clear is that all the acorns on that tree are all connected, to each other and to the very first acorn that started it all.
Our Universe: one giant fractal. The past and the future of everything, interconnected, existing all at once in chaotic assembly. A beautiful, four dimensional design, self-replicating, without scale, timeless in its integrity. At some stage the challenge will be: to create a three dimensional fractal that cascades within itself; that, as it has a beginning, will have an end or perhaps many ends, that do not flow forever towards infinitely small; and whose ends will connect seamlessly with the beginning or beginnings, so creating an efficace cyclical progression.
The monumental iterative equations needed to express this structure will be the DNA of existence, itself.
TIME'S PARADIGM, the book|
now available free to view
or download from this site
in published ebook format
for dektops, Kindles, readers.
Download here THE ABSTRACT in .pdf Format
Cycles are everywhere Spinning Magnetic Fields vortices and revolutions
website last updated: January, 2020
Philosophy of Science Proposal
No unauthorised use of the material published or the concepts described herein is permitted.