- Thank you received: 0
Infinite spectrum of time-progression
22 years 3 months ago #3093
by Jim
Reply from was created by Jim
Can you tell me what the spectrum of time progression is? I don't get out much. thanks
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- jimiproton
- Offline
- Premium Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
22 years 3 months ago #2846
by jimiproton
Replied by jimiproton on topic Reply from James Balderston
Quote:
Can you tell me what the spectrum of time progression is? I don't get out much. thanks
In a nutshell, imagine an ambiant influx of gravitions. If each graviton is a pure particle, it will approach a point in space at a defined rate based on our time-scale, and will arrive at, and pass through that point.
On an infinite spectrum of time-scale, it will never reach that point. As it approaches, an observer existent on a different scale(eg. at the scale of 1/10^30 of our measurements) would perceive the gravition as approaching the same speed as we percieve it approaching our point (i.e at a speed of 1/10^30 it's velocity on our time-scale). And so on for an observer at a scale of 1/10^30 of that observer's scale.
ie. time-flow is congruenous with scale (being infinite).
nb. Such a scale (1-10^30, perhaps inferrable elsewhere in these forums, based on graviton-matter interactions) would equate a single atom on one scale with galaxies on another -fortuitously within observational limits.
Can you tell me what the spectrum of time progression is? I don't get out much. thanks
In a nutshell, imagine an ambiant influx of gravitions. If each graviton is a pure particle, it will approach a point in space at a defined rate based on our time-scale, and will arrive at, and pass through that point.
On an infinite spectrum of time-scale, it will never reach that point. As it approaches, an observer existent on a different scale(eg. at the scale of 1/10^30 of our measurements) would perceive the gravition as approaching the same speed as we percieve it approaching our point (i.e at a speed of 1/10^30 it's velocity on our time-scale). And so on for an observer at a scale of 1/10^30 of that observer's scale.
ie. time-flow is congruenous with scale (being infinite).
nb. Such a scale (1-10^30, perhaps inferrable elsewhere in these forums, based on graviton-matter interactions) would equate a single atom on one scale with galaxies on another -fortuitously within observational limits.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- AgoraBasta
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
22 years 3 months ago #2847
by AgoraBasta
Replied by AgoraBasta on topic Reply from
jimiproton,
One can also imagine mutually inpenetrable time scales, e.g. - any finite duration on one scale is infinite on another. The infamous speed of light appears as an example of such barrier of scales, that's if one is a relativist; or just a scale barrier for the EM processes.
One can also imagine mutually inpenetrable time scales, e.g. - any finite duration on one scale is infinite on another. The infamous speed of light appears as an example of such barrier of scales, that's if one is a relativist; or just a scale barrier for the EM processes.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- jimiproton
- Offline
- Premium Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
22 years 3 months ago #2907
by jimiproton
Replied by jimiproton on topic Reply from James Balderston
Quote (from Angorabasta)
One can also imagine mutually inpenetrable time scales, e.g. - any finite duration on one scale is infinite on another. The infamous speed of light appears as an example of such barrier of scales, that's if one is a relativist; or just a scale barrier for the EM processes.
I'm not assuming that anyone in these forums need be a relativist.
Secondly, we simply must presume the EM to be of infinite spectrum. [could one disqualify the proposition?]
One can also imagine mutually inpenetrable time scales, e.g. - any finite duration on one scale is infinite on another. The infamous speed of light appears as an example of such barrier of scales, that's if one is a relativist; or just a scale barrier for the EM processes.
I'm not assuming that anyone in these forums need be a relativist.
Secondly, we simply must presume the EM to be of infinite spectrum. [could one disqualify the proposition?]
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- AgoraBasta
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
22 years 3 months ago #3226
by AgoraBasta
Replied by AgoraBasta on topic Reply from
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Secondly, we simply must presume the EM to be of infinite spectrum. [could one disqualify the proposition?]
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
The ZPF spectrum is believed to have a cut-off in the range of some hundred THz, AFAIK. That's not too high a frequency. Though I may be wrong about the exact figure, I just can't imagine an EM wave at frequency above the ZPF cut-off, whatever it be.
Secondly, we simply must presume the EM to be of infinite spectrum. [could one disqualify the proposition?]
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
The ZPF spectrum is believed to have a cut-off in the range of some hundred THz, AFAIK. That's not too high a frequency. Though I may be wrong about the exact figure, I just can't imagine an EM wave at frequency above the ZPF cut-off, whatever it be.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- jimiproton
- Offline
- Premium Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
22 years 3 months ago #3227
by jimiproton
Replied by jimiproton on topic Reply from James Balderston
Angorabasta,
Are you a relativist?
No connotations with the question.
Are you a relativist?
No connotations with the question.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.289 seconds