Back
Forum Replies Created
-
Realizing that the future does, ‘already’ exist, does seem to imply a fixed, fated future, And, that conflicts with the freedom of choice we also kow we have.
Most of us have the freedom to choose a, ‘soda’, or ‘fruit juice’, in a meal we plan to consume tomorrow. Many of us cannot choose a very expensive bottle of champagne.
If the future is fixed. How can we choose at all?
That, involves the existence, of yet another dimension I like to call ‘trend’. The dimension of superpositions, of the quantum wave function,, many worlds,, etc. Where ‘spacetime membranes’, “branes”, are stacked up in trend, much like ‘space membrane’ “moments”, are stacked up in time.
Just as our attention to “now”, travels futureward in time. So can our attention to the choice we wish to make, travel in trend. Towards the lunch where we are having a fruit juce, or whatever. :shrug: The ‘parallel universe’, where we are having the very expensive champagne, may be farther than our attention can travel, in one day. :shrug: It is implied, that the light, in a light clock, in uniform motion, (Say at velocity ‘Vt’, the velocity of the ‘train’, does not gain the velocity component Vt, of its source. in the direction of motion of the train,. It is assumed, that the light travels with its entire velocity of c, angled slightly towards the direction of the train’s motion. So that it meets the mirror, that it is to bounce off of, in its completion of a light clock, ‘tick’. If the beam is directed perpendicular to the direction of the ‘train’s motion. Then I guess the beam must be ‘curved’ by that motion.
And I suppose, that is the meaning of the g dx/dx term in the metric tensor for the general theory of relativity? This is a quote, from my post in the scale thread. It is more appropriate here.
“If something was, ‘actually’, traveling away from us, at twice the speed of light. We would observe, it travel say, 1 light year, from A, to B. In..
(1/2 year for object to travel from A to B) + (1 year to see the light of the objects arrival at b) = 1.5 years. And, conlude it traveled at 1ly/1.5y = 2/3rds the speed of light.
If the object traveled instantaneously, we would see it travel at light speed. We would see its arrival in one year, when the light of it reached us.
It is intuitive, that nothing can travel faster than instantaneously. Could the ‘speed’ of light limit’, be more to what we can observe, than to actual velocities?”.There is a set of equations, to what Bob would see as Alice moves to point B, at velocities that may exeed the speed of light..
For instance, without time dilation..
the trip time Bob measures ‘Tb’, equals the trip time alice would measure ‘Ta’ plus’+’ The time it takes the light to reach Bob at A, from B.
If Alice is traveling away from Bob, he cannot ‘see’ her travel faster than light, no matter how fast she goes. Unless, she can travel pastward in time.This qualitatively suggests to me, that this speed of light limit, might just be to our ability to observe, at the speed of light.
But, Bob calculates, with the equations of special relativity, that Slice will experience, ‘time’ dilation’.
For Alice’s clock time to agree with Bob’s calculation, Alice would have to actually experience a time dilation, (Ta(1+2Va/c, if I recall correctly) during her trip time at her actually faster velocity. :shrug: If something was, ‘actually’, traveling away from us, at twice the speed of light. We would observe, it travel say, 1 light year, from A, to B. In..
(1/2 year for object to travel from A to B) + (1 year to see the light of the objects arrival at b) = 1.5 years. And, conlude it traveled at 1ly/1.5y = 2/3rds the speed of light.
If the object traveled instantaneously, we would see it travel at light speed. We would see its arrival in one year, when the light of it reached us.
It is intuitive, that nothing can travel faster than instantaneously. Could the ‘speed’ of light limit’, be more to what we can observe, than to actual velocities?