Search this site
HOMEPAGE
Is this the missing link?
HOW OLD IS THE SUN?
|
Hi mead! Take in this! My latest thought is the universe is
only a few seconds old in Real Time. If Time is
Temperature, then the fastest times represent the greatest forces.
If a being were alive and experiencing the Timespeed of the Sun, then
they would still be reeling from the Big Bang. The further out from the
Sun, the more Time slows. The edge of a Solar System may contain a
transparent skin. We may need to look at molecular dynamics to pass
through it. Not likely with our present technological
skills
|
Meanwhile, take a look at the pictures (attached) I got from
a Nasa website. Dust
devils seem to be naturally occurring events on Mars - and they
come occur in massive form or mini form. But the fact that they create
static electricity bigtime leads to that old question, "Is there life
on Mars?"
and
"Could there be intelligent life on Mars?"
The actual size of this life might be small (insect size) -
and it may exist below ground. But it could use dust devils to acquire
power along paths that are gridded to capture and store the electrical
power generated. The smaller ones may even be caused by what would be
the equivalent to our aircraft. Perhaps they do both at once. Travel by
'air' while simultaneously recharging their grid.
Take a look at the end part of the 'dust devil' clip. There
almost seems to be an object speeding along in front of it.
Well, that's my flight of fancy for the day.
|
|
Hi Mead! I've tried with the sketches in 'sunseconds' to
demonstrate that there is no paradox for the sun and the universe to be
ten seconds old (eg), while we can easily claim it is 14 billion or
more years old.
If time is temperature, then the debris (planets etc) that
circle the Sun are far from the fastest timespeed. Not only that, but
they travel greater distances than the Sun - because they are locked
within the Sun's gravity pull and yet circle it over ever widening
orbits.
The Sun would be making one linear movement away from the
'big bang'. The planets are also making this linear movement (entrapped
by the Sun) in addition to their orbital movements. With temperature
receding toward the edge of the solar system, then time will recede
accordingly. Therefore the planets are travelling greater distances at
radically lower timespeeds than the Sun.
Perhaps Earth is rotating round the Sun 1.4 billion times
for every second of the Sun's existence.
|
 |
|
Hi Mead! I've done some rough estimates on the the effect of
virtual age against real time age in a 'time is temperature' scenario,
where light is the propelling force within the solar system.
Sun: 26 million years old
Earth: 780 million years old
Jupiter: 2,340 million years old
Uranus: 4,680 million years old
Neptune: 7,020 million years old
It is quite likely that taking this expansion of time into
the nether reaches of the Solar System would bring up a virtual time of
14,500,000,000 years.
This calculation is based on the acceleration of time from
the Sun's surface to the Corona - an estimate of 'times170'.
My present idea is that light is the force that positions
planets and their spin and orbits. This force will decay with distance.
This idea is bound by density also. If I was able to live on the sun I
would be incredibly heavy, but my essence would be compressed even
though my energy output would constitute an enormous amount of mass. On
the further reaches of the solar system the opposite would apply.
Can you see what I'm getting at?
|
Hi Mead!
Imagine a sphere in seemingly perpetual, constant and
predictable orbit around a larger sphere. Inhabitants on such a sphere
can create the idea of infinity through the experience of this
perpetual, constant and predictable orbit - and prove it through a
seemingly proven system of mathematics.
The Universe (or universes) however, would (if
conscious) view the sphere orbiting as a temporary occurrence and
understand the event as a re-action to its own system of mathematics.
We can achieve remarkable accuracy with our present
numerical system, but if it is applied to ever wider space and time it
becomes increasingly inaccurate. Within the full complexity of the
universe, our mathematics may be viewed as heavily flawed.
There are 13 new moons in a year. We divide the year
into 12. We need an extra day every four years to adjust to the flaws
within our numerical system. we are able to arrive at 33.3333333
recurring. From such things, we conceive infinity.
Applying the numerical idea of
to the cycle of moons, arrives at three sequential
events per two years. 26 moons (under our present system) becomes 2 new
cycles + 8 stages (completion of a third cycle). The start of the next
cycle 3c (27 in our present system) heralds the start of what we would
regard as the third year.
This would indicate universal years of Jan to August
(inclusive), September to April (inclusive) and May to December
(inclusive) - allowing for minor incursions.
It also indicates that the way we would class a year
(from one condition to a return to a similar condition) is not the way
the universe would class a year (from one condition to the opposite).
It is natural for us to think mathematically within a
decimal system, because we have a total of ten appendages on our hand.
But thumbs are are actually very different from fingers. We have eight
fingers - and their completion is an event (1c). Every human being is
supposed to have eight fingers. It is a constant result. If this does
not occur, it is an anomaly within the universal sequence that should
have led to it. These anomalies are most likely due to an imbalance of
temperature (and therefore time).
The biggest cycle in our lives is that of being young
to being old, if you discount being born to dying. If you look at all
other cycles of our lives, it is likely to be births and deaths of
experience. We regard a year as something that will return to a
predictable state, with similar conditions. The universe seems to see a
year as a period of change - from one state to the opposite. As long as
there is a variable in temperature there will always be a journey
between two opposites. Infinity depends on this to perpetually occur.
But, without change, there is no universe. If infinity entered the
equation of the universe, then the universe would eventually cease to
exist.
|
|
Hi Mead! A news report today claimed that English
schoolchildren are increasingly shunning Science subjects like
Physics.It is feared this country could lose its technological prowess
because of this. I think it is important to seed 'flights of fancy' and
imagination into the minds of future scientists. A new frontier must be
envisioned before it can be explored.
|
Hi Mead! The Woolly mammoth sperm in this article could be
us on Earth in the 'time is temperature' scenario, while the present
day could be the Sun. But the actual effect seems the precise reverse
of the 'Sun is ten seconds old' impact. The sperm has been inhabiting a
time speed zone where the sperm has not decayed from being viable in
its active form.
If the sperm were substituted for you or I, it would be like
me sending this email or you reading it - and suddenly finding
ourselves thousands (or millions) of years in the future after closing
the email (or sending it).
The earth's atmosphere could have this effect because all
events (above) are occurring within it. But the mammal sperm is
actually the correct temperature this far from the Sun (when the
sperm was frozen). It is the Earth's atmosphere and its greenhouse
effect that has speeded up time by 33 degrees. It is the Sun that makes
this possible.
But the heat of the Sun is speeding up Time upon and within
the Sun itself. The question is, however:
How long has the Sun been travelling outward from the Big
Bang?
There is the heat of the object itself - and the force that
catapults it. Both are profoundly different.
If you were to throw the block of ice that encased the
mammoth sperm, the ice would move in our present understanding of real
time (and its average speed). But the sperm would continue its slow
progression (or decay) within the timespeed of -20C.
If you were throwing the block of ice into an area where the
average temperature (timespeed) was -200C? If you were able to video
the stone's progress with a magnification that could trace molecular
and particle responses to this 'heated' object invading their space?
Would these particles and molecules coalesce into mini
planets circling the 'hot' ice?
Time on the block of ice is moving ten times faster than the
area surrounding it, but the area from the furthest out mini planet
(close to -200C) to the core of the block of ice (-20C) would
mimic a decay of time speed.
I can see all sorts of seeming paradoxes for any beings who
might come into existence on those mini planets.
|
| Brian, Expand a little on your sentence [If infinity entered the equation of the universe, then the universe would eventually cease to exist.] I find that thought very interesting! Also, what happens to all the past moments which we have lived? Are they gone forever or are they repeated over/over or are we living them all in different universes? Best Regards, MEAD |
Hi Mead! I found it hard to define and explain this sentence:
But, without change, there is no universe. If infinity entered the
> equation of > the universe, then the universe would eventually cease to exist. But infinity has no value, nor deviation. therefore it can
not change. Man's retreat to the idea of infinity is the surrender of
the validity of a theory. Time (temperature) is dependent on change in
molecular and force-driven values responding to inevitable consequence.
Infinity implies a non-variable. Time (temperature) is not possible
without variation above the value of absolute zero (or below).
Brian! I believe that you are right on target. Personally, I believe that an infinite universe is impossible. As you so well stated the universe is ever changing and ever expanding? I even have some doubts about the concept of infinity in mathematics as currently accepted. Mead |
| Brian, Also, what happens to all the past moments which we have lived? Are they gone forever or are they repeated over/over or are we living them all in different universes? MEAD |
Hi Mead! PAST MOMENTS: I would guess that 99.9% of our
past moments are, by themselves, utterly forgettable. They count more
as a cumulative experience that can be viewed with a generalistic
summary. As my article "Sarah - the inner memory" laid out, I
feel there is a dual layer of memory within us. One is the outer memory, which is used
daily by us and it tends to erase (or summarise) past moments that have
little weight within our present emotional and functional being.
The amount of information that can be stored in the outer memory is
dependent on the capacity of our IQ and the way our individual
retentive abilities have been utilised and organised. Most of us are
perhaps a little lazy... perhaps simply realistic under the duress of
living...so we tend to allow overwrite rather than 'flexing the
muscles' of our memory.
But the inner memory is a different animal altogether. It remembers EVERYTHING - and applies it to a universal sequence. The outer memory may forget events, or when they occurred, but the inner memory does not and it alerts us to the relevance of a past event impacting on potential actions we may employ in our present life. Time is Temperature is akin to saying we move forward against a past that is locked. If we can go back to the beginning of a fire, then we would be able to extinquish it before it burns the house down. In such a way, we may extinquish our very existence. The past may be locked, but I do feel it is fully recorded. Our inner memory may well be able to utilise this resource. So much for my thoughts for the day.
|