## Raymond Tallis

Discussion of articles that appear in the magazine.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Memories come from the past but not any past. They come from the pasts when each past was present. Every present adds to memories such that the current memory is an accumulation of past accumulations plus the present. But even though the past is not available in the present, memories are always available in the present. Reality provides referents for the present but reality doesn’t provide referents for the past. Memories provide referents for the past.

The past does not provide referents for the present, so how does one know that the past still exists?

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Consider Minkowski’s fourth dimension.

When graphing a time line, the x-axis is time and points on the axis are events or outcomes. Y and Z are not representations of events or outcomes. So why is t associated with x, y, and z? That is arbitrary. Any variable other than t could be associated with x, y and z. For example associating n (=numbers) with x, y and z would lead to the conclusion that space-numbers are in the fourth dimension. The technique produces spurious results sometime. There needs to be some other justification for the 4th dimension other than this questionable calculation.

If there is movement in space time, where does it come from? Without movement in space-time there is no time in space-time, only space. But if there is movement in space-time, then that movement defines time. Space-time does not.

If space-time is indeed moving, then it would keep abreast of the present seemingly creating many presents rather than many pasts.

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Some people will accept a claim and base their conclusions on the claim. However, if the initial claim is wrong, their conclusions will be wrong.

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

In spacetime x,y,z,t specifies an order. It doesn't specify events. In reality time is repetitive. In space time it's not. t is simply an order unrelated to time. x,y,z,n would specify the same order and would not imply the order is related to repetitions which it's not. Space time is a misnomer. Space order is a better term.

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

One object can't be at two different places at the same time. But it can be at two different places at different times. So, is it time that allows movement?

Not directly. What allows movement is an underlying change in states. Not the states of objects but the states of the whole universe. When the state of the universe changes, the state of all objects change. If there wasn't an overall change in states, everything would be frozen. Change in the states of the universe are not visible but must have a physical effect on objects. Can one measure states directly or are they immeasurable like space?

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

How are states and dimensions related? There are no movements in dimensions without states. However, a fourth dimension can represent states with the understanding that states effect objects in space while dimensions don't.

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Just to clarify, states do not move objects. All states do is free objects so they can be moved by energy.

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Dimensions don't effect objects because dimensions are simply the location of objects. Something must effect the orientation of objects. Changing states can effect the orientation of objects. But what causes changing states? This is unknown but speculation leads to some possibilities. They could be caused by an extremely fast gate like operation, a wave of some sort, a vibration or a disequilibrium in the universe that causes fluctuations.

A state is one orientation. Many states refers to many orientations which leads to movement which leads to time.

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Going out on a limb I wonder if gravity could exist without time. The reason I suggest this is the formula for gravity doesn’t depend on time. The gravity of the Earth is g = GME/r2 where G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the Earth and r is the radius of the Earth. Time is not a factor and so gravity seems like it might exist without time.

According to Einstein’s general relativity, gravity effects spacetime which without time is simply space. If (and this is a big if) gravity has a fluctuating effects on space, this could be the source of changing states. The fluctuations could cause state a then state b then state a and then state b ever repeating.. Each new state changes the locations of all objects in space and they then could move forward.

What I didn't say but assumed is that space can move without time.

This is more of a thought than a theory but it does give a possible (though layman’s) explanation of time.

Impenitent
Posts: 1660
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

jayjacobus wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:47 pm
Going out on a limb I wonder if gravity could exist without time. The reason I suggest this is the formula for gravity doesn’t depend on time. The gravity of the Earth is g = GME/r2 where G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the Earth and r is the radius of the Earth. Time is not a factor and so gravity seems like it might exist without time.

According to Einstein’s general relativity, gravity effects spacetime which without time is simply space. If (and this is a big if) gravity has a fluctuating effects on space, this could be the source of changing states. The fluctuations could cause state a then state b then state a and then state b ever repeating.. Each new state changes the locations of all objects in space and they then could move forward.

What I didn't say but assumed is that space can move without time.

This is more of a thought than a theory but it does give a possible (though layman’s) explanation of time.
if space is nothing but the distance measured between points, can space itself move?

-Imp

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Impenitent wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:31 pm

if space is nothing but the distance measured between points, can space itself move?

-Imp
I don't know but Einstein claimed that spacetime is warped by gravity and the universe (space) is expanding. Perhaps I am wrong but this is the only explanation for time that I know of so give me a little credit for good try.

But your point is well taken. The dimensions in four dimensions can't move because they are separated only by distances In spacetime physics distance represents time but if you convert distances back to time the four dimensions collapse into three dimension with many many states over time.

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Impenitent wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:31 pm

if space is nothing but the distance measured between points, can space itself move?

-Imp

Perhaps I said that wrong. Space may not move but gravity exists in space as evidenced by attraction between objects. So gravity waves exist in space and may have a relationship to time. In fact if gravity doesn't require time, then it may actually have a causal relationship. At least that's my supposition.

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Universal state is a necessary concept for the universe to work as it does. In order to see objects around us they must be in the same universal state as us. If they weren’t we couldn’t see them or contact them. Objects in different universal states (an hour ago?) would not be present. and light waves would disappear into prior (or future) states and never reach us. If there is a constant, universal states is that constant. Plus there can be only one universal state at a time.

Time may be relative and relational but universal states fixes the changing condition of all objects.

Impenitent
Posts: 1660
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

jayjacobus wrote:
Sat Oct 21, 2017 5:07 pm
Universal state is a necessary concept for the universe to work as it does. In order to see objects around us they must be in the same universal state as us. If they weren’t we couldn’t see them or contact them. Objects in different universal states (an hour ago?) would not be present. and light waves would disappear into prior (or future) states and never reach us. If there is a constant, universal states is that constant. Plus there can be only one universal state at a time.

Time may be relative and relational but universal states fixes the changing condition of all objects.
so you claim that an infinite number of past universal states exist non presently?

-Imp

jayjacobus
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

### Re: Raymond Tallis

Impenitent wrote:
Sat Oct 21, 2017 7:44 pm

so you claim that an infinite number of past universal states exist non presently?

-Imp
Once an universal state is past it is gone except in memory. The only way a past universal state could exist is in a record which isn't a "state" with any effect. The current state is a function of the last state but doesn't make the last activity current.

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests