Algebraic Equation for Time?
Algebraic Equation for Time?
This is an algebraic equation for time I figured out last night. I don't like it, but I believe it might work.
What we observe as time is strictly relations between movement. For simplicity we will use a 24 hour clock as an example. Aω is equivalent 86,400 seconds being the potential relations of one cycle as “day”. Bϕ, is the actual relations at 3:00 a.m or 10,800 seconds.
As actual relations, Bϕ is a grade of Aω as:
T=________Aω________ → T= ________86,400ω______
..............Bϕ................................10,800ϕ
Bϕ has a constant state of change added to it, considering it is in a constant state of movement. This span of change relative to Aω, maintains a window of movement through A – B equivalent to 75,600.
T=________Aω________ → T= ________86,400ω______
...........Bϕ + (AB)ϕ..................10,800ϕ+ 75,600ϕ
Adding (A – B) to Bϕ, or 10,800+ 75,600, does not take into account the change as progression from B → A as 1 cycle of movement, or 10,800 → 86,400 as 1 cycle.
This change begins with 10,800+1/(1 ≤ x) . This is considering all measurements of unity begin with 1 or a fraction of 1 as potential unity, with this unity itself equivalent to the second.
It ranges to 10,800 + 75,600 therefore is equal to 1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (AB) where BΔ is equivalent to a constant change.
T=___________Aω___________ → T= ____________86,400ω_____________
....Bϕ +(1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (AB).............10,800ϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤BΔ ≤75,600)ϕ
This constant change ranges from 1/(1 ≤ x) to 75,600 and is indefinite as pinpointing one movement causes a change in the measurement. Take for example observing three seconds later at 10,803 causes a change in the measurements as:
T= ____________ 86,400ω_____________
.....10,803ϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ 75,597)ϕ
BΔ is equivalent to a constant state of change as relation. This change acts as linear relation between 1/(1 ≤ x) and (A – B). In these respects BΔ, as change observes an approximation between 1/(1 ≤ x) and 75,597.
Using the example above and observing a measurement where the cycle is complete the equation can be observed as:
T= __________86,400ω__________ → T= _________1ω___________
.........86,400ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ )ϕ...............1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ )ϕ
Considering 1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ ) would require 1ω to exist as a fraction of:
_____1ω_____ → ____1ω____
.(1ϕ+ 1ϕ = BΔ)........(2ϕ = BΔ)
if 1/( 1 )= BΔ then; 1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ ) must change to:
T= __________1ω___________
....1ϕ + (1/(1≪(n →∞)) = BΔ )ϕ
Where x is equivalent to a number that tends towards infinity. In these respects Time is always approximate as it is always divided by a continuous change at the peak of its cycle as the perpetual relation of particulate. In these respects what we understand of time is merely approximation of movement.
In summary Time is equivalent to Potential Particulate relations divided by Actual Particulate Relations plus a fraction less than or equal to one that is less than or equal to Actual particulate change which is less than or equal to A minus B.
T= ____________Aω____________ → ___________1ω___________
.... Bϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (AB))ϕ .......(1ϕ + (1/(1≪(n →∞)) = BΔ )ϕ
What we observe as time is strictly relations between movement. For simplicity we will use a 24 hour clock as an example. Aω is equivalent 86,400 seconds being the potential relations of one cycle as “day”. Bϕ, is the actual relations at 3:00 a.m or 10,800 seconds.
As actual relations, Bϕ is a grade of Aω as:
T=________Aω________ → T= ________86,400ω______
..............Bϕ................................10,800ϕ
Bϕ has a constant state of change added to it, considering it is in a constant state of movement. This span of change relative to Aω, maintains a window of movement through A – B equivalent to 75,600.
T=________Aω________ → T= ________86,400ω______
...........Bϕ + (AB)ϕ..................10,800ϕ+ 75,600ϕ
Adding (A – B) to Bϕ, or 10,800+ 75,600, does not take into account the change as progression from B → A as 1 cycle of movement, or 10,800 → 86,400 as 1 cycle.
This change begins with 10,800+1/(1 ≤ x) . This is considering all measurements of unity begin with 1 or a fraction of 1 as potential unity, with this unity itself equivalent to the second.
It ranges to 10,800 + 75,600 therefore is equal to 1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (AB) where BΔ is equivalent to a constant change.
T=___________Aω___________ → T= ____________86,400ω_____________
....Bϕ +(1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (AB).............10,800ϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤BΔ ≤75,600)ϕ
This constant change ranges from 1/(1 ≤ x) to 75,600 and is indefinite as pinpointing one movement causes a change in the measurement. Take for example observing three seconds later at 10,803 causes a change in the measurements as:
T= ____________ 86,400ω_____________
.....10,803ϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ 75,597)ϕ
BΔ is equivalent to a constant state of change as relation. This change acts as linear relation between 1/(1 ≤ x) and (A – B). In these respects BΔ, as change observes an approximation between 1/(1 ≤ x) and 75,597.
Using the example above and observing a measurement where the cycle is complete the equation can be observed as:
T= __________86,400ω__________ → T= _________1ω___________
.........86,400ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ )ϕ...............1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ )ϕ
Considering 1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ ) would require 1ω to exist as a fraction of:
_____1ω_____ → ____1ω____
.(1ϕ+ 1ϕ = BΔ)........(2ϕ = BΔ)
if 1/( 1 )= BΔ then; 1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ ) must change to:
T= __________1ω___________
....1ϕ + (1/(1≪(n →∞)) = BΔ )ϕ
Where x is equivalent to a number that tends towards infinity. In these respects Time is always approximate as it is always divided by a continuous change at the peak of its cycle as the perpetual relation of particulate. In these respects what we understand of time is merely approximation of movement.
In summary Time is equivalent to Potential Particulate relations divided by Actual Particulate Relations plus a fraction less than or equal to one that is less than or equal to Actual particulate change which is less than or equal to A minus B.
T= ____________Aω____________ → ___________1ω___________
.... Bϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (AB))ϕ .......(1ϕ + (1/(1≪(n →∞)) = BΔ )ϕ

 Posts: 2015
 Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
C=LOCK
Imp
Imp
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
A second is one 86,400th of a period of a day. Methinks.
But maybe that's not what you asked. Maybe the answer should be "arbitrarily". Or "absolutely!" or "vividly."
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
That was back in the old days. These days, The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.
So if you want to know how long a second is, first get yourself a cesium atom ...
https://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/second.html
Last edited by wtf on Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
No argument against this standard at all. The intention was presenting a strictly algebraic equation for time where the variables, such as potential movement and actual movements are observed strictly for what they are: variables. Time is relative to the variables used to measure it, as time is merely the relation of movements.wtf wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:00 amThat was back in the old days. These days, The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.
So if you want to know how long a second is, first get yourself a cesium atom ...
https://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/second.html
The cesium atom should be able to be applied here, assuming you have an actual point of movement for variable B.
I think the equation gives an accurate description of time, however for whatever reason, I don't like it.
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
It was merely an example of movements, any standard that observes potential and actual movement should work. Time is strictly the relation of particles as movement. What we observe as "seconds" constitute a particulate format, in that they are "particles" or "parts" of a standard or cycle of potential movement. The relation of seconds, as particulate, in turn are grades of a potential unity of relations, which in this case is the "day".
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:24 pmIt was merely an example of movements, any standard that observes potential and actual movement should work. Time is strictly the relation of particles as movement. What we observe as "seconds" constitute a particulate format, in that they are "particles" or "parts" of a standard or cycle of potential movement. The relation of seconds, as particulate, in turn are grades of a potential unity of relations, which in this case is the "day".
So to answer your question in simpler terms: Seconds are particulate, with the relation of particulate in turn determining the nature of time.
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
T=$
Time is money!
Time is money!
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
There are equations that I don't like, either, though this is not one of them.
I hate equating women to men. Vive la differance!
I hate equating "Lucy in the Sky" by the Beatles to "Salmon in the Creek" by Chopin.
I hate equating "Long hair" to "Short brains."
I hate equating the structure of the solar system to subatomic structure.
I hate equating life to a beach. Life should not be spent flat, wet, full of sand.
I hate equating equations.
I hate equating the nineteensixties to drug culture. (Although it is unavoidable in the west, in the Eastern Block there was nothing like it.)
There are some equations that I like. Really like. But I am too tired now to think of them.
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
Granted, there is that. And then there are the "sloppy seconds". We shan't delve into that. Or dive into that  even less. Yikes.wtf wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:00 amThat was back in the old days. These days, The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.
So if you want to know how long a second is, first get yourself a cesium atom ...
https://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/second.html
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
It's a viable one, but not limited strictly to that considering the nature of "particulate" is not limited strictly to atoms but any "part" of a whole. Under that definition cellestial events also apply
Re: Algebraic Equation for Time?
Eodnhoj7  You're obviously very creative and bright. (And apparently smoke alot of weed.) It'd be nice to see you put your talents into something that matters, like writing fiction, writing for causes, etc. (and maybe you already do). You've obviously mastered the language of math and science but evidently not the practice of it. Your posts remind me of the sentence "What color is love?" The words make sense grammatically, but obviously the sentence is nonsense (assuming we're not being fanciful, poetic)  love is an emotion, and emotions aren't things that have a physical color.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests