math & physics
424319a at March 24th, 2004 07:40 — #1
A new theory of time-space
The main idea of a new theory of time-space is that time is a expression of change in motion distance and curvature. In a word, time is equivalent to space, and vice versa. Time is space. Space is time. Two things are same.
It is unnecessary to postulate that time is the forth dimension. For example, time-space of the earth system, sun system and atom, and so on, is spherical. The rectilinear motion in plane coordinates or three dimensions in classical physics occurs in spherical time-space and must be influenced by it. This is reason why time-space is a four dimensions.
According this new theory of time-space, there are three kinds of clock. Those are current clock, thing clock and Doppler clock. Every clock has its own second unit.
Time-space is moving.
Active and passive motion of time-space forms a whole world of physics. The new theory gives us a definite answer to what the nature of wave, light, gravity, energy, passive inertia, active inertia, electricity, magnetism, special and general Doppler principle is.
Reference book: THING AND ITS LAW (ISBN 1-58939-525-5)
anubis at March 24th, 2004 08:12 — #2
i'm sorry, i totally fail to see the meaning of your post. i reads like the backcover of a book and has nothing in it that could spark off a discussion. also you didn't bother to answer to the previous thread. as a matter of fact i assume that you are plainly spamming this board and would kindly ask you to stop that
bladder at March 24th, 2004 08:34 — #3
I dunno... it made sence for a little while, then everything got jumbled up in my head. You're going to have to explain just a wee bit more. The way I figure. Time takes place over a period. Time "happens", but space does no such thing, they have different properties so they cant be the same. Space is where things happen, time is when they happen. Space cannot be when things happen because things happen "in" space, not "at" space.
If time was spherical, then that would imply that our lives would eventually overlap our lives ... ?? If my blood cells were in spherical time, then their lives would continually overlap themselves and they'd never die. I would think that if cells lives overlapped, they'd never "die" and humans would be immortal
actually.... I feel a game story line coming about
The new theory gives us a definite answer to what the nature of wave, light, gravity, energy, passive inertia, active inertia, electricity, magnetism, special and general Doppler principle is
anubis at March 24th, 2004 12:26 — #4
seriously, it sounds to me as if he was trying to sell the book not talk about it which i would be glad to do. you know you'd start a discussion by saying i read xy about yx in book z and what do you think about it. not
The new theory gives us a definite answer to what the nature of wave, light, gravity, energy, passive inertia, active inertia, electricity, magnetism, special and general Doppler principle is. Reference book: THING AND ITS LAW (ISBN 1-58939-525-5)
he isn't very good at speaking english. maybe it's just that ?
but frankly his nick makes me think of spam, too
bladder at March 24th, 2004 21:14 — #5
When I hit the reply button, your post wasnt actually there. So I didnt get to read it while replying, but you do have a very good point. Now that you mention it, it does seem like a book advertisement or the back of the book. feh on the OP if it is indeed spam
pthread at May 4th, 2004 09:24 — #6
It sounds like a very unscientific book at that, how could this be a theory if it is so new? If it hasn't been tested, and isn't accepted by a significant percentage of the scientific community, it isn't a viable theory. Sounds like some crackpot trying to make a few bucks by throwing big words together they don't understand.
Probably the same people that have the new creationism "theory" now. What do they call it now? They have some new fancy name, but its still the same old crap... and they keep calling it a "theory"... that is the best part.
zenogais at May 4th, 2004 22:43 — #7
Your "theory" which I think is non-sensical, makes no sense and violates all laws of physics basically. It is a common notion that time has no spatial representation, time and space are related but most definately not the same thing.
mihail121 at May 5th, 2004 07:35 — #8
It's true that time and space are related (everything is related to everything else infact) but they are DEFINETELY not the same thing.
However time can be observed as the fourth dimension 'cause everything has it's rightfull place (waves, motion, you name it) in time. Atleast that's what i think
Other than that, the post seems just like a damn propaganda.... 10x but no 10x if i want some i'll just turn on CNN. Good day!
farmertom at May 29th, 2004 14:19 — #9
I don't think that this "theory" is so new, I've heard of it before. Here's a new one for ya :
They're each made of three quarks, each with its own 'flavor' and one of three 'colors'. Lets not forget the gluons, the even smaller particles that hold this mess together when they collect and form glueballs (not a very original name).
I don't think there are three Quarks but its just our perspective of them in thier relative states. Also a gluon I think could be more realistic described using a model of harmonics and dark mater (electron less atoms). I think effects like paralellism and an electrons habit of bleeping in and out of an electron cloud at various values can be attributed to the facT of a harmonic relation of elements in the universe that are conducted through space aka dark mater. Look at the research being done on Einstien Bohr condensate, it reveals that at a near zero absolute temp matter lases. Its because you are making the matrix....space....dark mater quiet. Also in super conducting design it has been determined that a material will conduct an electron (a particle or just an effect in space?) through the matrix of that material better at lower temps cause of simple collision physics. Lets say you set the harmonic vibration of the electron stream you wanted to conduct to near match the quantum holes harmonic path, and also if you used a material that is electrically deformable like a organic crude oil dirivitive, would this stream pass through the matrix of this special material with relatively little interfearance?
BTW: Speaking of Realitivety and all, I don't feel this topic is so realivant to game physics, do U? :yes:
mario at November 5th, 2004 16:33 — #10
I would be nice if someone gave an answer to this mother-of-questions and complete The Great Theory of Everything. Heh... I would be nice, but it isn't. I haven't heard of any serious unification theory, excluding many hypothesis and theorems.
In my opinion searching for the truth is already made irrational. The whole physics bases on mathematics; the reason is quite simple: people needed numerical describtion of surrounding space. Everyone can interpretate the simple formulas containing length and time, like Galilean transformations. But how to truly master the Shrodinger equation or the matter of divergence in field theory? It's simple to manipulate with this formulas, but the true meaning of the basics stay unrevealed.