CENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITY•SYMMETRY•HARMONY GOALS.9-10.Jan..2024
HOMEPAGES: ASSUMPTIONS |DARK|FORMULAS|INFINITY|KEYS|Map|REVIEW|Transformation|UP
An Ongoing Exploration of Time
by Bruce E. Camber Initiated: 2 October 2016 Updated, this page: 5 January 2024
Abstract. Our simple mathematical progression and simple logic that became our chart of the universe — quite literally encapsulating everything, everywhere for all time — provides a radically different approach to the historic questions about time. If you multiply PlanckTime, the smallest unit of time by 2, then each result by 2, over and over again, in just over 202 steps you will be at the Age of the Universe. The 143 doubling takes you up to a second. Believe it or not, the 202 doubling is just over 10.9 billion years in duration. It’s hard to process and believe, “The entire universe in just over 202 steps?” You’ll have to think about that simple logic. Mathematically, this is the most-simple, most-integrated, most-comprehensive grid that can be defined. Yet even for us, it is still hard to comprehend. Called base-2 notation from the Planck Scale to the Age of the Universe, this model suggests that space-and-time are finite, derivative, local, and quantized. The net-net, bottom line conclusion: What you do today imprints the universe forever. Here is time from a different point of view. Thank you.
From the first moment of time, Planck Time, to the Now is just a chart numbers.
If space and time are finite, one might then ask, “Then, what is infinite?” We simply look at one of our oldest, most versatile, most-used equations, pi (π), to find three basic qualities of infinity, continuity-symmetry-harmony. Discussions about the nature of the infinite (and of infinity) have been going on throughout records of human history. Among our scholars today, one of the most articulate about the shortcomings of our current understanding of time is MIT professor, Max Tegmark. He’s creative. He’s aggressive. And, it doesn’t suffer fools gladly. And, he goes by the moniker, Mad Max, for a reason!
Max Tegmark. A scholar’s scholar, Tegmark explores the question of infinity in his article, “Infinity Is a Beautiful Concept – And It’s Ruining Physics.” Tegmark is the author of popular books like Our Mathematical Universe. He, has written hundreds of articles and has done thousands of interviews and lectures. Infinity gets in his way (see: renormalization and regularization). He concludes that science does not need the infinite. An increasingly popular position among many very smart people, I believe his conclusion is a bit too quick. Nevertheless, his engagement of the key questions is very good. More…
If space and time are finite, one might ask, “Is there anything that is infinite?” As a result of the simple base-2 model, a most simple answer could be “Continuity, symmetry, and harmony.” Order, relations, and dynamics – it appears that the thrust of the universe and the thrust of our cells require all three. To explore what that means, we will use our simple model to see how it impacts every article (including Max Tegmark’s), book, conference, and late night discussions about the nature of time referenced here.
On 19 July 2016 Quanta Magazine (and Atlantic Monthly (19 July 2016) published an article , July 19, 2016 and Atlantic Monthly , July 26, 2016 (just a week later) The Debate Over Time. Dan Falk, the author a book, In Search of Time, opens the door on a June 30, 2016 conference, Time in Cosmology, at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Ontario. Part of the focus was on the science of time symmetry. Time’s arrow from the past to the present to the future has been a longstanding problem.
Fifty-seven of the brightest and best cosmologists, astrophysicists, theoretical physicists and philosophers-of-many-flavors had gathered. Although several attendees have been introduced to the simple model using base-2, there was no introduction and no discussion about those numbers. It is that idiosyncratic! Not one has made a comment about our simple base-2 chart.
We are able to listen in on many of the world’s leading theorists of the physics of time. That conference ended inconclusively and their debate continues to go on and on and on.Here are very smart people. Each writes prolifically, so we will continue to examine their work and we will write to them to ask questions. To that end, on these pages we will share our emails and, when permission is granted, share their responses to us. Every person will be queried, “What is wrong with this simple model of the universe that begins with the Planck Scale and goes to the Age of the Universe in just over 202 base-2 notations?”
We will ask each to go to the simple base-2 chart for analysis.
Richard A. Muller is a professor of physics at University of California – Berkeley. He is the author of many books, hundreds of articles, and thousands of lectures and interviews. In his September 2016 book, NOW: The Physics of Time (WW Norton & Company, 2016), he concludes that there is no past and future, only this time, right now. Because his orientation is big bang cosmology, everything physical is interpreted in that light. When it comes to talking about the nature of the the infinite, Muller chooses to insert it at the back of the book within Appendix 6. There he quotes other astute scientists’ comments about the infinite and then he offers his own confession on a single page (338) entitled, “Me” (partial image below). He offers no specific qualities of the infinite that could in some fundamental way give rise to space and time. These kinds of discussions often revert to very personal generalizations that offer very little insight into a more scientific understanding of the infinite.
We are stuck. We need a new starting point that is faith neutral.
*****
This page is: https://81018.com/time
Another analysis of time is here: https://81018.com/nature/
Worldviews limit perspective 