Further observations about physics – split files

(11) More around time

Aside: atomic clocks

We talk of developing ever more accurate atomic clocks. Would we not be better talking about ever more stable oscillators? The fact that we use these oscillators for establishing a reliable time reference for use around our immediate (parochial) environments is, naturally, a useful application of incredibly accurate oscillators. "Accurate oscillators" implies that, when two or more identical oscillators are placed "side by side" they will oscillate at virtually identical frequencies – even after long periods of use the number of oscillatory cycles will be the same in all oscillators. Using this to measure time is, naturally, a useful application for us. But, the oscillatory frequency will be different in different locations (e.g., at sea level, below ground, on a mountain top or in outer space). So, for example, when put side by side on a mountain top, they will continue to run at "identical" rates. But when we separate them, say, one at sea level and one on a mountain top, then they will oscillate at different rates, with the lower oscillator oscillating at a very slightly lower frequency than the higher oscillator. Calling them "clocks" encourages us to regard time as an absolute reference or phenomenon.

The “flow” of time

(See!! – our descriptive vocabulary gives us clues straight away.) We all know, instinctively, that time cannot be turned backwards. The breaking of this rules is inconceivable from our experience. But, imagine a water analogy. Imagine that we are situated in a place where where we are in a torrent of flow - say for example the Niagara river. It is inconceivable that, in the strongest flows, we'd be able to swim fast enough to get out of this "forward" flow or ever eperience flowing backwards. However, how did this flow get there in the first place? The surface water of our oceans evaporated, swept inland on high altitude winds, fell on the hills and then accumilated in our rivers, some of which ended up in the Niagara. It's a cycle and if your parish is too big and too hard to escape from (think rockets and Einstein and time "travel") then you'll never experience slowed, let alone reversed, time. Now, if the universe is constituted from precisely zero energy (by implication that's zero improbability and 100% probability) but has fundamental uncertainty at base (balanced positive and negative probabilities occurring "by chance"), then there will be net positive and negative flows (as oceans, rain, rivers, Niagara). In universal terms – there is net zero energy (improbability). It's just the parish that makes us think that time is irreversible (and that energy flows from "the big bang" to today).

So, out in deep intergalactic space (seen by us as the most distantly interconnected electron shells – connected at both the "origin" and "arrival" locations at the SoL) "time" (distance) is "increasing" (expanding) faster than the intensely wound up photons (spatial waves) that are incorporated into matter. However, a photon in deep intergalactic space should see itself as timeless/unmoving. So the real effect is that matter is "taking a dive" into the past (time/compaction) – and as noted earlier – this is rather like gravity. This dive into time/compaction is truncated when matter and antimatter "annihilate" (really, release all their photons from their wound up state) and "send" all their photonic energy back to deep intergalactic space. What needs to be sorted out is "where is the hidden antiversal matter dispersion". Neutrinos might be part of the solution.

That leads to more clues. I have already suggested that neutrinos "travel backwards" in time (whatever that means). So, neutrino decay "starts" at the apparent arrival point (explaining, perhaps, the impression that neutrinos change flavour during "flight"; so tau decay "begins" at what we believe is the arrival point and it progressively "decays" – but time reversed – into electron neutrinos at what we consider to be the source. So, at source, they are far more likely to be electron neutrinos than the other flavours (muons/taus).

Then we have to consider what leads to the occasional rectification of electron/positron pairs that are spontaneously generated in transient quantal foam fashion. Well, Hawking radiation points out that this is likely to happen at the event horizon of black holes. But, if we go back to the inference that, what we see as negative charge is created by collapsing space and positive charge by expanding space (electrons being the rectified manifestation of two entwined photons that are collapsing/expanding synchronously – and, of course, it creates an entwined positron that persists in the rectified "antiverse" and the expansion/contraction there is "apparently" (take the literal meaning here) the inversion of the universal perspective. Now, gravity is "pulling" towards contracting space, so it is probably differentially easy for electrons to sink "down the gravitational plughole" than it is for positrons to do the same. This might suggest that, when we finally manage to observe it, gravity might tend to repel positrons (physicists are trying to establish this nature of this behaviour). This may constitute a progressively "aggressive" rectification as we approach an event horizon. So positrons of spontaneously generated electron/positron pairs are repelled by gravitational "pull" (to form white holes) and electrons retained by it (black holes).

In the view shown in the diagram below, all systems from atoms to black/white holes are compacted – the earliest stages of compaction are evident in a hydrogen atom and hyper-extreme compaction is found in a black/white hole. The universe's volume is mapped out by the sum of all "magnetospheres". At the periphery of this arena, the time forward and time backward properties "disappear" – they become timeless in this "location" (their confluence). The disappearing/diving photon pair components form electrons ("negatrons" and positrons) reach the minima of electon orbitals then "expand out" in reverse (mirrored) time. What we see as an electron is a rectified blur of just recessions. They (the negatronic and positronic rings) are concentric in focus – and not in (necessarily) separated places. These rings ("spheres") are probably, compared to cosmic scales, very close together BUT, because the positronic ring is temporally earlier than the negatronic ring, it appears to us to lie within an electron ring. It gives the illusion of a focused, set of almost point-like entities in the central nucleus when they are part of the opposite time direction to the extra-atomic space we observe; its perspective is dominated by the surrounding "magnetosphere". Remember, I have suggested that an electron is a pair of "oscillating" photons in which the electric component is "created" by the disappearance (at SoL speed) of contracting phases of this photon-pair-oscillation that is effectively rectified on either temporal side. The rectified magnetic component forms the spatial arena in which the electron particle (an effect created by the contracting photon wave components "disappearing at the SoL" – either in a forward or backward time illusion). I am thinking that the SoL may be set by the interaction of the oppositely charged electrons (negatrons and positrons). Something, some property of their "interactability" (the formation of an entangled system), must dictate this "speed" – beyond which photons cannot join or escape electrons and, concequently, give rise to the "antiversal" nuclear particles whose behaviours they enable. I think that there is potential "meat" in this incipient view. The photon pair behaviour may give a clear 180 degree phase shift of forward and backward time; this may become more complicated in triplet photon dances (muons?) to a threesome or more when there are greater numbers of photon dancers (5, 7, 11 and so on). These increasing "prime" number "dancers" should become increasingly (exponentially?) more improbable (rare) and energetic (massive). They should only exist/persist in areas of greater and greater compaction.

So what features suggest this shadowly world of the anti-verse? Well:

The natural assumption, when thinking of a (time) cyclical universe, is to imagine it expands from the "big bang" in a forward time "motion", gradually draws to a halt in this expansion and then (in forward time) gets "drawn" back to a big crunch where it can then (in forward time again) explode once again as a big bang. This assumption of a "time forward" restriction leads to an eternally collapsing expanding concept.

However, let's think about what happens as matter coalesces (photons get wound up progressively tighter). It goes electrons/positron pairs (that somehow get rectified and separated to persist), hydrogen, then helium then lithium then a sequence leading through iron then uranium then neutron stars and eventually "black holes". In this "journey", matter instability results in a progressive release of the wound up photons (fusion in stars, supernova explosions then black hole evaporation) till all this (balanced) borrowed energy (improbability) is set on course to reunite with its counterpart "lender" (positive and negative energy are reunited – whatever it is that represents negative energy). So, looking at our parish, sunlight (starlight) is released in copious quantities and sent off radially into the deep cosmos. Some of it (a very small proportion) channels its way through planetary atmospheres and atomic matter to facilitate eddies of order (eg, living organisms). However, the vast majority just heads off – unimpeded – into deep intergalactic space and a progressive "decay" to lower and lower wavelength photons. By the time it reaches the deepest voids of intergalactic space, it contains little more than low wavelength photons typical of a 2.7 degree Kelvin "black body" radiation. It is here that true annihilation of energy is more likely (eg, annihilation as evidenced in the dark bands of photon interference patterns, where out of phase photons cancel each others' energy). Here, the copious influx of very low frequency photons, in myriad phases and covering a limited range of frequencies, could well add up to the ultimate "energy loan" repayments for loans that allowed matter to evolve in the first place. So, in this (true) annihilation, spacial expansion (the sigma-summation of all magnetic spherical expansions) ceases to exist (expand) – and there are no photons with enough energy to interact with matter. So, there can no longer be any "source/destination" handshakes that lead to both entanglement and to the apparent "speed of light" limit. ("Source/destination" in parentheses because it depends on your universal or antiversal view of which is which). Note that entangled handshakes by light can be achieved either in the forward or backward time "direction". A photon sees no passage of time when "travelling" at the speed of light. We can interpret it as sending the entanglement message "backwards in time" from the destination to the source rather than instantaneous communication across space – the latter confuses us as it is "anti-Einsteinian". In this view, antiversal matter shadows universal matter rather than being spread evenly throughout the cosmos. As above, we have evidence that this shadowy, poorly interacting matter exists "close" to us. Antiversal matter (made of positron/anti-proton baryons) sits "close" to universal matter ("negatron"-proton matter) but looks like something different when viewed from one side or the other of the divide.

In this scenario, time is the "illusion" created by a "dive" into greater and greater photon compaction, from electron-positron pairs to neutron stars (and beyond) and this is counterbalanced by antiversal mirroring. Time only appears to "race" in our parish (it slows to a standstill at a BH event horizon). Ultimately time is an illusion created out of balanced positive/negative energy rectification near areas of deep photon compaction (photonic dances). It is rather like a CD or DVD where most play it forwards to enjoy and understand it but the contained information remains fully preserved on the disk surface. It only takes on a time flow because we play it in a "forward" direction.

Time travel into the past.

(I think that) I have pointed out earlier that time travel into the past would necessitate the dissipation of an enormous amount of energy. It is easy to look at the earth and feel that it is attracting us by that nebulous force – gravity. However, the alternative "elevator" concept is equally valid. The centre of the earth is accelerating out to hit us (unless we are pinioned to the ground, when it turns into an elevator). So, work this out: how much energy would need to be dissipated to travel back a year into the past? Well, every second we are elevated at a rate of 1G (roughly 10 metres/sec/sec). Over a year that is an awful lot of pent up energy that has to be released on return to an earlier time. So, if there is all this much pent up energy what is stopping it simply dissipating for it must represent an enormous potential+kinetic energy store. Why does it not simply "collapse into pure radiation energy? Well, ask a fusion scientist. They know that matter (hydrogen in particular) represents an enormous energy store that, if unleashed easily, would let us discard just about all other primary sources of energy. Indeed, that is the focus of a great deal of attention at the moment. So what is holding this energy source back out of reach? Well, it's electron shells and Pauli's exclusion principle. That is why we can't easily force baryonic matter inside the electron shell complex. As soon as matter approaches matter, there is an enormous and mounting repulsion as the electron shells get closer and closer together. (This is NOT so when matter approaches antimatter, then the barriers to energy release melt.) So what does this tell us about the past? To get there, we have to breach the electron shell barrier and force our way "inside" the electron shell complex. BUT!! I have already alluded to the point that there may be no "inside" at these close to Planckian distance scales. The central nucleus may simply be a virtual place (remember "i" , the square root of -1 that works its way into quantum equations) and the actual location of the nucleus may be outside the electron shell. But, by implication, and fitting with the idea that gravity is simply "the past rushing out to fetch us back", this antiverse is in reverse time mode. The rectifier that keeps the universe and antiverse apart is the electron shell complex and Pauli's exclusion principle. So that fits nicely with the "apparent" absence of antimatter. Indeed, the shadowy world of very poorly interacting (with matter) neutrinos is likely a manifestation of this antiverse and (to our perspective) it may be "moving" backwards in time. Hence heavy neutrino decay starts within the earth and is complete by the time it reaches what we consider to be its source (eg., those neutrinos "emitted" by the sun). IF the concept I have proposed is valid, that dancing pairs of photons are what make up an electron, then we need to expand our view of what constitutes an electron beyond a point particle. Superficially, it appears to be a point particle with unitary negative charge. However, we must now consider it to be a system that is not too concerned with the direction of time travel except inasmuch as how that manifests at any particular parish of this system. However, the system comprises two photons, each of which is an oscillating spatial entity. Instantaneous it is a static spatial insinuation (expansion) with all energy in the form of potential energy, then its (positive) spatial potential energy (magnetic) collapses into a travelling (negative) potential energy (electric) that reaches a minimal amplitude at crossover when it begins to move back into expansion but "in reverse time". Each static (positive) maximum expansion leaves a increasingly ghostly impression at the static point then we see the particulate kinetic point like particle emmerge, ghost like then "solid", then ghost like again in what appears to be a pulsing particle travelling at the SoL. An electron forms (? - it's my belief) where two photons lock into a mutual dance and become rectified so that the negatrons stay on the universal side and the positrons stay on the antiversal side (not always though - we can engineer a deviance but it won't last long except under very special conditions). Time now becomes balanced. After an interval of (say) 10 minutes, the antiversal positron is located – in respect to the universal negatron – at a point that 10 minutes in the past (that's a long way when we are careering around the galactic centre). So, the system has to stay consistent and spread over large distance. (That needs thinking through - it's primitive in conception as yet). Note that there is a magnetic-approaching-enveloping manifestion of a photon and an electric-receding-particulate manifestion of the photon. These are reflected in their synchronised magnetic and electic waves.

Oh!! Say we could release all the photon pairs (and the triplets, quintuplets, septuplets etc) from their fermions (electrons, muons? and taus? and perhaps rarer forms) so that they decompactify. They would all "rush off" to diissipate throughout the wide universe, the majority of which is more like deep intergalactic space than foci of baryonic matter. Once there, their kinetic energy is tranmuting towards potential energy (note the red shift) and then to true annihilation (think 180 degree out of phase light waves cancelling each other out to "zilch, nothing, nihil"). Then we are back to the whole of the universe emerging from quantum uncertainty, condensing into hydrogen and helium atoms, then condensing gradually more to dust, stars and black holes. So, the big bang may just be a parochial state in this temporal cycle – as will be the spontaneous generation of particles from nothing. Could Fred Hoyle have been a bit right?

"Time going backwards"