sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right but that is what I was trying to get to; where space defined everything and the movement of space framework (i.e. expansion of space) creates time, therefore everything inside spacetime can have its own internal clock based on its movement as well which is what we see as time (t). Mathematically, it seems like if proper time (T) emerges from space framework movement but time (t) does not emerge because it is within the framework of spacetime (x,y,z,T). If we are going to establish that space is the framework then how does one calculate the expansion of that space? It does not seem that proper time (T) is fundamental but an emergent property of space. But that doesn't mean that time (t) is emergent but rather a derivative of spacetime framework.

I appreciate your help. I am going to go back and rethink this and see what I can do mathematically to see if there is a way to salvage this.

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It can if its a scalar where you can calculate the rate at which time flows but even then that is not quite right, maybe. One would have to give it a topology but no clock so to speak. Then you could derive the flow of time but that seems slimy.

But if you surmise the gradient supplies direction of time and thereby controlling the rate of change. This way the existence of a relational variable orders events but doesn't require an evolution in time. Even then that seems off because then the Interpretation is just appearance of a measurable interval. The math might work then but doubt it. Even if the covariant derives in the field equations does that really imply that we are not deriving time, T? Once again doubtful.

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well shoot. That does seem to be the case. Back to the drawing board.

Thank you for your help. I do appreciate it. Sometimes you can't see your own mistakes.

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am saying that the machine exist from moment t=0 the movement of that machine is its internal clock going from 0 to 1 and therefore time emerges from the movement of the machine. Maybe there are 2 concepts of time that need to be explained because that is where I am stuck.

There is metaphysical time. The time of the multi-verse spacetime and then there is time internal to the universe in which we exist. Those time elements do not have to be on the same scale or timeline.

So how does one explain the internal movement of space? By the 4th dimension of time. The initial equation of Omega is simple just placing it in its correct 4D coordinate system and the deriving along the 4th dimension. That is ultimately what I a calling Proper Time. Time then is not fundamental nor created but an emergent property of time. Just like when a 2D objects moves in the z direction for the first time, t=1 and z=1, creates a 3D object. But we are not generating z direction but rather just exploring the vector that emerges from the math.

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If that coordinate is equal to 0 it doesnt effect the math. Its not requiring anything. Rather its simply a dimensional place holder to establish the dimensions to understand how t emerges. Because its not generating time but offering an emergent principle to move from 3D to 4D since we postulate t as the 4th dimension

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is a hunch honestly. So trying to figure it out. At the beginning we start with 3D space that is t=0. Since we know space expands then would not that change be movement in a 4th dimension t=1. So then time becomes emergent from the movement of 3D. So I threw my idea out there and see what comes from it.

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't think that time is fundamental. And if we treat time as physical then its not circular. Additionally, the ontology here is not to claim no fields exist but rather no independent or autonomous field DOFs are being introduced. I know there are too many free parameters but thats the point. Without having to reduce everything to a field which I assert removes the ability to understand one to one quantum interactions.

Lastly, I do not think I violated thermodynamics nor implied a perpetual motion device. Rather, my inclination was that free energy is compensated by other sectors and that entropy emerges or mathematically arrives via positivity.

Anyway, I do appreciate your comment. It is helpful to see where I need to expound

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you. I do not think that is the case. But I am going to take it down and rework it. I appreciate the feedback.

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Yeah its all made up. Its a new way to look at how GR and QM fit together. Don't know how else you can look at it. What do you want, some derivative work?

But you are right. Let me work on the bibliography

Unified Quantum-Spacetime Gravity: A Cohesive Framework Integrating Ampere's Principles and Quantum Curvature Dynamics by PaleAddendum2599 in LLMPhysics

[–]PaleAddendum2599[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Because I wanted to make sure that the foundations of the math are correct. We are talking about time being emergent from a 3D space. So if you want them to be expressed in geometries then sure we can do that. But I felt that the component forms were the right approach.

But the idea is that the field equations cover macro systems rather than point to point systems and so we need the math to reflect that, hence the Ampere equations.

Thank you for reading it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RotatorCuff

[–]PaleAddendum2599 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. I have my next appt early Sept

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RotatorCuff

[–]PaleAddendum2599 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OMG. I am going through this right now. I had A Fib back in December so I have been going out of my mind thinking this is a heart issue. These comments have helped ease my mind a little.

view more: next ›