Labyrinth Busker Journal - Brian Robert Pearce
Search this site

Is this the missing link?

Hi mead! Take in this! My latest thought is the universe is only a few seconds old in Real Time. If Time is Temperature, then the fastest times represent the greatest forces. If a being were alive and experiencing the Timespeed of the Sun, then they would still be reeling from the Big Bang. The further out from the Sun, the more Time slows. The edge of a Solar System may contain a transparent skin. We may need to look at molecular dynamics to pass through it. Not likely with our present technological skills
Meanwhile, take a look at the pictures (attached) I got from a Nasa website. Dust devils seem to be naturally occurring events on Mars - and they come occur in massive form or mini form. But the fact that they create static electricity bigtime leads to that old question, "Is there life on Mars?"
"Could there be intelligent life on Mars?"
The actual size of this life might be small (insect size) - and it may exist below ground. But it could use dust devils to acquire power along paths that are gridded to capture and store the electrical power generated. The smaller ones may even be caused by what would be the equivalent to our aircraft. Perhaps they do both at once. Travel by 'air' while simultaneously recharging their grid.
Take a look at the end part of the 'dust devil' clip. There almost seems to be an object speeding along in front of it.
Well, that's my flight of fancy for the day.
Hi Mead! I've tried with the sketches in 'sunseconds' to demonstrate that there is no paradox for the sun and the universe to be ten seconds old (eg), while we can easily claim it is 14 billion or more years old.
If time is temperature, then the debris (planets etc) that circle the Sun are far from the fastest timespeed. Not only that, but they travel greater distances than the Sun - because they are locked within the Sun's gravity pull and yet circle it over ever widening orbits.
The Sun would be making one linear movement away from the 'big bang'. The planets are also making this linear movement (entrapped by the Sun) in addition to their orbital movements. With temperature receding toward the edge of the solar system, then time will recede accordingly. Therefore the planets are travelling greater distances at radically lower timespeeds than the Sun.
Perhaps Earth is rotating round the Sun 1.4 billion times for every second of the Sun's existence.
Is the Sun only a few seconds old?
Hi Mead! I've done some rough estimates on the the effect of virtual age against real time age in a 'time is temperature' scenario, where light is the propelling force within the solar system.
Sun: 26 million years old
Earth: 780 million years old
Jupiter: 2,340 million years old
Uranus: 4,680 million years old
Neptune: 7,020 million years old
It is quite likely that taking this expansion of time into the nether reaches of the Solar System would bring up a virtual time of 14,500,000,000 years.
This calculation is based on the acceleration of time from the Sun's surface to the Corona - an estimate of 'times170'.
My present idea is that light is the force that positions planets and their spin and orbits. This force will decay with distance. This idea is bound by density also. If I was able to live on the sun I would be incredibly heavy, but my essence would be compressed even though my energy output would constitute an enormous amount of mass. On the further reaches of the solar system the opposite would apply.
Can you see what I'm getting at?
Hi Mead!
Imagine a sphere in seemingly perpetual, constant and predictable orbit around a larger sphere. Inhabitants on such a sphere can create the idea of infinity through the experience of this perpetual, constant and predictable orbit - and prove it through a seemingly proven system of mathematics.
The Universe (or universes) however, would (if conscious) view the sphere orbiting as a temporary occurrence and understand the event as a re-action to its own system of mathematics.
We can achieve remarkable accuracy with our present numerical system, but if it is applied to ever wider space and time it becomes increasingly inaccurate. Within the full complexity of the universe, our mathematics may be viewed as heavily flawed.
There are 13 new moons in a year. We divide the year into 12. We need an extra day every four years to adjust to the flaws within our numerical system. we are able to arrive at 33.3333333 recurring. From such things, we conceive infinity.
Applying the numerical idea of
to the cycle of moons, arrives at three sequential events per two years. 26 moons (under our present system) becomes 2 new cycles + 8 stages (completion of a third cycle). The start of the next cycle 3c (27 in our present system) heralds the start of what we would regard as the third year.
This would indicate universal years of Jan to August (inclusive), September to April (inclusive) and May to December (inclusive) - allowing for minor incursions.
It also indicates that the way we would class a year (from one condition to a return to a similar condition) is not the way the universe would class a year (from one condition to the opposite).
It is natural for us to think mathematically within a decimal system, because we have a total of ten appendages on our hand. But thumbs are are actually very different from fingers. We have eight fingers - and their completion is an event (1c). Every human being is supposed to have eight fingers. It is a constant result. If this does not occur, it is an anomaly within the universal sequence that should have led to it. These anomalies are most likely due to an imbalance of temperature (and therefore time).
The biggest cycle in our lives is that of being young to being old, if you discount being born to dying. If you look at all other cycles of our lives, it is likely to be births and deaths of experience.  We regard a year as something that will return to a predictable state, with similar conditions. The universe seems to see a year as a period of change - from one state to the opposite. As long as there is a variable in temperature there will always be a journey between two opposites. Infinity depends on this to perpetually occur. But, without change, there is no universe. If infinity entered the equation of the universe, then the universe would eventually cease to exist.
Hi Mead! A news report today claimed that English schoolchildren are increasingly shunning Science subjects like Physics.It is feared this country could lose its technological prowess because of this. I think it is important to seed 'flights of fancy' and imagination into the minds of future scientists. A new frontier must be envisioned before it can be explored.
Hi Mead! The Woolly mammoth sperm in this article could be us on Earth in the 'time is temperature' scenario, while the present day could be the Sun. But the actual effect seems the precise reverse of the 'Sun is ten seconds old' impact. The sperm has been inhabiting a time speed zone where the sperm has not decayed from being viable in its active form.
If the sperm were substituted for you or I, it would be like me sending this email  or you reading it - and suddenly finding ourselves thousands (or millions) of years in the future after closing the email (or sending it).
The earth's atmosphere could have this effect because all events (above) are occurring within it. But the mammal sperm is actually the correct temperature this far from the Sun (when the sperm was frozen). It is the Earth's atmosphere and its greenhouse effect that has speeded up time by 33 degrees. It is the Sun that makes this possible.
But the heat of the Sun is speeding up Time upon and within the Sun itself. The question is, however:
How long has the Sun been travelling outward from the Big Bang?
There is the heat of the object itself - and the force that catapults it. Both are profoundly different.
If you were to throw the block of ice that encased the mammoth sperm, the ice would move in our present understanding of real time (and its average speed). But the sperm would continue its slow progression (or decay) within the timespeed of -20C.
If you were throwing the block of ice into an area where the average temperature (timespeed) was -200C? If you were able to video the stone's progress with a magnification that could trace molecular and particle responses to this 'heated' object invading their space?
Would these particles and molecules coalesce into mini planets circling the 'hot' ice?
Time on the block of ice is moving ten times faster than the area surrounding it, but the area from the furthest out mini planet (close to -200C) to the core of the block of ice (-20C) would mimic a decay of time speed.
I can see all sorts of seeming paradoxes for any beings who might come into existence on those mini planets.

Expand a little on your sentence [If infinity entered the equation of the universe, then the universe would eventually cease to exist.] I find that
thought very interesting!

Also, what happens to all the past moments which we have lived? Are they
gone forever or are they repeated over/over or are we living them all in
different universes?

Best Regards,

Hi Mead! I found it hard to define and explain this sentence:
But, without change, there is no universe. If infinity entered the
> equation of
> the universe, then the universe would eventually cease to exist
But infinity has no value, nor deviation. therefore it can not change. Man's retreat to the idea of infinity is the surrender of the validity of a theory. Time (temperature) is dependent on change in molecular and force-driven values responding to inevitable consequence. Infinity implies a non-variable. Time (temperature) is not possible without variation above the value of absolute zero (or below).

Brian! I believe that you are right on target.  Personally, I believe that
an infinite universe is impossible. As you so well stated the universe is
ever changing and ever expanding? I even have some doubts about the
concept of infinity in mathematics as currently accepted.

Also, what happens to all the past moments which we have lived? Are they
gone forever or are they repeated over/over or are we living them all in
different universes?
Hi Mead!  PAST MOMENTS: I would guess that 99.9% of our past moments are, by themselves, utterly forgettable. They count more as a cumulative experience that can be viewed with a generalistic summary. As my article "Sarah - the inner memory"  laid out, I feel there is a dual layer of memory within us. One is the outer memory, which is used daily by us and it tends to erase (or summarise) past moments that have little weight within our present emotional and functional being.  The amount of information that can be stored in the outer memory is dependent on the capacity of our IQ and the way our individual retentive abilities have been utilised and organised. Most of us are perhaps a little lazy... perhaps simply realistic under the duress of we tend to allow overwrite rather than 'flexing the muscles' of our memory.
But the inner memory is a different animal altogether. It remembers EVERYTHING - and applies it to a universal sequence. The outer memory may forget events, or when they occurred, but the inner memory does not and it alerts us to the relevance of a past event impacting on potential actions we may employ in our present life.
Time is Temperature is akin to saying we move forward against a past that is locked. If we can go back to the beginning of a fire, then we would be able to extinquish it before it burns the house down. In such a way, we may extinquish our very existence. The past may be locked, but I do feel it is fully recorded. Our inner memory may well be able to utilise this resource.
So much for my thoughts for the day.