• THE TIME THEORY OF EVERYTHING •
Vikki Ramsay puts forward her idea that Time is not a dimension.
Contact details
To contact me directly by email please click here.
Introduction
It is my belief that Time is a force. That Gravity and Time are similar to Electro/Magnetic. I have dubbed this phenomena as Gravi/Time and my aim now is to compile mathematical proof.
Welcome to my ever increasing Time Theory site.
Looking at gravity, drag and terminal velocity - 4th April 2011
The following extract is taken from this link: http://electron9.phys.utk.edu/phys135d/modules/m2/Freefall.htm
You drop a ball from a window on an upper floor of a building. It strikes the ground with speed v. You now repeat the drop, but you have a friend down on the street, who throws another ball upward with the same speed v. Your friend throws the ball upward at the same time you drop yours from the window. At some location the balls pass each other. Is this location at the halfway point between the window and the ground, above this point, or below this point?Solution
Both balls are accelerating. The ball thrown upward will reach the window at the same time the dropped ball reaches the ground. The speed of the dropped ball increases linearly with time. The ball moves with the slowest speed near the window and with the fastest speed near the point it hits the ground. In half the time it takes to reach the ground it covers less than half the distance and is still above the midpoint between window and ground. The speed of the ball thrown upwards decreases linearly with time. It moves fastest near the ground and slowest near the window. In half the time it takes to reach the window, it is already above the midway point. The two balls therefore meet above the midway point.
The interesting thing here is not where the balls meet, but the fact that the ball thrown upwards gets to its destination in the same time…
That it experiences a + 9.8 (m/s) on it's way up which proportionally slows its speed
Logically speaking this could mean, that the higher the ball gets, the more gravity it is experiencing.
Now if an object experiences a proportional increase in gravitational pull with elevation, then this means that an object will experience a proportional lessening of gravitational pull on it's way down.
Now with respect to terminal velocity - the following quote is from Wikipedia to be found here:
Terminal velocity varies directly with the ratio of weight to drag. More drag means a lower terminal velocity, while increased weight means a higher terminal velocity. An object moving downward with greater than terminal velocity (for example because it was affected by a downward force or it fell from a thinner part of the atmosphere or it changed shape) will slow until it reaches terminal velocity.
This phenomenon seems to have been entirely attributed to "drag", but I think that the possibility exists that this could be partly due to the object experiencing proportionally less gravitational pull the closer it is to the Earth.
Now to look at aviation technology.
An aircraft will experience high Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption during its ascent, until it reaches cruising altitude, whereas TSFC falls considerably and the aircraft will fly at this elevation for fuel economy. This is attributed to drag and air density however, the engines which are designed to be at full capacity during take-off and ascent are actually not at their most efficient at the ratio of oxygen to fuel mix experienced at these elevations, due to the lack of air density.
The smaller the aircraft the lower it's cruising altitude.
Can this be attributed more to gravity losses than to drag? That there is an inter play between the mass of the Earth and the mass of the aircraft? That the aircraft experiences an increase in gravity on take-off that intensifies until it reaches a zenith and tails off, the elevation at which this happens being based on over-all mass size?
Could it be that an object falling at terminal velocity cannot go faster because the gravitation pull is proportionally weakening as the object gets closer to the earth? That this could be acting in conjunction with drag to slow the object?
Recent developments in gravitaional data: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12911806
I believe that gravi/time can be measured similarly to the electro/magnetic using Coulomb's Law or Bernard Bershaws Velocity Dependant Coulomb's Law. Whereas mass is considered as electrically charges particles and gravi/time being what is going on between them...
It has been pointed out to me by a mathematician that this would be a double dose of Newton's Law of Gravitation. I disagree. Newton's law of Gravitation accurately predicts what the effects of gravity are, but entirely neglects to explain gravity itself. So to use Newton's Law of Gravitation within Coulomb's Law is an acceptable and possibly necessary means of ascertaining what gravity is and how it works, rather than just its effects.
In answer to the Independent article 24th September 2010
In answer to the article in The Independent, 24th September 2010, "Einstein's Theory is Proved", page 16:
How pleased I am to read that the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Colorado is proving that time is variable according to the circumstances of the conditions of its locale.
However, with my understanding of time as a force, (see website http://www.innovaweb.co.uk/vikkiramsay) I can see that the implications of the data may not be fully understood. Let me explain.
To say that Einstein's theory of variable time is correct would be true. To say that his theory of general relativity is correct, well I beg to differ. The concept of space/time is a misconception. Both time and gravity are forces which react with each other and motion and temperature to produce a "time period reaction."
James Chin-Wen Chou and his colleagues found that when they monitored two clocks positioned just a foot apart in height above sea level, they found that time runs more quickly the higher up you are. This observation at first seems contrary to my theory of time which states that: as gravity decreases the further you get away from the planet, subsequently time should be going slower at a higher altitude. This does not take into consideration a body of mass and the clue here, as stated in the article, is gravitational pull.
Dr Chou states that if they position one clock closer to the planet there is an increase in gravitational pull and time actually runs slower than for another similar clock positioned higher up. The reason given for this is that the gravitational pull on the lower clock is more intense than on the higher clock. This really is not the case. It is, in fact, the other way round.
According to my theory of time, I predict that if one were to place a clock at ground level and placed an exact twin at a height precisely above it, that the clock on the ground would read very similarly to the elevated clock. This is because the clock on the ground would be within the field of influence of the increased gravitational pull of the clock elevated above it. The variables would be due to the extended circumference arc of the elevated clock and its subsequent increase in motion and the difference between ground temperature and temperature at elevation. If an exact triplet clock were to be placed on the ground a metre away, it would read a slower time than its sister on the ground under the elevated clock. It would not be experiencing an increase in gravitational pull causing it to go faster.
I predict that if one were to place the elevated clock at a greater height above its sister on the ground the clock on the ground would still read more similarly to the elevated clock than to its counterpart a metre away on the ground.
I further predict that there will be a tail-off point for this phenomenon. As the clock is elevated higher there will be a point where the clock beneath it will start to resemble a more similar time to its sister on the ground a metre away, whose time will have increased slightly. This will be due to the small mass of the clock rising above the huge mass face of the planet. The trajectory of gravitational pull on the ground will widen to include both clocks. The increase of this trajectory progressively diminishes the intensity of the gravitational pull on any one part of its expanding gravitational field. If the mass of the clock were increased, this tail off point would be extended to further elevation. The elevated clock experiences a greater gravitational pull as the gravitational field trajectory widens on the ground, focusing conically against its smaller surface area, therefore causing its time to speed up.
The researchers also demonstrated that when the atomic clocks were altered in a way that mimics the effects of travelling through space, time begins to slow down. It was not explained in the article as to which techniques were employed to create the conditions to mimic the effects of space travel. I assume that a decrease in gravity must have been involved. Less gravity plus motion equals slow time period reactions.
I expect that Dr Chou and his colleagues have been confused by the fact that a lack of gravity in space slows time down, while an increase in gravity on the planet also slows time down. This is the answer!
I have to say that I am hugely envious of anyone in a position to be making such experiments.
I foresee that they really are going to have the time of their lives!
The concept of time being a force, with the length of its time period reactions dependent on the intensity of gravity, motion and temperature will open up a whole new approach and direction of experimentation. When the notion of time as a dimension is discarded and time is proved as a force, a brand new era of physics will commence. The implications are overwhelming. I am certain that this will put us on the road to a fully unified theory. I am not certain that it will turn out to be the unified theory that I have come up with on my website though. Further reading and investigation have, for me, raised question marks over the big bang theory. My only true clarity concerns time as a force, reacting with gravity and temperature/motion. That the interaction of these phenomena cause the remaining forces that react with each other and time and ravity to cause particle formation.
Dr. Chou states that if they position one clock close to the planet, it will run slower than an identical clock positioned at a greater height. The reason given is that the clock on the ground is experiencing a higher gravitational pull than the raised clock, consequently slowing its time.
This is a misconception. The raised clock is the one experiencing an increase in gravitational pull which is consequently accelerating it. I predict that if you place a third clock beneath the raised clock, that its time will be closer to that of the raised clock than the time of its counterpart on the ground.
That this phenomenon will tail off is certain. As the clock is raised higher, it will experience a wider field of gravitational pull from the much greater mass of the planet. This wider field of gravitational influence focused on the smaller mass of the clock will cause it to go faster. The clock beneath is now feeling less of the elevated clock’s gravitational pull and will run slower, but not as slow as the other ground clock.
Raising the clock further causes an even wider field of gravitational pull from the greater mass of the planet focusing on the lesser mass of the clock, causing its speed to further increase. The clock on the ground beneath it is experiencing a further slowing and the clock next to it is has increased its speed and both clocks on the ground will be running at the same time. I expect that Dr Chou and his researchers have been bothered by the fact that a lack of gravity in space slows time down, but that an increase in gravity on the planet will also slow time down. This is the answer!
A few further predictions:
If the elevated clock were to continue its journey upward, there will be a tail-off point for the incease in gravitational pull that it experiences. At this point the clock will start to run increasingly slower until it leaves the atmosphere.
As the elevated clock gains in height at some point the gravitational field it is creating on the ground will reach its zenith and thereafter start to reduce.
LATEST ADDITIONS: 10th and 14th October 2010
Looking at a gravity pendulum
A pendulum is constructed simply by attaching a mass to the base of a rod.
Displacing the mass causes the pendulum to oscillate in a regular fashion.
The parameter that describes this phenomenon is known as the "period" of oscillation. The "period" of oscillation is the "time" required for the pendulum to complete one cycle in its motion.
The reason that the pendulum oscillates about the vertical is that if the pendulum is displaced, the "force of gravity" pulls down on the pendulum.The pendulum begins to move downwards. When the pendulum reaches vertical it can't stop instantaneously. The pendulum continues past the vertical and upwards in the opposite direction. The "force of gravity" slows it down until it eventually stops and begins to fall again. If there is no friction where the pendulum is attached and there is no wind resistance to the motion of the pendulum, this would continue forever.
Because it is the force of gravity producing the oscillation one might expect the period of oscillation to vary for differing values of gravity. In particular, with a smaller gravitational force, there is less force pulling the pendulum downwards, the pendulum moves more slowly toward vertical and the perceived "period" of oscillation becomes longer.
Quote from Timezone.com:
A pendulum clock that keeps perfect time at sea level, say in Cape Cod, will lose almost two minutes a day on top of Mount Everest due to changes in the acceleration of gravity.
Here we have a clock that goes slower at altitude.
So what is going on?
If, hypothetically speaking, Dr Chou and his researchers were to raise this pendulum clock above Mount Everest, would it then start gaining time?
Everything with mass attracts everything else with mass gravitationally.
Does mass feel an increase in gravitational pull when it is raised above the huge mass of a planet?
Yes it does!
Space shuttle technologists use this phenomenon to perform G-turns or gravity turns in space.
Within rocket launch and aviation technology there are precise mathematical equations that represent the widening field of gravitational pull experienced by mass rising above our own planet. It's just that they would not have been thinking about it in these terms.
Investigating the NIST-F1 atomic clock
Obviously my next step was going to be investigating the mechanisms of the NIST-F1 atomic clock used by Dr Chou and his researchers.
From the description of the mechanism used in the NIST-F1(details from the website are below), it is quite clear to me that an atomic clock and a pendulum clock will share the same characteristics with regards to an increase or decrease in gravity.
Why does Dr Chou say that an increase in gravity will slow this clock down?
Unless there is some aspect that somehow escapes me, there is no conceivable way that he can really actually believe this to be true.
What is going on here?
Technical Description: (NIST-F1 website)
NIST-F1 is referred to as a fountain clock because it uses a fountain-like movement of atoms to measure frequency and time interval. First, a gas of caesium atoms is introduced into the clock's vacuum chamber. Six infrared laser beams then are directed at right angles to each other at the centre of the chamber. The lasers gently push the caesium atoms together into a ball. In the process of creating this ball, the lasers slow down the movement of the atoms and cool them to temperatures near absolute zero.
Two vertical lasers are used to gently toss the ball upward (the "fountain" action), and then all of the lasers are turned off. This little push is just enough to loft the ball about a meter high through a microwave-filled cavity. Under the "influence of gravity", the ball then falls back down through the microwave cavity.
The round trip up and down through the microwave cavity lasts for about "1 second." During the trip, the atomic states of the atoms might or might not be altered as they interact with the microwave signal. When their trip is finished, another laser is pointed at the atoms. Those atoms whose atomic states were altered by the microwave signal emit light (a state known as fluorescence). The photons, or the tiny packets of light that they emit, are measured by a detector.
This process is repeated many times while the microwave signal in the cavity is tuned to different frequencies. Eventually, a microwave frequency is found that alters the states of most of the caesium atoms and maximizes their fluorescence. This frequency is the natural resonance frequency of the caesium atom (9,192,631,770 Hz), or the frequency used to define the second.
Although the mechanism of this clock seems fairly complicated it is not. The intricacy of it only applies to its time keeping quality. The pull of gravity determines the rate of its time. The fact that gravity affects its time is alluded to by Dr.Chou and his researchers in the article - that a change in gravity will make it run faster or slower.
However, as with the pendulum clock an increase in gravity will make an atomic clock run "faster" and not slower!!!
Exerpt PHAROA atomic clock article
General Relativity
Part of Einstein’s general theory of relativity is "gravitational time dilation". Time travels at different rates under different gravitational potentials, that precept states. The weaker the gravitational field is, the slower time travels. Proof of time dilation was first obtained by the team of Robert Pound and G. A. Rebka, Jr., by their famous "Harvard Tower" experiment. Their results utilized the Principle of Equivalence, a part of Einstein's theory. Pound and Rebka's earth-bound test produced time differences of the order of nanoseconds. Vastly superior results are expected from PHARAO.
Read more: http://www.brighthub.com/science/space/articles/58548.aspx#ixzz11ulsv9o7
Why does the European atomic clock team expect to find that an increase in gravity will speed time up?
As quoted above by the PHARAO team, "Einstein's general theory of relativity is gravitational time dilation. The weaker the gravitational field is, the slower time travels".
Why does the Colorado atomic clock team expect to find that an increase in gravity will slow time down?
As quoted by the NIST-F1 team "These precise clocks reveal the effects of gravitational pull, so if we position one clock closer to a planet you also increase the gravitational pull and time runs slower than for another similar clock positioned higher up," Dr Chou said "No one has seen such effects before with clocks which is why we wanted to see if these effects are there. We would say our results agree with Einstein's theory - we weren't expecting any discrepancies and we didn't find any", he explained.
Do we have here two atomic clock camps that have entirely contradictory interpretations of Einstein's general theory of relativity with regards to gravitational pull???
Please PHARAO team and NIST-F1 team; is there any chance you could copy me in where data from atomic clock experiments is concerned?
Looking at gravity and time:
Note: I am not saying that gravity comes in coils nor not - I merely find that coils are the most convenient way to depict my interpretation of time and gravity reactions.
Here is a coil of gravity displaying an attraction to mass. Where the gravitational pull is greatest (closer to the mass), gravity coils are both more tightly coiled and smaller in diameter. When the gravitational pull lessens as one gets further away from the mass, the gravity coils expand and are larger in diameter.
Shown here is a portion of gravity coil. The "force" of time is everywhere but relies on reacting with gravity to produce "time period reactions".The length of the "time period reaction" is determined by the width between the coils and the coils' diameter.
Time goes slower for an object that is moving. As an object of mass accelerates, its gravitational coil (actually there would be many of these) becomes stretched allowing more width between the coils and a slower time period reaction. The faster an object of mass is moving the more stretched the gravity coil becomes and the time period reaction is increasingly slower.
Obviously a vehicle on the planet would experience gravity in a downward direction. This would have been hard to draw, so I'm afraid that this is a space faring convertible (my space ship really was rubbish).
Results from the GEO600 experiment
Please consider this article by Ian O'Neill.
Craig Hogan believes GEO600 is seeing quantum fluctuations in the fabric of spacetime itself.
I believe that in looking at gravity, they have found my "time period reactions".
Coming Soon:
- Interplanetary gravity and time reactions.
- Time, gravity and distance.
- Time, gravity and temperature.
The theory
My further reading consisted of “Genesis of the Cosmos” and “Earth under Fire” by Paul La Violette. I am also reading “QED” by Richard P. Feynman and “In Search of the Multiverse” by John Gribbin. It is my intention to read further about sub-quantum kinetics as Mr. La Violette's books have thrown the whole concept of the big bang into question. It is said that to know the future one has to look to the past. Of course much is down to personal interpretation where myths are concerned, however one thing I have learned is that there are no holy cows where theoretical physics theories are concerned. Having referred to a physics friend (London) who has been a great help in explaining where my reasoning is questionable and some very interesting communications since July with another physics friend (New York), whose questions and input have pushed me into further understanding, on re-reading my theory I have noticed catastrophic mistakes in which I have stated that an intensity of gravity slows time down.
This is wrong. Gravity speeds time up. Where there is an intensity of gravity, time goes faster or another way of putting it is that the time period reaction is shorter. Much of what is written below is wrong or I no longer fully believe in the concepts I have portrayed time against. I have highlighted these portions instead of deleting them so that the evolution of the theory can be traced.
PLEASE NOTE: the theory is under revision as I am gathering more relevant information and evidence to support it. Please check back from time to time to view the updates.
To say so, reading about special and general relativity was ecstatically mind bending. The sensation of pure logic squeezing, expanding, bursting forth as an understanding. So brilliantly conceived considering that the commonly held view of the era was of a static, eternal universe. Still, Einstein proved that the universe is dynamic, that there is a relationship between time and motion and gravity. He came up with spacetime and relativity which have become everyday workable sciences in practical application.
Reading about the weird and wonderful world of quantum. Matter meets anti-matter handshakes, parallel anti-particle universes, cats that are both dead and alive at the same time. Yet quantum mechanics is a hugely successful workable science in everyday practical application despite the deeper implications being akin to a Timothy Leary experiment. Even though quantum works, it is impossible to measure a particle’s location and it’s motion at the same time.
The fact that special and general relativity and quantum mechanics are in practical application should imply that they are compatible, however the calculations for each break down to infinity’s in the others domain.
Reading about string theory which I must say is a beautiful idea and my theory of time does not discount it. However, if the claims that the maths are finite for string theory are true, then this has only been traded for an infinite amount of possible string theories.
Mond works within galaxies but not outside them. Dark matter theory works outside galaxies but not in them.
These mathematical frameworks, these systems, these theories. Why is it that they break down into infinities or nutty scenarios outside of their specific areas?
Encouraged by Lee Smolin’s book “The Trouble with Physics”, I put forward the idea that time has been misrepresented.
It is useful to have a measurement of time which enables you to meet with given co-ordinates, in a dimension of space at the same time. This however does not mean that time is a dimension.
Please imagine that you are in the process of some very simple adding and subtracting calculations using a calculator. You have an extremely precise representation of your answer. You are checking how many of this, that and the other fit in it. So intent is your attention on the list of items in question that you don’t notice that you have inadvertently used the wrong symbol. The divide button. Horrified, you see that the calculator is not displaying a whole number. It has point blah, blah, blah. As you are an excellent mathematician and you already have your answer to hand, all it takes is more complicated maths to get there. Now imagine that all your this, that and the others take on different properties when you move them from one set of conditions to another. The mathematical framework incorporating the wrongly used symbol has worked in the original conditions but gives infinities or crazy scenarios when used under different conditions. Being an excellent mathematician you come up with a framework for the new set of conditions.
Now let's cook a chicken, in an oven, at a temperature, for a period of time.
The chicken is a mass. The oven is a dimension. The temperature is energy/motion. The period is a reaction of time.
Obviously there is a perfect mix of the above for a tasty meal, but let's mess around a bit.
Assuming that the chicken is cooking normally, let's leave it in the oven/dimension for a longer period/reaction of time. OK. Bad idea. Dinners ruined.
Let's turn the temperature/energy/motion up. Dinner will be served sooner therefore the time period/reaction is faster. But the inner mass of the chicken will not be fully permeated by the temperature/energy/motion which is why we don’t conserve time in this way.
Pretty basic stuff, huh! Let's not forget that gravity holds the mass of the chicken onto the shelf in the dimension of the oven.
Let's turn gravity up a bit. Now the mass of the chicken is greater and the temperature/energy/motion is less. It will take much longer till dinner is served therefore the time period/reaction is slower.
Let's turn the gravity down a bit. The mass of the chicken is lesser, the temperature/energy/motion is greater and the dinner will be served sooner, therefore the time period/reaction is faster.
The only things that are not changing here are the dimensions of the oven.
(Please note that if gravity was turned right up then the dimensions of the oven would close in on themselves and if gravity was turned right down then the dimensions of the oven would drift off.)
How can time be a dimension?
Time acts more like temperature/energy/motion (which I shall refer to as motion from now on).
If time is like motion, then time is a force. Time is a wave/particle duality. If time is a wave/particle duality then this places time in the world of quantum.
If time is not a dimension, then spacetime is not where time belongs. If spacetime is not where time belongs then where does time belong? And when we find where time belongs, what difference is this going to make to our mathematical frameworks, systems, and theories? Will trying to fit time and everything else into a three dimensional space rather than everything else except time into a four dimensional spacetime help?
Let's try and see where time fits in as a wave/particle duality.
Motion is a force. Time is a force. Gravity is a force.
All three forces are apparent within our three dimensional space but perhaps they are actually responsible for three dimensional space. The push of motion, pull of gravity and the reaction of time giving rise to three dimensional space.
Let's say this is so.
Now we have a three dimensional space caused by motion, time and gravity that also contains motion, time and gravity within it. Turning each of these three forces up or down gives rise to an effect on the other two. Severe tweaking giving rise to black holes and big bangs. As these forces interact with each other they give rise to three other forces.
Electro/Magnetic. Strong/Weak. Light/Dark.
Which in turn give rise to the three families of fundamental particles.
With time restructured so closely related to three dimensional space I think that the calculations derived will be compatible with general relativity in much the same way as general relativity was compatible with Newton’s laws of motion and universal theory of gravity.
Let's look at time as a wave/particle duality.
Using a blackbody type experiment, lets see where we go. link to notes.
Introducing a time line or time arrow. link to notes
Introducing gravity and entropy. link to notes
Introducing Kelvin and trying to find the light/dark, strong/weak and electro/magnetic forces.. link to notes
We have measured and manipulated motion. We have measured and manipulated gravity (haven't we?). We have measured time to a degree that is relative to where we are and how fast we are moving but how would time be manipulated? By using gravity and motion?
Let's have a look at a black hole.
A huge mass of matter has attracted a lot of gravity. As a result of this, motion and time have slowed down. Let's say (just to make it more interesting) that at the point where the huge amount of gravity forces motion and time to stop altogether, the mass of matter is forced into its negative state, anti-matter and gives the impression of imploding.
Let's look behind an event horizon.
Gravity rules supreme and it starts concentrating, attracting more and more gravity to itself and consequently other particles. Time and motion have been forced into their negative states, anti-time and anti-motion. They are essentially running backwards but there is no where for them to go. Compressed anti-matter and concentrated gravity have them securely trapped in the depression all this mass is making in the fabric of three dimensional space. In either positive or negative states, time and motion don’t make good prisoners. They are highly agitated, energised like coiled up springs.
Let's have a look at a big bang.
When the black hole reaches crucial mass and crucial anti time/anti-motion pressure, anti- time and anti-motion rip through the fabric of space and make their escape taking anti matter with them. Free from the crushing oppression of gravity they return to their positive states. The highly energised time and motion rush off dragging matter. Gravity has been concentrating intensely and doesn’t catch on for an instant, meanwhile an inflationary period happens. Time and motion run with matter unhampered by gravity, as fast as they can (the speed of light?). Hundreds of thousands of years pass in an instant (an instant by modern standards of time), however most of these years go by in the beginning of that instant, because motion slows time down.
Gravity catches on an instant later getting away from itself and follows matter, motion and time. Conditions at the event horizon equalise under less severe tweaking and seal the ripped fabric of the original space dimension. Gravity is all permeating. Gravity is really very attracted to matter, as is motion. Gravity is also attracted to time and motion and to itself. There is no danger of gravity drifting off. There is nothing attractive to it out there. Gravity grasps the escaping matter, motion and time within its field creating three dimensional space and causing motion and time to further slow down. A cooling period ensues.
Why are we accelerating? Have we always been accelerating?
Gravity in a smaller universe is more concentrated. Matter is more prevalent. Matter clumps together under gravity’s influence. Time and motion may well have been going slower than at present day speeds. However, the masses of matter reach crucial weight sooner and black holes are formed. As gravity is now constantly being attracted to behind the event horizon, this gravity, although not lost from this dimension, is no longer operational in it and time and motion go faster as a result. Black holes also constantly leak particles. Not all black holes give birth to universes. A black hole in an under populated region of the universe might never reach crucial weight and leak all of it’s particles back into this dimension.
A way to prove this would be to observe galaxies that aren’t in the region of a black hole and check their speeds against those that are.
What happens when the field of gravity becomes very weak?
As the universe becomes further flung and more gravity is lost to black holes, gravity will be more diluted. Motion and time go faster. Matter will have less mass.
Do we just drift off or does anti-gravity kick in? Does anti-gravity push? These questions might be better answered by maths than byme.
I realise that this is not really a theory of everything.
What creates time, gravity and motion? How many other universes are there? Do they ever collide? What would happen if they did?
The nature of an answer is to lead to another question.
Have I got this right or am I just another nut case?
Vikki Ramsay
Blackbody thought process
Page notes 1
Page notes 2
Page notes 3
Page notes 4
Having given this blackbody experiment a lot of thought, I realise that what I have been looking at is a separation of the motion, time and gravity waves. This does not represent the reality that I observe around me.
On the basis of the "Russian Doll" concept I now look at the blackbody diagram again and try to find time and gravity happening within it.
There are two events already happening in this diagram. The temperature/energy/motion and the distribution of subsequent radiation. Therefore the time wave cannot be placed on the wave length of radiation distribution. There is already an event happening there.
Looking at gravity, I realise that the entropy of a blackbody/radiation calculation can be used in the same way to quantise gravity.Introducing Kelvin and trying to find the light/dark, strong/weak and electro/magnetic forces.
Introducing Kelvin
Introducing the forces of light
There is a third event associated with the original blackbody radiation distribution diagram. This is the temperature colour chart "Kelvin". This shows that temperature and light have an intimate relationship. Temperature creates light.
Light energy has a relationship with the strong side and dark energy has a relationship with the weak side of this force. Both sides of the strong/weak force have an intimate relationship with the time period reaction.
Light has a relationship with the electro/magnetic force in that photons carry its energy. However the electro/magnetic force's intimate relationship is with gravity. Gravity is attracted to matter and this is why the electro/magnetic force is so apparent around planets and is the force we understand the most.
It is my understanding that within the diagram above there are the parameters of calculations for Time Theory, however as I am not an "excellent mathematician", I think I'd best read some books on the subject pronto, unless anyone wants to help?
a message from the authour
Dear Reader
My name is Vikki Ramsay and I am writing to present my “Time Theory of Everything”.
I am not a physicist, scientist or mathematician. In fact I left school aged eleven and have no formal training in anything at all. My sum total of physics knowledge has been derived from reading, firstly a few years ago “A Short History of Everything”, subsequent conversations with my physics teacher friend and more recently reading in quick succession, “E=MC2”, “The Big Bang”, “The Search for Shrodinger’s Cat”, “A Brief History Of Time”, and “The Elegant Universe”. At this point I had begun to have an inkling but it was halfway through Lee Smolin’s extremely coherent book “The Trouble with Physics” that my realisations solidified and my theory was formed.
I am aware that my interpretation of the forces is naïve and my theory over simplistic, synonymous with my lack of training in the subject, but feel that this lack of training is precisely why I have been able to come up with this concept. Four dimensional space-time is as deeply entrenched as a corner stone of everyday workable science that anyone trained in the field would struggle with the idea of letting go of it.
Having said this and also having finished Lee Smolin’s book, going on to learn that the universe is accelerating and with great excitement that he also thinks there is something wrong with Time, I believe that if Lee and his associates haven’t come up with something close to my theory already, then they are not far from doing so.
Taking on board the feeling of frustration expressed by the authors of the books mentioned above concerning the decided lack of progress with physics in the past three decades and despite my child-like simplicity, the naivety of my interpretations, my misuse of the term anti-matter, misuse of the term mass, the spelling mistakes, my lack of qualifications in making such a statement, and the obvious trepidation anyone would feel in challenging the work of Einstein, I am firm in my belief that Time is a force and not a dimension and I stand by my theory and the predictions it makes (see original notes).
Please allow me to present “The Time Theory of Everything”.