Thread: the geometry of time

If I could present a few pages on a theory of time, and not space, as being the relevant issue of focus in the study of space-time, how would I go about it and what proof would I need.

Basically, instead of focussing on space as three dimensional, why not focus on time as dimension in the zones of "before", now", and then "after", and constructed space on that premise.........according to how our perception, logically, perceives time. Basically, let our MIND itself, our perception, be space, in theory, and then devise a theory for time central to our mind being SPACE.

What if in doing that, I could derive "time geometry"...........equations for a sphere and circle relevant to time.......and of course relevant to our perception (as space)?

Would ANYONE be interested, and if so, who?

Has it been done before?

What if I could also derive all relevant field forces of space-time, and even einstein's equation?

If I have achieved all that, who do I present that theory to?

You've peaked *my* curiousity (for what it matters).

River Rat posted this thread on the Astronomy forum with some advice abou how to go about getting published if you have a new idea.

http://www.thescienceforum.com/For-t...here-6940t.php

I'd advise you hammer it out pretty completely before you actually try and present it to the real pro's though, because credibility is priceless and you don't want to get it wrong or sound like you don't know what you're doing when they first hear from you.


Anyway, I'd never really considered that possiblity. That then, now, and future could be considered dimensions from the perspective of the observer as up, sideways, and forward are in space perception. It sounds very interesting if you can elaborate upon it.

does 370 or so pages sound like enough elaboration?

100 or so full/complete reviews?

16 years in the making, 8 years in revised-researched print?

mid-2007 as web release year?

I read riverRat's post when posted.............had nothing to do with me..........that information was for people who had not studied a classical University degree.

In my case, as has been the case in this science forum, chabnging the axioms of space time, is, may I say, next to near impossible given the accolades science offers it's own in regard to time being only the fourth dimension and nothing more.

I am in this forum for the following reasons:

- to get common feedback I should expect from the physics intelligencia.
- to input the relevant answers to those common problems in appendix sections in the book.
- to scout for a theoretical physicst willing to offer his official review of the work, paid of course.
- to return all this information to a respectable (edit) Aerospace Agency who has a research capability of handling this new science and associated technology.

to return all this information to a respectable Government who has a research capability of handling this new science and associated technology.

You would trust them with it!?!?!?! Fermi made that mistake too, and now we have the atom bomb. :?


God forbid the USA government ever get a hold of time travel.

Anyway, I'm not sure I agree with you about past present and future being dimensions of their own. It is an intriguing thought, but I tend to see them more as being like left, here, and right. Or forward, stationary, backward......... etc.

Still........... I'd want to compare notes with you on a few things........ if I didn't think you were going to deal with the government that is....

What if location, velocity, and acceleration were seen as dimensions?

Go to my recent post "proof time is circular". It explains how time can be like a left-right dimensional thing.

As for the Government, dealing with a Government, technically one is contracted to a Government as a major aerospace company, like Boeing. I would be working for, say, for instance, a company like Boeing, as a contractor to Boeing, or B.Aerospace, being contracted to a military tender........whatever it would be.

I suggest if you don't trust your Government, vote in a new constitution.....we need to trust at least one Government by now.....or at least our own ability to control them (another subject though).

I am a firm believer of transparency........it offers the best show and propaganda of all.

As for the Government, dealing with a Government, technically one is contracted to a Government as a major aerospace company, like Boeing. I would be working for, say, for instance, a company like Boeing, as a contractor to Boeing, or B.Aerospace, being contracted to a military tender........whatever it would be.

Even worse!!!!!!!!!!

I just don't inherently trust mankind with toys he's not ready for. Give it to a government, and you're giving it to the least common denominator, because that's who controls government. Give it to a corporation, and you're giving it to a slightly smarter entity, but one that has absolutely no sense of responsability (because corporations are designed not to feel the weight of responsability).