B Is There Evidence of Physical Matter Existing Beyond the Present Moment?

[David W Thomson]

Help me first understand the physical Universe that these twins live in. Has anybody ever measured physical matter from a different time frame other than the present moment? In other words, is there physical matter existing in a time other than the present moment?

If there is no evidence of another physical Universe existing at a different time frame other than the present, where would the physical matter leaking out of the present moment go?

It would seem that the only time dilation that is occurring is in the perceptions of the viewers, and that this time dilation has nothing to do with physical reality.

 

[Dale]

It would seem that the only time dilation that is occurring is in the perceptions of the viewers, and that this time dilation has nothing to do with physical reality.

Numerous physical experiments disagree:

http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
Your reasoning simply does not reflect the way nature works. Look at your statements and see if you can determine which of your underlying assumptions is the most likely to be inconsistent with nature.

 

[David W Thomson]

Numerous physical experiments disagree:

http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
Your reasoning simply does not reflect the way nature works. Look at your statements and see if you can determine which is the most likely to be inconsistent with nature.

I am aware of all the Relativity experiments, having read about them for over thirty years.

I do not dispute that there are distortions of perception caused by relative moving bodies, and also from massive bodies creating a lens effect.

What I have not seen is any evidence that there is such a thing as a time dimension, where a previous physical Universe exists, or a future physical Universe exists. As far as I am aware, all the physical matter of the entire physical Universe has ever only been measured as being part of the present moment.

I am not looking for a pseudoscientific or philosophical argument here. I am looking for physical evidence that physical matter can leak out of the present moment and be measured as arriving at a different moment along a timeline and also within a real, physical Universe.

So far as Relativity theories go, all I have seen is evidence that perceptions are distorted in the present moment. I have seen no evidence at all for time travel.

Be aware that there is a difference between a thought experiment and a physical measurement. One can imagine the existence of time, and even write stories and produce movies about time travel. What I am interested in is pure science. Where is the physical evidence that something from the present has arrived at a different time, or where is the physical evidence that something from a different time has arrived in the present moment?

Also, keep in mind that all velocity measurements are taken from the reference of the present moment, and not from a fixed time frame. In a fixed time frame, there cannot be velocity by definition, since velocity is equal to length per time, or length times frequency. A fixed time frame is essentially a static hologram. The present moment is dynamic, and the entire physical Universe exists only within the present (as far as I can see).

 

[Dale]

I do not dispute that there are distortions of perception caused by relative moving bodies

How do distortions of perception physically change the decay rates of nuclear particles? In particular, how would perception explain the muon decay rates in Bailey’s experiment published in 1979?

Again, your statements are simply not compatible with the way that nature is observed to actually work. You must first accept that you have made a mistake before you can understand why.

As far as I am aware, all the physical matter of the entire physical Universe has ever only been measured as being part of the present moment.

Really? How could you experimentally measure that some physical matter was *not* part of the present moment? What experiment could you perform whose result would either verify or falsify this statement depending on the value measured? (Hint: this “present moment” is the unphysical assumption I mentioned above that you need to look into)

I am looking for physical evidence that physical matter can leak out of the present moment

Before you can do that you need to have physical evidence of a present moment and a way to measure if matter is in it or not.

 

[Ibix]

Before you can do that you need to have physical evidence of a present moment and a way to measure if matter is in it or not.

...and also a physical theory that includes "matter leaking out of the present moment", which isn't a description of anything in relativity so far as I am aware.

 

[Dale]

...and also a physical theory that includes "matter leaking out of the present moment", which isn't a description of anything in relativity so far as I am aware.

Agreed, there is no obvious correspondence between those words and anything in the math of relativity that I can see. I certainly have never seen a homework problem calculating present moment matter leakage or anything described similarly. Nor a quantity in the theory that seems like it could correspond to that concept.

 

[David W Thomson]

How do distortions of perception physically change the decay rates of nuclear particles? In particular, how would perception explain the muon decay rates in Bailey’s experiment published in 1979?

Regardless of how the muon decay rates change, they still exist in the present moment. Therefore, time has not changed. The physical process has changed. Come up with any explanation you want, but don't say that time has changed.

As far as I am aware, all the physical matter of the entire physical Universe has ever only been measured as being part of the present moment.

Really? How could you experimentally measure that some physical matter was *not* part of the present moment? What experiment could you perform whose result would either verify or falsify this statement depending on the value measured? (Hint: this “present moment” is the unphysical assumption I mentioned above that you need to look into)

I am not the one claiming that time has changed. This is a claim made by Relativity theorists. Ask them to provide how they could measure the time shift. I am simply pointing out that there is no evidence that matter is leaking out of the present moment into a different time frame, and neither is there any evidence that matter from a different time frame is materializing into the present. I am the one being the skeptic here, and asking for evidence to support the relativists claims that time is being altered.

Just because something slows down does not mean time has changed. You can imagine a change in velocity, or a change in frequency as time change, but that doesn't make it so.

Since nobody can verify the extraordinary claim of time travel, we must stick to the simplest explanation that it is just a change in perception. The objects being observed in Relativity theories never leave the present time frame, as there is no place where there is physical matter that they can go outside of the present time frame.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Are you asking a question? It seems to me that you are not. You are trying to convince us of the correctness of your ideas.

 

[David W Thomson]

...and also a physical theory that includes "matter leaking out of the present moment", which isn't a description of anything in relativity so far as I am aware.

The claim that a twin is older or younger due to the effect of relative velocity is a claim for time travel. How else would you be able to claim that one twin was older than the other?

You may want to imagine that one twin is older than the other, but the fact remains that they both have always existed in the present moment. Neither one of them moved to a different time on the timeline.

 

[David W Thomson]

Are you asking a question? It seems to me that you are not. You are trying to convince us of the correctness of your ideas.

Read my question. It is a valid question. What physical evidence is there that any relativistic object has ever left the present moment? Please stay away from making this personal, as I believe that violates the forum rules. This question is strictly about physics. Let us stay on topic.

 

[David W Thomson]

I am looking for physical evidence that physical matter can leak out of the present moment

Before you can do that you need to have physical evidence of a present moment and a way to measure if matter is in it or not.

It is not "I" that needs to find this evidence. It is the responsibility of those who claim time travel is occurring who need to provide this evidence.

Relativity theorists appear to have merely assumed that the present moment exists. However, it is the present moment that any time shift is assumed to be relative to.

If matter does not leave the present, then it has not time traveled. If matter slows down within the present, then that is not time travel; that is a velocity change within the present moment, or merely a perceptual change if you are switching perspectives between two different observers. Regardless of how you choose to see it, it is not time travel unless the material object has left the present moment and appeared at some other moment.

If Relativity theorists want to claim time travel has occurred, then they need to prove it. They cannot just mince words and play mind games. Time travel is a movement through time, which means leaving the present for either the past or the future.

 

[TeethWhitener]

What physical evidence is there that any relativistic object has ever left the present moment?

What physical evidence is there to the contrary? And what physical evidence would be required for you to accept either proposition?

You’re using terms you haven’t adequately defined for experimental verification/falsification.

 

[David W Thomson]

What physical evidence is there to the contrary? And what physical evidence would be required for you to accept either proposition?

You’re using terms you haven’t adequately defined for experimental verification/falsification.

This is not about me. Relativity theories have been proposed by several different scientists. These theories do show changes in perception, but the change in perception only occurs from within the perspective of the present moment. None of these theories show actual time travel.

Perhaps Relativity theories just need to be presented for what they actually are, distortions of space, angular momentum, and velocity within the present moment. There is no time dilation, and there is no time travel.

There is not any evidence that there is any other time than the present moment. There is no evidence that a material world exists in the past, or exists in the future. The only material world we can identify is that which exists in the present, which means there is no evidence for the existence of time as a dimension.

There is, however, evidence that frequency is a dimension. Within the present moment we can observe frequency, even if we can only imagine time. The material world does vibrate within the present moment, but there is no material world along a timeline extending into a past or future.

Something similar is true for length and its reciprocal, which is wave number. Length is a dimension that defines physical space and volume in the material world, whereas wave number is just a concept with as little to do with physical reality as time.

 

[TeethWhitener]

You ignored my question. What specific measurable quantity is there that is different in a theory where time is a dimension versus a theory where time is not a dimension?

 

[Ibix]

the present moment.

Please provide an exact definition of this term. It appears central to your claim, yet does not have a clear definition.

don't say that time has changed.

I don't believe anyone has done so.

I am not the one claiming that time has changed. This is a claim made by Relativity theorists.

Please provide a reference (and preferably a link) to support your assertion that this is a claim of relativity. It isn't a description of any such claim of which I am aware, so seems more likely to be your failure to understand what relativity actually says.

I am simply pointing out that there is no evidence that matter is leaking out of the present moment into a different time frame, and neither is there any evidence that matter from a different time frame is materializing into the present. I am the one being the skeptic here, and asking for evidence to support the relativists claims that time is being altered.

I think you need to provide evidence of "relativists" making such claims. I've certainly never seen anyone claiming "matter is leaking out of the present moment" apart from you in this thread.

Since nobody can verify the extraordinary claim of time travel, we must stick to the simplest explanation that it is just a change in perception.

The Hafele-Keating experiment is consistent with the prediction of the twin paradox, and different tick counts of atomic clocks do not sound like a "change in perception" to me.

The claim that a twin is older or younger due to the effect of relative velocity is a claim for time travel.

Not in any general sense, and I'd say it was extremely likely to engender confusion to refer to it that way, but you can so call it if you like. I don't think it's helpful.

How else would you be able to claim that one twin was older than the other?

The integral of the interval along their respective worldlines is different. That is the only claim relativity actually makes that relates to the twins' aging.

You may want to imagine that one twin is older than the other, but the fact remains that they both have always existed in the present moment. Neither one of them moved to a different time on the timeline.

Again, this appears to be you using words and phrases that you don't define and aren't standard terms. I've already asked you to define "the present moment". Please also define "timeline", preferably providing links to "relativists" using these concepts.

It is a valid question. What physical evidence is there that any relativistic object has ever left the present moment?

You haven't defined your terms, so at the moment your question is as meaningful as asking "what is a kerplutz?" Without linking "kerplutz" to some concept with which everyone is familiar the question is not valid.

It is not "I" that needs to find this evidence. It is the responsibility of those who claim time travel is occurring who need to provide this evidence.

No one except you is making such a claim. Unless (as I suggested above) you are using time travel in a rather peculiar and confusing way.

If matter does not leave the present, then it has not time traveled. If matter slows down within the present, then that is not time travel; that is a velocity change within the present moment, or merely a perceptual change if you are switching perspectives between two different observers. Regardless of how you choose to see it, it is not time travel unless the material object has left the present moment and appeared at some other moment.

This is just nonsense as far as I can see.

If Relativity theorists want to claim time travel has occurred, then they need to prove it. They cannot just mince words and play mind games. Time travel is a movement through time, which means leaving the present for either the past or the future.

We aren't claiming any such thing - you appear to be confusing yourself with your "time travel" terminology.

Perhaps Relativity theories just need to be presented for what they actually are, distortions of space, angular momentum, and velocity within the present moment. There is no time dilation, and there is no time travel.

...angular momentum?

There is no time dilation,

You've never heard of the GPS then?

There is, however, evidence that frequency is a dimension. Within the present moment we can observe frequency, even if we can only imagine time. The material world does vibrate within the present moment, but there is no material world along a timeline extending into a past or future.

Something similar is true for length and its reciprocal, which is wave number. Length is a dimension that defines physical space and volume in the material world, whereas wave number is just a concept with as little to do with physical reality as time.

Oookay. I'm not going to get my asked-for references, am I?

 

[Dale]

Regardless of how the muon decay rates change

This is not acceptable. You claimed that the results of the experiments I linked to were due to “distortions in perception”, the implication being that they are not physical but simply faults in our perceptual capability, like the perceptual distortions that are at the root of optical illusions.

I am challenging that claim. Here is one specific experiment, you claim to be aware of all these experiments and that they are just “distortions in perception”. So how does a distortion in perception cause the results of Bailey’s 1979 experiment (and all the rest too). Your “distortions in perception” claim simply doesn’t stand scrutiny in the face of the experimental evidence.

they still exist in the present moment

Again, how would you be able to experimentally determine if they did *not* exist in the present moment?

Come up with any explanation you want, but don't say that time has changed

Why not? Relativity’s explanation works. It quantitatively explains all of the above referenced experimental results to the highest precision available. Any alternative explanation needs to do the same, and quantitatively. “Distortions in perception” doesn’t make the grade.

This is a claim made by Relativity theorists.

I have never seen any relativity theorist make any claims either way about matter leaking from the present. That is entirely your claim.

I am simply pointing out that there is no evidence that matter is leaking out of the present moment into a different time frame, and neither is there any evidence that matter from a different time frame is materializing into the present.

You claim that there is no evidence but you have not even clarified what would constitute such evidence. Your concept of matter leaking out of the present is entirely your concept, not a concept from relativity. So it is indeed up to you to define your own concept experimentally. What experiment could be done to determine the amount or rate of matter leaking? What measurement would you accept as evidence that indeed matter did leak out of the present?

You are trying to invent your own concept, attribute it to relativity, and then demand that relativity explain it. It doesn’t work that way. Matter leaking out of the present is your concept and it is up to you to operationalize it. No relativity expert has used that concept, it is not part of relativity. But once you have operationalized your concept, then we can examine if relativity actually predicts it or not simply by doing the math.

Regardless of how you choose to see it, it is not time travel unless the material object has left the present moment and appeared at some other moment.

And what relativistic formula predict that?

It is the responsibility of those who claim time travel is occurring who need to provide this evidence.

The claims of relativity take the form of specific numeric predictions for a given experimental setup. “Time travel” is vague and non quantitative phrase. What relativity actually claims is not. Which specific numerical prediction of relativity are you referring to with the phrase “time travel”.

I am the one being the skeptic here, and asking for evidence to support the relativists claims that time is being altered.

And I gave you a huge list of evidence that supports relativity’s actual claims. In any sense that the list of experiments does not support a claim that claim is not actually a claim of relativity but just a straw man you are inventing.

Merely being a skeptic does not absolve you from clearly defining your objections and it does not give you license to misattribute your own concepts to the other side.

What physical evidence is there that any relativistic object has ever left the present moment?

Where does relativity claim that it does? What would even constitute such evidence? Define your terms, else how can we even know if there is an agreement or a disagreement.

If Relativity theorists want to claim time travel has occurred, then they need to prove it. They cannot just mince words and play mind games

See the experimental results. In what sense are those mind games? Relativity’s claims are not even words to be minced. They are quantitative predictions on the result of physical experiments. All verified.

There is no time dilation

Bailey’s muons disagree.

 

[pervect]

Help me first understand the physical Universe that these twins live in. Has anybody ever measured physical matter from a different time frame other than the present moment? In other words, is there physical matter existing in a time other than the present moment?

If there is no evidence of another physical Universe existing at a different time frame other than the present, where would the physical matter leaking out of the present moment go?

It would seem that the only time dilation that is occurring is in the perceptions of the viewers, and that this time dilation has nothing to do with physical reality.

In special relativity, we define "the present moment" experimentally by the process that Einstein proposed, called Einstein clock synchronization.

With this definition, it's quite arguable that we never directly observe anything from "the present moment". All of our information on the universe comes from the past, because the fastest possible time that information can reach us from a distant event is at the speed of light, and this takes some time. And there is no way to get information on distant events any faster than the ulitmate speed, which is the same as the speed of light in the vacuum. So our perception of the present is always based on information that is outdated.

So with this view, "the present" or "the now" is a mental construction that we make up in our minds, based on out-of-date information that has it origins in the past. The light when it reaches our eyes is in the present, but the event that originated the light and has the information on the distant event originated in the past.

There are further consequences that are more interesting. But I don't want to get into any of them unless we can agree on some basics, basically what I've already presented.

 

[Vanadium 50]

But I don't want to get into any of them unless we can agree on some basics, basically what I've already presented.

I doubt we will ever find much common ground with the author of Secrets of the Aether: Unified Force Theory, Dark Matter and Consciousness. Self-published, of course.

 

[1977ub]

To be fully subjective & solipsistic, there is not only THE present moment, but MY present moment. Why not eschew all of physics since it involves phenomena at remote times and places - removed from MY subjective experience of the present moment? Then of course there is no such thing as empirical evidence and no questions about demonstrations or proofs.

 

[pervect]

To be fully subjective & solipsistic, there is not only THE present moment, but MY present moment. Why not eschew all of physics since it involves phenomena at remote times and places - removed from MY subjective experience of the present moment? Then of course there is no such thing as empirical evidence and no questions about demonstrations or proofs.

Actually, the assumption that there are multiple notions of "the present" is possible and quite common, really, with philosophies other than solopism.

See for instance Einstein's discussion of "The Relativity of Simultaneity" in "Relativity, the special and general theory", <<link>>

The relativity of simultaneity was actually what I was thinking of when I wrote my post. Because it is somewhat advanced, though, I thought it'd be easier to point out that observing distant stars through telescopes is a trivial example of an experiment of observing things not as they are, but as they were in the past.

 

[1977ub]

Actually, the assumption that there are multiple notions of "the present" is possible and quite common, really, with philosophies other than solopism.

See for instance Einstein's discussion of "The Relativity of Simultaneity" in "Relativity, the special and general theory", <<link>>

The relativity of simultaneity was actually what I was thinking of when I wrote my post. Because it is somewhat advanced, though, I thought it'd be easier to point out that observing distant stars through telescopes is a trivial example of an experiment of observing things not as they are, but as they were in the past.

I was actually intending to reply to:

David W Thomson said:
What physical evidence is there that any relativistic object has ever left the present moment?

 

[Dale]

Since the OP is no longer with us, let’s go ahead and close this thread.