THE NATURE OF TIME By Ray Russell 1st December 2016 Question: What is the nature of time? First Postulate: It is impossible for now not to exist Second Postulate: For something to exist it must exist somewhere. Hypothesis: If a moment in time is like a ball containing nothing but this nothingness is completely defined by the dimensions’ of the ball, it follows from the two postulates that a dimensionless point of time must define a physical point of space (a minimum volume) to enable it to exist somewhere. Time itself is made of moments, temporal divisions’, the Original Moment (now) And Place (here) (OMAP) existing again and again with every new temporal division across time creating a fluid, point-like universe. The three dimensions of space and one of time universe that we are used to can be easily explained by an OMAP existing across time, filling the universe with point like spaces. If movement stops then so does our perception of time so what we perceive as the passing of time can be explained by nothing more than the changing positions (hence fluid) of these point like spaces. The difference between these two ideas is one describes different places at one time and the other describes one place at different times. Consider the fact that when we look out at the cosmos it is not only over there but also over then, I see no reason this is not the case at any distance. Predictions: 1. If one point is every point across time then there is only one point at any particular time, therefore the cosmological constant should be equal to the energy required to define a single point of space at a single moment of time. If a measurement was taken across all spaces at all times a constant energy density should fill space homogeneously. 2. If one point is every point across time then there should be no privileged reference frames, all times are equally valid and therefore the relativity of length and time would be a natural consequence. 3. If one point is every point across time then no two points exist at the same time, therefore a particular point in empty space should be surrounded by itself at all other possible times, this should create the structure of a probability wave. 4. If one point is every point across time then every point is at the center of its own probability wave, if a single solution is found in this wave no other positions are possible for that point to exist in, and conversely, all other points can no longer have this position available to them as a possible solution in their wave. Therefore coherence and decoherence should be a natural consequence of the original point existing at all times or at just one time respectively. 5. If one point is every point across time, then every point, coherent and decoherent, must belong to a universal wave function, the center of which can be found at any coherent point, that is to say the center of the universe can’t be found at a decohered point where the wave function has disappeared, this leaves a negative value within the universal wave at points that have decohered that should correspond to the value of a gravitational constant. 6. If one point is every point across time then locality is preserved as the next point always exists at the next time, the hidden variable is that there is only one point, meaning there is no need for action at a distance and faster than light communication between a single point, but what affects one point at the fundamental level should affect all points across time. Analysis: This idea has “hard to vary” explanatory power of specific details,( the cosmological constant, relativity, wave-particle duality, the measurement problem, coherence and decoherence, gravity, locality, action at a distance and faster than light communication) which fit together so tightly that it is impossible to change any one detail without affecting the whole thing. Occam’s razor is satisfied in both logical consistency (always the OMAP) and a minimum of assumptions (only the OMAP). This is a very simple explanation that changes “surprising facts” into a “matter of course”. Apart from the obvious step away from the generally accepted view of time, that which is underlined in the hypothesis, nothing as far as I know disagrees with the contemporary view of science that has not been explained. THE END.