Time Particles: Are They the Key to Understanding the Universe?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ryan albery
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particles Time
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of time as a particle, analogous to the Higgs boson, suggesting that time particles create mass and energy according to quantum models. The idea posits an 'ether' of time particles detectable through experiments like the Michelson-Morley experiment, potentially explaining the constancy of the speed of light and the second law of thermodynamics. Furthermore, it explores the implications of time particles on gravitational forces, dark matter, and the cosmological constant, proposing that the entanglement of time could influence the behavior of other particles.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and the Higgs boson
  • Familiarity with general relativity and its principles
  • Knowledge of the Michelson-Morley experiment and its significance
  • Basic grasp of thermodynamics, particularly the second law
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of time as a particle in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the relationship between time particles and the speed of light
  • Investigate the concept of dark matter in relation to time and mass
  • Study the entanglement of particles and its potential effects on cosmological constants
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for physicists, cosmologists, and anyone interested in theoretical physics, particularly those exploring the intersections of time, mass, and the fundamental laws of the universe.

ryan albery
Messages
67
Reaction score
1
Has anyone out there ever considered time as a particle, perhaps with a time particle having similar properties to the proposed Higgs boson? A time particle creates mass(energy) in accordance to quantum models, and general relativity governs the 'shape' of time. Just a thought really, but in some ways it kind of makes sense. Kind of like Sakharov's leap that particles with mass are of a wave nature too, only with time. Without time there would be no mass/energy, and without mass/energy there is no movement of time.

Assuming that there is an 'ether' of time particles that everything is traveling through, the field would be detectable in a sort of Michelson-Morely experiment through the effect of time dilation and other relativistic effects. If the 'spacing' of the time particles is governed by a relationship with Plank's Constant, it might explain why the speed of light is constant in all reference frames... perhaps even the speed of light could be derived mathematically? Time as a particle would also dictate that time is always positive, which would explain the 2nd law thermodynamics.

Assuming that gravitons exist, maybe it's how they're traveling through the relativistic ether of time that dictates the gravitational force and any given point... similar to photons and the EM force.

Getting even further out there, what if the ether of time is entangled (from the big bang?), and all other particles behave as a waveform simply because of the waveform nature of the time they're traveling through? If time does have mass, could it possibly explain dark matter (gravity from the mass of the time particles, but undetectable cause there's no mass/energy and therefore no passing of time)? Could the entanglement of the time field account for the cosmological constant and dark energy?

Anyway, there are a number of other interesting facets of this theory that I've been thinking about, but I don't want to get overly long-winded here. Anyone have any thoughts about this... or am I just plain crazy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ryan albery said:
Has anyone out there ever considered time as a particle, perhaps with a time particle having similar properties to the proposed Higgs boson? A time particle creates mass(energy) in accordance to quantum models, and general relativity governs the 'shape' of time. Just a thought really, but in some ways it kind of makes sense. Kind of like Sakharov's leap that particles with mass are of a wave nature too, only with time. Without time there would be no mass/energy, and without mass/energy there is no movement of time.

Assuming that there is an 'ether' of time particles that everything is traveling through, the field would be detectable in a sort of Michelson-Morely experiment through the effect of time dilation and other relativistic effects. If the 'spacing' of the time particles is governed by a relationship with Plank's Constant, it might explain why the speed of light is constant in all reference frames... perhaps even the speed of light could be derived mathematically? Time as a particle would also dictate that time is always positive, which would explain the 2nd law thermodynamics.

Assuming that gravitons exist, maybe it's how they're traveling through the relativistic ether of time that dictates the gravitational force and any given point... similar to photons and the EM force.

Getting even further out there, what if the ether of time is entangled (from the big bang?), and all other particles behave as a waveform simply because of the waveform nature of the time they're traveling through? If time does have mass, could it possibly explain dark matter (gravity from the mass of the time particles, but undetectable cause there's no mass/energy and therefore no passing of time)? Could the entanglement of the time field account for the cosmological constant and dark energy?

Anyway, there are a number of other interesting facets of this theory that I've been thinking about, but I don't want to get overly long-winded here. Anyone have any thoughts about this... or am I just plain crazy?

If time is represented by a particle, then so is space, as Einstein unified the two thru Special theory of Relativity.
The speed of light was derived mathematically, and long before Einstein came to the scene. James Maxwell divided his equations for electricity and magnetism to arrive at a constant: 300 Km/sec. This is why Einstein developed the Special Theory of Relativity in the first place--he had to reconcile a natural law (Maxwell's law of the constancy of light velocity) with the Principle of Relativity (that Principle that states that all natural laws must hold true, regardless of your state of motion relative to the law that you're testing).
 
Please review the PF rules on overly speculative posts.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K