# Constructing Time from an Axiom

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Willem, Apr 30, 2019.

1. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
I can construct time from a single axiom. See file: Dropbox/Constructing Time.XML at Dropbox.com.

Messages:
283

5. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,501
Uh, dude.

I'd think it more appropriate if you gave a bit more info than this:
I did click the link, however, signing in I thought would be too much effort for what it's worth.

sideshowbob and exchemist like this.

7. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
Here goes:

A_1: Complex numbers exists. Call this C.

Index...Statement...………………………………………………………………………………………………Reason
0...…….Import all mathematical operations..................................................................….Plato's Forms
1...…….Construct S = C x C.............................................................................................…..A_1, 0
1.1........S is 4 dimensional................................................................................................….1
2...…….S can transform in order to capture numbers......................................................…A_1, 1, 0
3...…….Construct two Riemann Spheres in S, call it RS x RS....................................……….A_1, 0
4...…….Isolate the Riemann Circle of S_4 and call it P_T...................................................A_1, 0
5......….Let P_T advance by one (rotate relative to S_1,2,3) at regular intervals. Call this dynamic "Sub-time" = T_S. A_1, 4
7...…...Define "Duration of Sub-time" by: T_Sf - T_Si.........................................................4
8.........Let S_1,2 be perpendicular to S_. 3,4........................................................................1
11...…..Construct {for all n = 1 to N: n(T_Sf - T_Si)} . Call this durations of sub-times...…5, 7
12...….Define "time interval" = Delta t = (1/N) \sum\limits_{n=1}^N n(T_Sf - T_Si)…….1-11

Last edited: Apr 30, 2019
8. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,501
First off, did I read that correctly?

As in say, imaginary numbers are real.

9. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
That is correct.

10. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,501
And by Plato's Forms, you're asserting, for lack of better words, imaginary numbers are actually the real numbers and vice versa?

11. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
No, imaginary numbers are R x iR. Where R = real numbers.

12. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,501
Well, what do you mean by invoking Plato's Forms?

13. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
Assume Plato's Forms exists (not just in minds but also on paper and internet).

14. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
No, the reason is that Plato's Forms exist in minds, on paper and on the internet. Therefore mathematical operators are usable.

15. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,501
Uh, think I read somewhere that Descartes thought that mind and matter should be considered separately so that the mathematical laws that govern the behavior of could be studied.

So, if imaginary numbers have a basis in reality can you give a simple example?

16. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
The current in a capacitor is described by a function of complex numbers.

17. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
Materialism has been disproved.

18. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,986
This is false: S is two dimensional. You literally spelled it out in (1): S = C x C

Transform how? And what does "capture numbers" mean?

What is the Riemann Circle of S_4?

You can't use the word "dynamic" here; you are currently describing a static model. There's nothing dynamic about it.

Right, you've now defined something called a "time interval". Now please prove that the name fits, i.e. that what you've got there really is time, and not (for example) a mislabeled spatial dimension.

Also note that you started out with S = C x C, so if there's one time dimension (number 4), there are two (number 2) due to symmetry. So what you are describing doesn't seem to match reality.

19. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,501
But you don't need complex numbers to do so, do you?

It's just easier to describe than with real numbers alone.

20. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
Easier is a big help. It is more elegant.

21. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,501
Can you describe time as an axiom, or whatever, with use of only real numbers?

22. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,501
Slow down, I still have no idea what you're thinking with Plato's Forms.

23. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,943
You are quite correct.

Equations that involve complex numbers can be described without them, complex numbers can be used as a shortcut.

Or as Willem puts it: more elegant.