# Constructing Time from an Axiom

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

1. ### arfa branecall me arfValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,832
I'm sorry, but can you explain what a regular interval means, here? If it means a regular interval of time, what happened to your "construction of time", if you simply introduce it?

In mathematics, a rotation is simply a thing that exists (and you can prove it! quite easily with geometry and some symbols), you don't have to rotate anything in "real time"; time isn't in the picture at all.

3. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
Yes, but then there isn't a nice distinction of even and odd components of the space.

It is used as a justification for using mathematical operators.

5. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
Regular intervals are the same angular momentum. Constant angular momentum.

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

Messages:
6,549
Well, show me?

Messages:
283

Messages:
18,890
10. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
C is two dimensional numbers, 2x2 = 4.

2 is not essential in the derivation, it becomes clear later (I am continuing to derive more physics).

The Riemann Sphere's imaginary part. That must read S_3, 4.

You must imagine the Riemann Circle rotating clockwise. There is dynamics.

It ticks over like a clock, it depends on the proto-particles's (RS x RS) state, and I must just add a recording ability to the proto-particles to correspond to the past.

11. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283

Symmetry is broken by item 4.

Messages:
283

13. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,986
Your argument is circular: angular momentum needs time per definition, so you are assuming time exists in order to prove that time exists.

So mass is also two dimensional according to you? ( http://sciforums.com/threads/pi-minus-decay-conserves-parity.161763/#post-3570832 )

That doesn't answer my question. You wrote something down, which (without giving definitions or an explanation what you mean) is gibberish.

How can a sphere have an imaginary part?

Your argument is circular: you are assuming ongoing rotation which needs time per definition, so you are assuming time exists in order to prove that time exists.

Only because you assumed time exists before. Your argument is circular.

Time depends on the presence of (proto-)particles? Not according to science.

Why is a recording ability required?

And since item 4 is similar to item 2, it's also broken by item 2.

Instead of thanking me, why don't you go and learn science instead of these imaginations unhindered by knowledge of it?

14. ### TiassaLet us not launch the boat ...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
37,824
Mod Hat — Inquiry

So, are you just spamming for a software company, then?

To be clear: You are making strange assertions and posting, as support, nondescript links requiring others to register for another private firm's website, thereby giving it things of value, in order to view your allegedly scientific information. If you're pushing your own thesis, be prepared to appropriately support it; burying the information behind walls like that is inappropriate. To the other, if you're simply here to advertise for a private software firm, stop.

15. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,986
I think Hanlon's Razor applies here. Willem (before trying to use Dropbox) posted a link to his local hard drive. I think it's just a case of severe "digital illiteracy". (Just my opinion though.)

16. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
I thought I got away from that sort of thing: try to define the speed of time. It's a hidden circularity the way I stated it.

I imagine particles has a log book of states at regular times. This is required for information not to get lost.

17. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,986
Well, clearly you didn't.

"Rate". The word you are looking for is "rate".

And it's not so difficult: 1 second per second (assuming you're comparing the same clocks).

So now that it's out in the open, and your argument has been shown to be bad; care to re-formulate, and remove the circularity?

Please provide evidence that particles have such a log book. Any evidence would be nice. (And probably Noble prize worthy!)

False. Log books like that are not required to "not lose information"; information theory is quite clear on this.

18. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,890
No one's going to register with Dropbox just to see a picture you put there.
Just attach the .png here. There's an upload file button in the lower right corner of the editing window.

19. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
I can define "regular intervals" in terms of space and then require quantum rotations. Here goes: define equal lengths on the circumference of the circle, this is regular intervals.

I can't find the upload button. The picture button needs a url.

.

20. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
It comes from the imaginary number plain it is the i-axis.

Messages:
283
No!

22. ### WillemBannedBanned

Messages:
283
Here is the picture: