Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #362427

Re: parallel universe

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Am 29.08.2015 19:23, schrieb Thomas Heger:
> Am 29.08.2015 18:30, schrieb The Starmaker:
>
>>>>> So, when I see members
>>>>> of the 'scientific community' talking
>>>>> about parallel universe...they are talking about
>>>>> a subject invented by the
>>>>> science fiction community.
>>>>
>>>> It depends whether they are just speculating or if they think
>>>> actually think
>>>> there is evidence for anything outside this universe. Speculation is
>>>> the
>>>> precursor to hypothesis which begets theory.
>>>
>>> It is a speculation that first came from science fiction community,
>>> not the 'scientific community'.
>>>
>>> I understand it's unobservable, not tested...but doesn't even come
>>> from the 'scientific community' as a theory.
>>>
>>> Cause it is an invention of 'the science fiction community'.
>>>
>>> Parallel Universe is a science fiction theory, not a science
>>> non-fiction theory.
>>>
>>> It comes from science fiction. It is borne from science fiction.
>>>
>>> There is no Science theory like this:
>>> http://www.hulu.com/watch/440782
>>
>>
>> To put it simply...
>> Parallel Universe is a speculation that first came from 'the science
>> fiction community', not the 'scientific community'.
>
> I had an idea about an 'universe around the corner'.
>
> I assume, that time behaves like an axis and we (together with our
> universe) perform some kind of movement along this imaginary axis.
>
> This we can't see, since we regard this movement as time, while the
> remote events are separated in space.
>
> It we take the line towards such a remote event as new axis of time, we
> would see a different universe. And this is not parallel, but has an
> angle, since its axis of time is in our world the path of light.
>
> In that other universe we (on this planet) are invisible, since we
> belong to the past of an observer moving along such a path.
>
> This effect is actually, what relativity is dealing with. If you think
> about velocity as angle in spacetime, the velocity c is the angle of
> 45°. If you turn to this angle, you are actually moving with c in
> respect to some other object (say: planet Earth).
>
> This will make the Earth drop behind the event horizon, while another
> universe opens.
>
> But the object moving along such a tilted axis does not regard its own
> movement as movement in space. The object regards itself as at rest and
> centres the universe around itself.
>
> This is at least what we humans do with our universe. We see ourselves
> as at the centre and measure distance in respect to us.
>
> Most likely all other possible observers would do the same, but would
> see a different universe. And these universes are not parallel, since
> they have a different axis of time, standing in an angle to each other.
>
This idea (presented above) stems from my own concept I call 'structured 
spacetime'.

This was my attempt to connect GR and QM. My method was, that it could 
be possible to make matter 'relative'.

Than matter is depending on the FoR and what is matter in one FoR is 
radiation in another FoR.

The transit from one FoR to the other is a rotation of the axis of time. 
This is similar to a Lorentz transform, but actually a little tricky.

But I made quite nice drawings and you may look at them in my 'book':
https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6

Now I assume, that to any such axis belongs a 'time domain', where this 
time is a valid measure and all clocks run the same.

This is associated with a 'universe', but this is not THE universe, but 
it is actually the image of the universe as seen in this time domain.

The other domains have other images and would see another 'universe'.

And this is not parallel, but in an angle, since the transformation is a 
rotation of the axis of time.


TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: parallel universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-29 00:55 -0700
  Re: parallel universe je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-29 01:13 -0700
    Re: parallel universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-29 09:17 -0700
      Re: parallel universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-29 09:30 -0700
        Re: parallel universe Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-29 19:23 +0200
          Re: parallel universe Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-31 07:06 +0200
        Re: parallel universe gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-29 19:58 -0500
          Re: parallel universe je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-29 18:40 -0700
            Re: parallel universe gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-29 22:33 -0500
              Re: parallel universe je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-29 21:03 -0700
              Re: parallel universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-29 23:43 -0700
                Re: parallel universe The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-30 13:01 -0700
          Re: parallel universe Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-02 01:05 +0200
  Re: parallel universe fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-08-30 05:16 -0700
    Re: parallel universe fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-08-30 05:35 -0700
    Re: parallel universe fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-08-30 07:07 -0700
    Re: parallel universe fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-08-30 10:17 -0700

csiph-web