Test the Waters .00 The Science

"I believe 'time' is fluid, and 'life' is relative. Therefore, one's lifetime ripples outward accenting, or even clashing with the timeline of other's lifetimes.

Thusly, time is the fluid which dictates life's relativity, yet it's is life's relativity that erodes the "path of least resistance" for which the fluidity of time to flow."

-averagbenjamin

This was my response to a question I was asked by my sister. The question was: "Are we what we do with time, or are we what time does with us?"

So to answer it simply, time and life are relative. life=an individual or other forms of mass with at least potential for energy. So us and time are symbiotic or, in the least, we influence one another in a forward flowing trajectory.

It is a good question. So good in fact that I spent a great deal of time wondering about it. I decided to write about it, as I'm writing I'm having a flood of thoughts. So many that this may end up being a two part piece. Only time can tell though.

UPDATE: As the clock ticks and the keyboard clicks I have determined this will definitely be a two-part series. Part One: 'Test the Water .00 The Science' will be dedicated to the science behind my response. Part Two: 'Test the Water .01 The Philosophy' will determine the new and approved philosophical rules or edicts I have gained and written for myself to be the river banks of my earthly timeline

So without further adieu, I would like to explain myself on how I drew this conclusion. I spent time delicately crafting analogies to demonstrate my train of thought. So I hope it's a good read, and I would love to hear all of your answers to the question. So please add your comments at the bottom of this page or on the FB page.

.00 let us begin

Imagine with me; two friends riding a train travelling in a straight line, and at a controlled speed, you can insert any trivial mph/kph. The actual speed doesn't matter so long as it is a constant rate, but for the sake of demonstration lets say 50mph.

Now imagine the friends are sitting forward facing directly across from one another, and they're tossing a ball back and forth, Because they are both travelling at a constant of 50mph, well then it's as good as if they were standing perfectly still. This is because they are both "relative" or tied to the trivial, but constant speed of 50mph. So the ball they're are tossing back to one another simply arches gently and lands as expected into the other's hand, so on and so forth.

This only changes if the "constant" changes. Perhaps the train suddenly accelerates or stops, or god forbid it becomes de-railed. this is where, to me, this particular analogy breaks down. So let us change the setting a bit.

Let us now imagine the two friends at a playground, they approach one of those spinning circular platforms that we all played on when we were young. Where someone sits on the platform and one of their friends spin it quickly in attempts to make each other ill or at the least very very dizzy.

So put one friend on the platform and spin it at a trivial speed, now when the friend on the platform tries to throw the ball to the other it sails off in a non predictable fashion and the ball is not received by the stationary friend (the observer) this is because they are not relative to one another's speeds. Also known as the constant, this is what the "c" stands for in then famous equation E=mc². The universal constant is the speed of light.

Now if the friend on the spinning platform were to adjust their timing to throw the ball a bit sooner, or with different applicable force the two friends could once again establish a successful volley of the ball.

Another, more predictable way to establish a volley would be for the friend that's standing on the ground to run in the same circular fashion as the turning playground toy and match the speed of the person on the platform.

this once again makes them relatively fluid and constant with one another, and although one is spending more energy than the other; they have once again established equilibrium. Making the volley of the ball easily predictable again.

Einstein's theory of special relativity states that the laws of physics are the same for all observers moving at constant speeds relative to each other, and the speed of light is always constant regardless of the motion of the source or observer.

While credit for this discovery is completely due to Albert Einstein, this law was written at second .00 of the universe. This law is the only perfect law known to man. This is the first and maybe only unbreakable law; not even the most cunning celestial criminal can break it.

A religious person might say it is the mechanism in which God was able to "let there be light." .01 "then there was."

The speed of light is constant and never changing, so time itself is not absolute time depends on the speed of the observer, and the speed of the observed relative to the speed of light.

This is why I personally conclude that life is relative, furthermore everything with mass and potential for energy is relative. I'll wait for part two to get into the philosophy.

Strange things happen as one reaches near the speed of light. Time actually slows down, and if it were possible to reach the speed of light time would actually stop.

This is why in our favorite Sci-Fi movies and books, space faring people age a great deal less than their loved ones still on their home planet. As far as physicists can tell this completely plausible and logical. There is even a name for it; it is called time dilation.

So to me it is perfectly possible for one to travel forward in time all you need is extreme speed. However, travelling backward in time is not possible as one would have to travel faster than the speed of light, faster than the universal constant. One would have to break the unbreakable law.

Unless... Time isn't perfectly linear. Allow me to invoke the words of renowned theoretical physicist Dr. Michio Kaku to explain.

In Einstein's equation, time is a river. It speeds up, meanders, and slows down. The new wrinkle is that it can have whirlpools and fork into two rivers. So, if the river of time can be bent into a pretzel, create whirlpools and fork into two rivers, then time travel cannot be ruled out. -Dr. Michio Kaku

This is how I conclude that "time is fluid." Again, more on the philosophy of such in part two.

"TIme Theory" is not nearly as concrete or as easily understandable as Einstein's Theory of Relativity. As preparation for this piece I listened to the audio version of Dr. Michio Kaku's book titled The God Equation in it Dr. Kaku describes the need and desires for a theory of everything a theory so bold, so preposterous, and just crazy enough it can unify all the theories from the great minds of the past. such as, Einstein, Schrödinger, Maxwell, Faraday, lets not forget Newton, Curie, and Tesla.

It's a great read/listen, it took just a couple of days to finish, and honestly I look at time in a completely different way now. Like everything else, time is relative to the observer, to me this must mean that light and time must be married to each other.

Recent discoveries from the James Webb Telescope shook up the astro community. From leading scientists in several different fields to simple thinkers and novices like myself.

As the telescope probed further into the depths of the Universe, they saw galaxies that were similar in size and shape and in many cases even smaller than our galaxy, and those in our galactic neighborhood. This is surprising, because the further away you look from where you are the further in the 'past' you are seeing. I know, crazy right? However, if we remember that 'C' or the constant, the unbreakable law numero uno, the speed of light is the ultimate dictator. So the Webb telescope is discovering galaxies as far as 12 billion light years away.[13.8 billion years is the suspected age of the universe] This means that the Webb telescope is essentially peering 12 billion years into the past. simply because that is how much time it has taken the light leaving the distant galaxy to reach and eventually be captured by the aperture of the webb telescope.

So as I'm reading this as just an average dude with an IQ that is found wanting, I think to myself if you were to look that early in the universe; one might expect to see either almost nothing or massive clouds of gas and dust much larger than a galaxy. That would eventually form massive stars and other celestial structures that would warp the fabric of spacetime (gravity) around them and eventually shrink into a galaxy.

The one thing you wouldn't expect to see is seemingly perfectly formed, stable and mature galaxies of an average size relative to the size of galaxies we've been spying on for decades.

This Brought me to a few possible depositions.

Deposition number 1: The universe is much older than scientists previously thought.

This would allow more time for these galaxies to form and find equilibrium.

Deposition number 2: something happens to light relative to time at these nearly unfathomable distances.

[The sun's light takes 8 minutes to reach earth. moving of course, at the speed of light. The light from these distant galaxies are 12 billion years old!] those photons or light particles have traveled a distance of 12 billion light years across relative to us on Earth. Yet, as far as the photon is concerned it was birthed and captured at the same exact moment. Because, as we know frome Einstein, time completely halts at the speed of light. Well, photons are light, so they exist at that speed. 'C' is ground zero for a photon, which means time can't exist for a photon.

Deposition number 3: Perhaps everything is happening 'at once.' moreover, it's plausible that everything that could happen or would happen is simply just happening unencumbered by the confines of the 'time construct.'

Since the ultimate perspective is the speed of light and we know time can't exist at the speed of light. Then perhaps time doesn't exist at all and is just a simple way for human overseers to organize thoughts and ideas of the universe around us. Be it which second we're supposed to be at work that day, or trying to make sense of the wonders of quantum particles seemingly tethered by 'time,' but very very very far from one another. This is a phenomena that Einstein aptly named "spooky action at a distance" which is now simply called action at a distance. Discoveries in particle physics have shown that sometimes when you manipulate a particle in some way; sometimes an identical particle in a completely different location shows the same symptoms of the original manipulation at the exact same time. Suggesting that somehow these particles are somehow tethered to one another. Which leads to possible space travel implications. Where perhaps, we could thrust information through these tethers making information transfer better than any fiber optic line ever could; because the info would be transferred at the speed of light which means time would not exist for that particular information or data set. Yes, there's a phrase for that idea Quantum Tunneling.

In order to "cover my ass," I would like to remind all the readers that the mission statement for averagebenjamin.com is to bring an average perspective to an extraordinary existence. I did not go to College, I am but a road work construction guy with a very rudimentary understanding of these complexities. I literally tried my very best to understand and describe them in an accurate way. I will add, that I'm not just speaking out of ass however. I have spent over a decade reading and listening to every modern physics literature, podcasts, and audiobooks I could get my hands on. It has been an absolute obsession of mine since my first astronomy class back in 2005, and I owe a huge thanks to my highschool teacher Mr. Taylor for very first opening the door to the universe that I've grown so fond of peering into its mystique and overall mystery. That's when I first begun to TEST THE WATERS.

This is part one of my first ever "two-parter." In part one I describe the scientific train of thought that led to the answer of the question posed to me by my sister. "Are we what we do with time; or are we what time does with us?"

Part two will be the philosophy and insights I personally gained through the contemplation and research that followed. Not only to answer the question the way I saw fit, but to also explore for myself why I drew the particular conclusion that I did.

I hope you all enjoy this read I put a ton of time and effort into it, to try and make it understandable, intriguing, and most importantly, reasonable.

Don't Forget to subscribe to averagebenjamin.com and find us on FaceBook @averagebenjamin. It's been a pleasure writing this piece.

Until next time this is AverageBenjamin

signing off.