(no subject)

[novapsyche]

If the universe is expanding infinitely at an ever increasing rate, wouldn't the rate eventually reach the speed of light, whereby time would cease to be?

What happens when you have infinite mass in a timeless space?

Comments

[techno-shaman.livejournal.com]

I rather appreciated Taariel's thinking there, it mirrored my own.
But here is a question.. people have always been pretty sure that the speed of light is both a constant, and a threshold that cannot be crossed.
Why?
Wouldnt it be hilarious if somebody accelerated something faster then the speed of light, and all it did was turn invisible?
*laughs*
.....or what if everything already IS faster then the speed of light, and what we have here is a review, using the conceptualization of time to associate and compartmentalize experience into small bite sized chunks as food for thought.
Or.
If everything is constantly vibrating faster and faster, and the speed of OUR light is vibrating faster WITH us, then really the question of breaking the speed of light becomes a becomes different. That theory would discredit the widely accepted "matter" theory though, that involves this complex idea called "physicality".
(I learned about that one in my "Philosophy Majors Think They're So Smart" class.)
I guess what I am saying is that a great deal of our scientific knowledge is built upon theory, which is the educated man's assumption. The universe is a mystery, and probably always will be.. call me a backwoods hick, but I see no reason why the concept of time should be dependant upon the speed of light. *shrugs* I also see no reason why I should be correct, or even "onto something" with my little rant here.. I think im going to go shower. *hugs* Namaste.
~Zeph the Psychonaut~

[guy-de-bored.livejournal.com]

have you ever taken a physics class?

[techno-shaman.livejournal.com]

*shakes his head*
I have not, friend.
Why do you ask?
~Zeph the Curious~

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

I haven't, either. This is why I posit these questions: to get answers from those who have more information than I do. Then I reassess all the information I have.

I love having a syncretic religion. I don't understand why people consider it to be an inferior type of religion (as opposed to traditional religions). It affords a scientific view of all other belief systems, in theory. It takes an objective stance toward all religions and tests tenets of each. I don't see how syncretism can be seen as less robust than traditional faiths.

But I digress. :) I think I'll have to post on that topic in the near future. But basically my belief system takes scientific evidence into account for its cosmology. Thus its cosmology is as dynamic as particle physics (or at least our understanding of it). I'm a novice when it comes to physics, so I depend on others to correct me when I use terms or make statements that aren't correct or come up with hypotheticals that just can't physically occur/exist.

At the same time, it's been shown that things show up if you look for them. Your hypothesis necessarily determines what evidence you might uncover; how you phrase a question determines what answers you receive. One's perception of reality might affect the aggregate reality. Who knows. But look and you will find.

[techno-shaman.livejournal.com]

*small smile*
Wastelo.
There is nothing wrong with injecting a dose of empirical scrutiny into your spiritual paradigm.. for myself, spirit has pragmatic value on top of personal fulfillment, making for myself at least a more lush and well rounded experience.
I especially appreciate your comment about expectations affecting results. The scientific method is dependant upon objective observation.. if the mere act of observing influences results, it throws a wrench into everything. In the coming times, I feel we are going to have to refine the scientific paradigm into something that more closely resembles a holistic approach if it is ever to understand the mysteries of consciousness and how it intrudes into our reality.

*snorts*
Of course, we could just abandon that route completely, stick our feet in the mud and concentrate on building bigger guns.
~Zeph the Psychonaut~

more mad science....

[guy-de-bored.livejournal.com]

I have a book called 'Quantum Reality', by Dr. Nick Herbert.

its a must read in this area, free copy for you in email, if you want it....

now there are non einsteinian space times, such as in the scale below 10^-33 cm, the Planck barrier.

here space and time collapse into one vector, called 'quantum foam time'....

the human brain has structures that approach this size limit, specifically microtubules that may shunt about single? ions.

also, the RNA tube cell membrane gates have a superconducting well of pi electrons inside them! that means a molecule intercalated in that well has ZERO molecular motion! absolute zero! at absolute zero, per the einstein bose condensate, quantum effects can be measured on the macroscopic scale.

m-theory - the Universe has 11 and (I think 12) dimensions of spacetime!
this is accepted physics! and it requires other universes to exist for ours too...branes, more branes!