My Personal View: Time as an Extended Dimension

[neshem]

---

OT ko gamay pertaining blackhole, wala man ko specific thread nkita. sorry for this rodsky ask lang ko
ngano man ang quasar 3C273,a distant galaxy with supermassive blackhole in its center, it says it generate so much energy by consuming materials that it outshines the rest of the galaxy a hundredfold. so why man naa visible light near that blackhole?

[rodsky]

so why man naa visible light near that blackhole?

Two possibilities. The light is either stellar matter falling into the blackhole, or it could be luminous gases being lit up and thus glowing, due to heating of the accretion disk that's spinning faster and faster as it falls into the hole.

Accretion disc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

-RODION

[rippler]

I've watched a video on BBC about The Theory of Everything, and the radiation the blackholes come from its quantum properties. They found out blackholes evaporate, and stuff. I enjoyed the documentary, they say they claimed to have found the ultimate source for everything. From String Theory to M Theory. I highly recommend it.

[neshem]

my view sa time dili sa "graphing paper" but sa real world. time exist bcoz it was "invented", we use to label the events exist and create a perception of time passing. we use time bcoz we understand that there is an imminent end to all things. its like a tool for human conciousness, realization and motion.

if naay tao na coma for let say 5 years, dayon mimata cya and il tell him/her na he/she was in coma for 5 days, he/she would probably believe me bcoz he/she did not render motion,realization and conciousness while na coma.

also sa event we called deja vu. "hala nahitabo na man ni or nakaanhi na man ko dri" its like the past,present and future exist as one.

[neshem]

I've watched a video on BBC about The Theory of Everything, and the radiation the blackholes come from its quantum properties. They found out blackholes evaporate, and stuff. I enjoyed the documentary, they say they claimed to have found the ultimate source for everything. From String Theory to M Theory. I highly recommend it.

interesting sir, tan awon pod nko na pag naa nkoy "time" hehe busy.

ang radiation from blackhole, is it by product sa iyang evaporation? so mao diay na ma heat up ang mga nearby materials and ma observe ang energetic emmision seen in radio and x-ray images.

as per rodsky, the physics we know in these universe ceases to work in a logical manner once we approach the event horizon.so ang concept sa time dili na applicable didto.is it our illusion? heh.."eventually" somebody will get it right..itll just take "time".

[neshem]

just a thought..if blackhole evaporates, then after some time, mawala na cya? is it?

[fritzd]

interesting sir, tan awon pod nko na pag naa nkoy "time" hehe busy.

ang radiation from blackhole, is it by product sa iyang evaporation? so mao diay na ma heat up ang mga nearby materials and ma observe ang energetic emmision seen in radio and x-ray images.

Well, in some way yes. It's like the energy or mass it loses due to evaporation. The real process involved is called Hawking radiation. Stephen Hawking, as many of you should already know, combined quantum effects with general relativity. In quantum mechanics, particle and antiparticle pairs form out of nowhere especially in vacuum. Of course, these are just quantum fluctuations or virtual particles and decay rapidly as if nothing was there. However, if you have quantum fluctuations near a black hole, the antiparticle part of the virtual pair can interact with the normal matter from the black hole and the normal particle part of the virtual pair can escape. The entire process also results into a measurable radiation, we call the Hawking radiation.

Hawking radiation has been demonstrated in analogous experiments like nonlinear optics in an optical fiber where they have shown hawking radiation like behavior. This is really amazing. More information here. Fibre-optical black holes Hawking radiation has also been demonstrated in sound waves. [gr-qc/0601079] Hawking Radiation from Acoustic Black Holes, Short Distance and Back-Reaction Effects

as per rodsky, the physics we know in these universe ceases to work in a logical manner once we approach the event horizon.so ang concept sa time dili na applicable didto.is it our illusion? heh.."eventually" somebody will get it right..itll just take "time".

I think rodsky laid it down perfectly as what we know now. We know that gravity bends the space-time continuum. At the event horizon, you experience a singularity or infinite curvature of the space-time continuum. So, the physics we know right now can not tell us what actually happens there until someone volunteers to do the experiment. Would that volunteer even live to tell about it? We don't really know. Until then, anything we think that could happen may most likely be wrong. hehe

my view sa time dili sa "graphing paper" but sa real world. time exist bcoz it was "invented", we use to label the events exist and create a perception of time passing. we use time bcoz we understand that there is an imminent end to all things. its like a tool for human conciousness, realization and motion.

if naay tao na coma for let say 5 years, dayon mimata cya and il tell him/her na he/she was in coma for 5 days, he/she would probably believe me bcoz he/she did not render motion,realization and conciousness while na coma.

also sa event we called deja vu. "hala nahitabo na man ni or nakaanhi na man ko dri" its like the past,present and future exist as one.

I explained my first post how time is defined scientifically. And in my opinion this definition is very much reasonable if not, we would not enjoy our accurate global positioning system and many more. It's not a mere invention of human consciousness. I think it's wrong to define time in terms of human philosophical consciousness. I think I can get away with this paragraph because we're in a science section. hehehe

just a thought..if blackhole evaporates, then after some time, mawala na cya? is it?

Yes. But it takes a very very very very very very very very long time. hehe Lifetime of a black hole

[rodsky]

my view sa time dili sa "graphing paper" but sa real world. time exist bcoz it was "invented", we use to label the events exist and create a perception of time passing. we use time bcoz we understand that there is an imminent end to all things. its like a tool for human conciousness, realization and motion.

if naay tao na coma for let say 5 years, dayon mimata cya and il tell him/her na he/she was in coma for 5 days, he/she would probably believe me bcoz he/she did not render motion,realization and conciousness while na coma.

also sa event we called deja vu. "hala nahitabo na man ni or nakaanhi na man ko dri" its like the past,present and future exist as one.

I explained my first post how time is defined scientifically. And in my opinion this definition is very much reasonable if not, we would not enjoy our accurate global positioning system and many more. It's not a mere invention of human consciousness. I think it's wrong to define time in terms of human philosophical consciousness. I think I can get away with this paragraph because we're in a science section. hehehe

How do you exactly define the "real" world? You cannot escape the fact that your concept of the "real" world is alas, still dictated by numbers--go ahead, look around you--it's all numbers. Thus, using some other yardstick to measure time other than "graphing paper" will make your measurement of time more "unreal" than you could have possibly foreseen.

As to Deja Vu, my own personal theories of what it is as a child has been confirmed by some findings in research:

(from Wikipedia)
Links with disorders

Early researchers tried to establish a link between déjà vu and serious psychopathology such as schizophrenia, anxiety, and dissociative identity disorder, with hopes of finding the experience of some diagnostic value. However, there does not seem to be any special association between déjà vu and schizophrenia or other psychiatric conditions. The strongest pathological association of déjà vu is with temporal lobe epilepsy. This correlation has led some researchers to speculate that the experience of déjà vu is possibly a neurological anomaly related to improper electrical discharge in the brain. As most people suffer a mild (i.e. non-pathological) epileptic episode regularly (e.g. a hypnagogic jerk, the sudden "jolt" that frequently, but not always, occurs just prior to falling asleep), it is conjectured that a similar (mild) neurological aberration occurs in the experience of déjà vu, resulting in an erroneous sensation of memory. For someone who regularly has such seizures, there is typically a feeling of déjà vu associated with whatever sensations (particularly sounds) may be occurring nearby.

Pharmacology

It has been reported that certain drugs increase the chances of déjà vu occurring in the user. Some pharmaceutical drugs, when taken together, have also been implicated in the cause of déjà vu. Taiminen and Jääskeläinen (2001) reported the case of an otherwise healthy male who started experiencing intense and recurrent sensations of déjà vu upon taking the drugs amantadine and phenylpropanolamine together to relieve flu symptoms. He found the experience so interesting that he completed the full course of his treatment and reported it to the psychologists to write up as a case study. Due to the dopaminergic action of the drugs and previous findings from electrode stimulation of the brain (e.g. Bancaud, Brunet-Bourgin, Chauvel, & Halgren, 1994.) Taiminen and Jääskeläinen speculate that déjà vu occurs as a result of hyperdopaminergic action in the mesial temporal areas of the brain.

Memory-based explanations

The similarity between a déjà-vu-eliciting stimulus and an existing, but different, memory trace may lead to the sensation. Thus, encountering something which evokes the implicit associations of an experience or sensation that cannot be remembered may lead to déjà vu. In an effort to experimentally reproduce the sensation, Banister and Zangwill (1941) used hypnosis to give participants posthypnotic amnesia for material they had already seen. When this was later re-encountered, the restricted activation caused thereafter by the posthypnotic amnesia resulted in three of the 10 participants reporting what the authors termed "paramnesias." Memory-based explanations may lead to the development of a number of non-invasive experimental methods by which a long sought-after analogue of déjà vu can be reliably produced that would allow it to be tested under well-controlled experimental conditions. Cleary suggests that déjà vu may be a form of familiarity-based recognition (recognition that is based on a feeling of familiarity with a situation) and that laboratory methods of probing familiarity-based recognition hold promise for probing déjà vu in laboratory settings. Another possible explanation for the phenomenon of déjà vu is the occurrence of "cryptamnesia", which is where information learned is forgotten but nevertheless stored in the brain, and similar occurrences invoke the contained knowledge, leading to a feeling of familiarity because of the situation, event or emotional/vocal content, known as "déjà vu".

Ergo, deja vu is a purely mental/psychological phenomenon and has nothing to do with time as it exists as a property/dimension of this universe.

-RODION

[rippler]

I have a question though. In the perspective of time, say light traveling also takes time, what is the 'true' state of a blackhole when we are observing it? We all know that the more distant the stars and galaxies are, the farther we travel back in time as we take a look at it. But if light struggles from within the blackhole, and gravity bends light and time, we ultimately see a void in space, so the real question is how do we know how far back in time are we looking at blackholes, knowing that time is warped and so is light in relation to us observing it? The physics part here for me is confusing.

[rodsky]

I have a question though. In the perspective of time, say light traveling also takes time, what is the 'true' state of a blackhole when we are observing it? We all know that the more distant the stars and galaxies are, the farther we travel back in time as we take a look at it. But if light struggles from within the blackhole, and gravity bends light and time, we ultimately see a void in space, so the real question is how do we know how far back in time are we looking at blackholes, knowing that time is warped and so is light in relation to us observing it? The physics part here for me is confusing.

When you mention things like "true", you're talking about absolutes, which is a no-no in the relativistic universe we live in.

A black hole actually has no "hole"...what you will just see is a dimple/distortion in space. Imagine you're looking at a metallic mirror. You can see your own reflection and everything behind you because the metal mirror is so flat and shiny. Now take a sharp icepick and make an indentation on the metal surface. Now look at the mirror again...you now see that the shape of your face, or the things behind you, tend to "curl" or "curve" around the dent you made in the metal. This is precisely how one would see the black hole--it's just a dent in 3D space, as compared to a dent in the 2D surface of a shiny, reflective metal sheet.

So going back to your question, how far back in time? Since those distortions you see still "belong" in this dimension/universe (the proof of this is that you can still see them, right?), they are still subject to the same measurements we give any celestial objects, and thus if it has been determined that the black hole is say, 1000 light years away, then the "light" (or x-rays or other forms of radiation) you see from it (the light that just fell on your retina) is 1000 years old, with the exception of the light around it from other stars that got "bent" (the warping around the hole)--the age of light of course depends on the source star behind the black hole.

So there is no confusion--you deal with the black hole using known values and parameters because it still exists within the framework of something we can still measure.

-RODION