You need to be a member of Ashtar Command - Spiritual Community to add comments!
Latest Activity
"Yes Both dictators had the same nickname except for Napolean it was more affectionate because he would stay close to his men on the battlefield. Hitler was a runner during WW 1, as you know underground comm lines were blown up and soldiers had to…"
"As for the little corporal Adolf, I believe that Napoleon was also described as such, by his men..."Le Petit Caporal" and especially after the Battle of Lodi, 1796..."
"Queen Catherine de' Medici did offer and provide Michel with her personal protection, being her court astrologer, in effect, yet the risk was still there and why he used codes, in his works...So that's incorrect...and court politics can change a…"
"Nostradamus was not afraid to be taken to an inquisitrion investigation, Catherine de' Medici, the Queen of France (wife of King Henry II), was the royal supporter who protected and admired Nostradamus. She summoned him to Paris in 1555–1556 to draw…"
"Don't ya just love it, when supposed mythology, becomes proven fact....🇮🇳Rama Setu & Dwarka........Yes, they're all real and sometimes assumed fiction, can become discovered fact........The Indian people knew it, in spite of their government…"
"Only a scurrilous scallywag, such as Kier Starmer, would seek to appeal such a just and needed legal verdict, that supports the apt rights of Chagossians........I say, bravo to the ruling....Rule Britannia.....!!🇬🇧🫲🏿🇮🇴🫱🏿🇺🇸…"
"The latest news on the ongoing (light--dark) tug-of-war over Chagos, is great news and will make comrade Xi Jinping, cough on his chop suey flavoured cornflakes...This means the case for British retention of the territories, safeguarding ownership…"
Comments
(t/T)^2=1-(v/c)^2
This is a pythagorean relationship as in
(cosA)^2=1-(sinA)^2
so provided that we let v/c=sinA, we will have t/T=cosA
So does this suggest that t 'axis' is at an angle A from T?? Well, it is so only when we think that v/c=sinA necesarily mean that v is moving along an axis at an angle A from the axis of c of which we know that clearly this is not the case.
Merely spoting a mathematical symmetry does not mean that there is any reality underlieing it. Physicists used to know this very well and there are myriads of such amazing symmetries in mathematics. I can show that a one octave higher wave is 'perpendicular' to the lower wave. This is called HILBERT SPACE and I can show that the peculiar relativistic relationship above stems from the same waving since a particle moving with v is realy a wave.
Even Einstein first rejected the idea as superfluous. He was correct, but he neaded Minkowski insight in generalising relativity. But this is just MATHEMATICALY not in conceptual sense.
Time dillation reads: t/T=B, This suggest that we measure speed using T and not using t. we say x/t=(x/T)x(T/t)=x/TB. Once we have done this, we have a set of FOUR, not THREE ratios. These are:
i)t/T
ii)x/T
iii)y/T
iv)z/T
We have what mathematically looks like something moving in a 4 dimensional spacetime. But then t/T is not realy a speed. It is a time dillation. This is the first insight in understanding Minkowski spacetime. The second insight is comming.
A merger of space and time, even in principle is problematic for some reasons. It necesarily put some regions, such as andromeda, millions of years 'away' hence it is imposible to reach there without spending a million years. But if we think clearly, this impossibility is only in practise not in PRINCIPLE. If we had another signal moving faster than light, then spacetime interval btwn here andromeda would be smaller, without the space interval necesarily reducing. Judge this from s^2=x^2 y^2 z^2-(ct)^2. The spacetime interval, s, tends to zero as ct, hypotenuse distance tends to equal x^2 y^2 z^2. If there is no limit as to how fast a signal can cross the cosmos, then there is no need to think that 's' reflects the true nature of space and time. It is only so as an EMERGENT phenomenon due to bridging gaps using light signals. it has been shown in quantum mechanics that IN PRINCIPLE, there is no limit as to how fast a signal can get across. So relativity is nolonger a fundamental picture of reality. It is an emergent phenomenon and we must treat such equations as just a mathematical setting.
I´m not merging space and time......I´m merging the relative and the bigger perspective...
s2=x2 y2 z2-(ct)2
s=spacetime. But this is a mathematical relationship, not a CONCEPTUAL. Donnot try to form an idea of a merger between space and time in your head, you will spoil your brain. To understand spacetime, simply take math. It has no nonmathematical meaning.
No space either.??..I´d say that from the bigger perspective it is all here now......; but, from a personal daily life view it is convenient to use the concepts of space and time. I think the trick is to jump back and forth between the two until they somehow merge and become one. The same way we can think how things are one and many simultaneously....or any of these sets of opposites that exist simultaneously depending whether we look at the large or small picture...