L’Électronisme
Les électrons constitués de masse, temps et énergie forment l’Univers et tous ses objets
L’Électronisme
Les électrons constitués de masse, temps et énergie forment l’Univers et tous ses objets
IS THE TIME REAL ? Lee Smolin and the time
Lee Smolin and the time
It's time physics recognised that time is real
26 April by Lee Smolin
My New Scientist. Magazine issue 2913.
In May 2013, I commented on the text below of Lee Smolin, accepting the idea of considering the-time as real for its participation in the phenomena of the universe.
My current ideas, discoveries in recent weeks, cause a significant change in how we understand the universe with an item, the time that would have no "responsibility" in the realization of events.
Time does not exist as an actor. It has no action in fundamental or individual phenomena of the universe. This leads us to important changes in how to examine and understand important phenomena at all levels, from the most elementary particles to clusters of galaxies.
It has no influence on the timing of events. At the primary level, they are all independent of each other.
The time is a human concept, a condensed observation of the action of other elements. Unconsciously, the living beings, Human in particular, create an accurate tool to attach together all the elements of our lives.
See the first chapter of the essay, paragraph 1.3
I resume my comments in the light of these new ideas.
The original text is in blue, my comments in black
" The laws of the physics say to us that the time is an illusion. A radical revision is necessary ", asserts the physicist Lee Smolin.
We all feel the forward march of time, but the laws of physics tell us it is an illusion. A radical rethink is needed.
We think we need to keep the idea that time is an illusion, and draw all the conclusions, which is not currently done by physicists in their review of the "action" of the time.
THE aim of science is to explain all the features of the universe, from the mass of the Higgs boson to the fact that the night sky is filled with stars. Perhaps the most obvious feature of all is that time in our universe only travels in one direction: forwards. We remember the past but not the future, and most things about our world are irreversible, from a glass of spilt milk to the birth of a child.
It is clear, that is to say, easy to understand, probably because we ourselves have created this notion of time.
No single feature of our universe is more in need of explanation than the forward march of time, yet physics and cosmology have so far failed to explain this basic fact of nature. It's time for a radical approach. We need a new starting point for explaining the directionality of time.
This quality of the time is that we, living beings on Earth, consider the events as a series of one another, while at primary electrons level, only acting element of all operations in the world, actions are still independent. The electrons of a free compound or component, perform an action during the expansion motion by the mass of their energy. There is nothing left in either the electron or elsewhere, in time, for example, who would have the memory and guide for the next action in a natural progression, according to our notion of an arrow of time.
Physicists speak about arrows of time. One such arrow is visible in the light we see coming to us from distant stars: all of it comes from the past, showing us what they were once like, with none coming from the future. This is mysterious because the equations we use to describe light are unchanged if we reverse the direction of time.
There is no equation describing the light. Except Maxwell's equations if the light is considered electromagnetic radiation, what it is not. But there is no understandable explanation of radiation and electromagnetic fields.
We should first explain what light is and why it is moving.
As long that of the stars than the flame of a candle or light bulb that we can turn on and off "instantaneously".
Consequently these equations have two solutions: waves that propagate energy and information from the past to the future, and waves that do the reverse, moving backwards in time.
Also explain what exactly are the space waves and the "information".
The waves are a physical phenomenon "observable" by us living beings. Does energy travel with the waves?
It is difficult to understand what these Information discussed here, which follow one another in time and are locked into black holes:
Do they exist according to which we could understand them?
Mathematical equations should not be applied to natural phenomena without control of their limitations and results.
Mathematics must remain only means of verification or models of physical phenomena.
They never create real phenomena.
But nature only seems to use the first kind. This is called the electromagnetic arrow of time.
Why the arrow of time, illusion or not, would it be electromagnetic? What could this mean?
To explain it we have to impose a harsh condition on the theory of electromagnetism, which rules out most of its solutions, leaving only those that propagate from past to future.
Within the big bang cosmology this amounts to imposing the condition that there were no light waves travelling freely at the first moment of time. But this drastic condition requires explanation and so far there is none.
The best known arrow is the thermodynamic arrow of time, which refers to the irreversibility of processes such as broken porcelain.
Let "thermodynamics" in parentheses.
As already mentioned above, all events are carried out in primary level by electrons, and every action includes only the quality of the elements present and never in a way that helped them out.
To explain this we invent a quantity that increases whenever an irreversible process happens – entropy – which the second law of thermodynamics asserts can only increase. In the nineteenth century, Ludwig Boltzmann proposed that the second law can be understood as a consequence of the hypothesis – then unproven – that matter is made of atoms. Entropy, Boltzmann proposed, is a measure of the disorder of atoms, and its tendency to increase is a consequence of the observation that random processes are more likely to introduce disorder than order.
Boltzmann's atomic hypothesis was correct. Yet he faced critics who were quick to point out a paradox lurking in his reasoning. The laws that describe the motion of atoms are reversible in time. So how come the second law of thermodynamics isn't? The closest we can get to a time-symmetric form of the second law says that if we find a system with low entropy it is most probable that entropy will increase in the future and that it was higher in the past.
Boltzmann's theory applies to matter consists of atoms, as we know it on our planet and other objects with an atmosphere or a comparable thermal agitation. These arguments explain badly entropy which would be simply the observation of the state function of disorder in a system, limited to a specific area.
In the theory of Électronisme, only electrons are important and carry out the actions, according to their characteristics and applicable simple rules everywhere and any time without any possibility of modification.
The only two real actions of the energy of electrons are:
The (movement of) expansion of the electrons vibrations,
The movement, incited by this expansion, of the free electrons in the ether of the space.
In this environment, a peculiarity occurred and is renewed. It is the accidental connection by intricacy of two electrons. It is a rare event but since billions of billion years of existence of the Universe, these peculiarities allowed the creation of all the objects existing in the space.
The intricacies of electrons are irreversible simply because these connections always take place between electrons which have the same energy and because there is no other free energy, or other than unknown, which could destroy this connection.
In spite of the implication of Einstein at the beginning of the XXth century, the permanent discussions between the philosophers and the physicists, the cosmologists and others, this shows that there is no reason for cosmology to be considered as a science.
Yet this still doesn't explain why our universe has such a strong arrow of time. As physicist Roger Penrose pointed out in 1979, the only thing that can explain the thermodynamic arrow of time is that the entropy of the initial conditions of the universe was very low. But this is extremely improbable too.
This is correct in a Universe which would begin with the big-bang, for which Georges Lemaître had planned a precise and limited essential atom, in which Gamow put all the current knowledge…
Another beginning or " no beginning " of the Universe is possible, supposing that it is inexplicable and it is created with zero entropy.
So both the electromagnetic and thermodynamic arrows of time require that the initial conditions of the universe were extraordinarily special. But why is this? The only way we can explain the time asymmetry of our universe is some mathematical trickery which involves choosing special solutions to time symmetric laws. Which is to say it is not explained at all.
I would like to propose a radically different approach. In my book Time Reborn I take up Penrose's suggestion that the truly fundamental laws are time asymmetric, making time's irreversibility a fundamental condition of the universe. The laws we had thought fundamental up until now – general relativity, quantum theory and the standard model – must then be approximations of a more fundamental time-asymmetric law which would explain the otherwise improbable initial conditions.
This proposal has huge implications for the question of the nature of time. One big question is whether time is fundamental or an illusion. Many of my fellow theorists argue that it is an illusion. In accordance with this view, there are proposals for fundamental laws that don't mention time at all. Physicist Julian Barbour argued in his book The End of Time that time disappears completely from the fundamental theory that merges quantum theory with cosmology. I hold a contrary view that time is real, which means that the distinction between the past and the future must be fundamental as well. I have been developing this view in collaboration with the Brazilian philosopher Roberto Mangabeira Unger.
It might be a funny thing to say, but the idea that time is real requires a radical departure from the standard paradigm of physics. This is because the effect of 400 years of the development of physicists' conception of nature has been to devalue time and ultimately to remove it from the fundamental aspects of nature. Ever since the era of René Descartes in the 17th century, time has been represented as if it were just a dimension of space. This culminated in the "block universe" conception of general relativity in which the present moment has no meaning – all that exists is the whole history of the universe at once, timelessly. When laws of physics are represented mathematically, causal processes which are the activity of time are represented by timeless logical implications.
But the real universe has properties which are not representable by any fact about a mathematical object. One of them is that there is always a present moment. Mathematical objects, being timeless, don't have present moments, futures or pasts. However, if we embrace the reality of time and see mathematical laws as tools rather than as mystical mirrors of nature, other stubbornly inexplicable facts about the world become explicable, such as the laws themselves. If the laws are just true, timelessly, there is no way, within science, to explain why the particular set of laws we observe are the true ones. But if time is real, laws can evolve and hypotheses about the process of evolution become testable, and hence offer the basis for a scientific explanation of why the laws hold.
Can it work to reverse the standard idea in which irreversible phenomena emerge from reversible laws? In work in progress with the cosmologist Marina Cortês at the University of Edinburgh, UK, we have constructed simple models of systems governed by rules which are irreversible in time, from which emerge approximately time-symmetric behaviours. These models may be simple, but they are a first step to developing a new approach to the arrows of time.
The idea that nature consists fundamentally of atoms with immutable properties moving through unchanging space, guided by timeless laws, underlies a metaphysical view in which time is absent or diminished. This view has been the basis for centuries of progress in science, but its usefulness for fundamental physics and cosmology has come to an end due to its inability to answer key questions such as what chose the laws of nature or why the universe is so asymmetric in time. Some people have confused the reliance on timeless laws with science itself, but this is wrong.
These fundamental questions seem to me to be more philosophy than physics, but in theoretical physics, it may respond or try.
To conclude my comments, it is amusing to note that in the Physics of Électronisme there would be accidental connection between physical phenomena of the universe and time, a concept only human, in the fact that all the actions of electrons always are an increase in bonds and thermal agitation, until the destruction of objects, as if everything was guided by an arrow of time always in the same direction!
A new scientific world view is emerging based on the principles that time is real, laws evolve and irreversibility is fundamental. It is already clear this view has the capacity to explain – in ways that are testable by experiment – basic facts about our universe that otherwise appear to be inexplicable.
Profile
Lee Smolin is a theoretical physicist at the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, Canada, who focuses on quantum gravity. His latest book is Time reborn: From the crisis in physics to the future of the universe
From issue 2913 of New Scientist magazine, page 30-31.
© PhD - 19,10,2014
dimanche 19 octobre 2014