Skip to main content

Time, Time, There is no Time.

I often wonder about time and what it really means. Some people think you can travel through time, as if it has some corporeal properties. I don't think this is so.

First off, all of our time measurements are based upon physical phenomena. A second of time is an arc second of planet movement. This is the equivalent of the Earth moving 1 arc second through it revolution about its axis. A year, keeping with the physical analogies, is just one revolution about the Sun. The Earth also moves about 139 miles per second through Space. Its movement in the galaxy is rotational, so those 139 miles are along a curved path. So really the Earth follows a curly path through Space as it travels through time.

Why is this important, you ask? Well, imagine that you can travel through time, like HG Wells would like you to think. Say you go back in time 1 second. In 1 second, the Earth has moved 139 miles from its original location, and it has moved 1 arc second about its axis. Where would you be?

If you are to travel backwards, or forwards, through time, then you have to also travel through space. Otherwise, if you keep your physical location constant and you change your time location, then you are lost in space. Lost 139 miles away from the Earth, in space, that is.

What if there is no time. If the Earth didn't move, would we still have time? Would humans have devised time keeping if the heavens were static and the Sun shone always? How would we measure time in such an environment? It would be likely that we'd measure time in terms of how long it took the King to walk a meter, or something like that. Yet, still, we're creating time to describe physical movement. What if there simply is no such thing as time.

When you lay in bed tonight, try to deprogram yourself from considering time as something real. Try to imagine yourself living in a timeless reality. You can do it. You did it for the first couple of years of your life. Nobody is born with the notion of time as we know it. We are programmed with the notion of schedule and when to sleep, but not time.

Popular posts from this blog

THE RISE OF FASCIST SOCIAL MEDIA

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines fascism as: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control .  The phrase "dictatorial control" is important for the case that I am going to make about fascism in social media. The word "dictatorial" means "of or relating to a dictator," and a dictator is "one ruling in an absolute and often oppressive way." In 2020, social media has seen a rise in the number of autocratic events of censorship. The two social media outlets that I am going to focus on are Facebook and Twitter.  Background Facebook is a semi-private curated blogging platform where you, the user, share information at your leisure. The public part of Facebook is in Facebook Groups. With a group, outside people who are not privy to your "Facebook Wall" will join your group and establish a communal discourse. This can be private, by invitation only, or public. The Facebook is auth-walled so that you must

DNS Custom Logs and selinux

If you google "named custom logs selinux" you will find quite a bit of chatter about setting up custom logs outside of /var/log for DNS (named). These posts are interesting, but they tend to be run on posts about learning selinux and becoming an expert on named. What you need to know? If you have setup custom logging locations in your /etc/named.conf file, such as:     channel default_file {         file "/var/log/named/default.log" versions 3 size 5m;         severity dynamic;         print-time yes;     }; Then you will likely see errors like this in /var/log/messages: Oct 26 11:41:13 namedsvr setroubleshoot: SELinux is preventing /usr/sbin/named from write access on the directory /var/named/chroot/var/log/named. For complete SELinux messages. run sealert -l 6eab4aaf-e615-4ade-9e88-4efdc789eaf2 Then you run the sealert command as suggested by the very friendly selinux audit log and you are told: #============= named_t ============== #!

Number of Primes

Anderson's Theorem (a) The number of primes in [1,n] is no more than 2+floor(n/2). The probability of n being prime when n is not prime is 1/2 - see Dasgupta,Papadimitriou,Vazirani "Algorithms" page 26. Therefore, the E(pi(n)) is n/2. (b) There does not exist another set of adjacent primes other than {1,2,3} 5: 2 + floor(5/2) = 2 + 2 = 4:=> {1,2,3,5} : 4 <= 4 7: 2 + floor(7/2) = 2 + 3 = 5 => {1,2,3,5,7} : 5 <= 5 11: 2 + floor(11/2) = 2 + 5 = 7 => {1,2,3,5,7,11} 6 <= 7 26: 2 + floor(26/2) = 15 => {1,2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23} : 10 <= 15 Lagrange's Theorem is Inaccurate Lagrange's theorem about primes states that pi(x) is the number of primes <= x. The pi(x) is approximately x/ln(x). He postulated that the lim of pi(x)/(x/lnx) as x-> infinity was 1. This is incorrect. if the number of primes is bounded by n/2 then refactoring and reducing Lagrange's Theorem results in the lim of ln(x) as x approaches infinity. This is alwa