Hi Bill_Sheppard, I don't think you can reply to this post
because I only read Sci.Physics and you only read Alt.Astronomy
and Webtv.NET won't let you crosspost.

Art_Deco ( a.k.a. Phineas the Duck )

can't distinguish models from
intrinsic reality. He usually tells me something like:

You're a kook ! you're a kook ! you're a kook !

Hi Bill_Sheppard, I don't think you can reply to this post
because I only read Sci.Physics and you only read Alt.Astronomy
and Webtv.NET won't let you crosspost.

Art_Deco ( a.k.a. Phineas the Duck ) can't distinguish models from
intrinsic reality. He usually tells me something like:

You're a kook ! you're a kook ! you're a kook !
If time is truly a _Spatial_ dimension ( i.e. falsely directional )
then why don't all _Models_ describe it that way ?

Hi Bill_Sheppard, I don't think you can reply to this post
because I only read Sci.Physics and you only read Alt.Astronomy
and Webtv.NET won't let you crosspost.

Art_Deco ( a.k.a. Phineas the Duck ) can't distinguish models from
intrinsic reality. He usually tells me something like:

You're a kook ! you're a kook ! you're a kook !
If time is truly a _Spatial_ dimension ( i.e. falsely directional )
then why don't all _Models_ describe it that way ?

As to what causes gravity, the following is how I think of it:
( from my web site, www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf )

Gravity is " caused " by mass-energy ( i.e. density and pressure )
precisely because they are one and the same.
The distinction between the two is entirely virtual, not real.

In a similar manner, time is truly spatial ( i.e. falsely directional )
and all changes ( including so-called choices ) are virtual, not real.
Virtual life arises from the cosmic consumption of Gibbs Free Energy.

Dark Energy is the virtual energy " debt " incurred by
a " black hole " when it creates a " vacuum ". Likewise, Dark Matter is
the virtual energy " asset " acquired from a black hole.
" Assets = Liabilities " and the " bank " ( i.e. the cosmos )
is collecting interest, diminishing the density/pressure of our Universe.

As even Hawking now admits... there's not enough time or energy in our Universe
to form a true event horizon...

Infinite gravitational acceleration
means infinite Unruh radiation... It can't happen, anywhere, ever.

Likewise, there's not enough time or energy in the Universe
to create an ideal vacuum... any gravitational field at all
means spontaneous particle creation ( i.e. Unruh radiation ).

The cosmos has no birth or death, just a limit to what we can observe.

Like ever-active yeast in a loaf of bread,
the cosmos expands everywhere all the time.
In 2-D, I visualise cosmological " time " as the Y axis,
and ( an ever-flat, 4-D ) Minkowskian spacetime as the X axis.
But the Y axis is " Cosmic Gravitational Deceleration, CGD ", not " time ".
" d CGD " ( a function of density and pressure ) is a slice of spacetime.

Adding up the slices forms a 5-D, horn shaped, " white hole ".

w(z) always equals -1 and Omega_Lambda is always .74 ( I posit ).
So Rho_Lambda ( and inflation ) was higher when Rho_Crit was higher.
( Because higher densities create stronger vacuums )
And: Pressure_Cosmos = - ( .74 / .26 ) * Density_Matter * c^2
See: www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/W.PNG

Where does spacetime warp into, if not gravitational acceleration ?

What place and time has absolutely no gravitational acceleration ?
How is it that Mass can be defined the same way as Length and Time ?
( i.e. as M, L and T oscillations of a special laser )

Already, a portable LaCoste-Romberg gravimeter can measure 10^-9 g's, and
the FINAQS project is developing atom lasers for " quantum gravimeters " which:

...may even permit a new definition of the kilogram
- at present based on the mass of a metal artefact kept in Paris -
in terms of the fundamental physical constants.

www.Finaqs.Uni-Hannover.DE/

.+.+.+....
General Relativity's ether is static ( spatial ), to wit:

The speed of light in an ideal vacuum is
the same in any local frame of reference that's in constant acceleration
( relative to some " far distant " frame ).

In " Ether and the Theory of Relativity " ( 1920 ), Einstein wrote:

TUHH.DE/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html

But this ether may not be thought of as
endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media,
as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time.

The idea of motion may not be applied to it.

In 1949, Einstein wrote ( in " The World As I See It " ):

EinsteinAndReligion.COM/sciencereligious.html

But the scientist is possessed by
the sense of universal causation. The future, to him, is
every whit as necessary and determined as the past.

At the loss of Einstein's close friend, late in Einstein's life, he wrote:

SpeakingOfFaith.PublicRadio.ORG/programs/einsteinsgod/unheardcuts.shtml

People like us, who believe in physics, know that
the distinction between past, present, and future is
only a stubbornly persistent illusion.

Hawking said:

In relativity,
there is no real distinction between the space and time coordinates,
just as there is no difference between two space coordinates.

Hawking said:

In summary, the title of this essay was a question,
" Is Everything Determined ? " The answer is yes, it is.
But it might as well not be, because we can never know what is determined.

In " Is There an Alternative to the Block Universe View ? ", Petkov wrote:

Philsci-Archive.Pitt.EDU/archive/00002408/

This paper pursues two aims. First, to show that the block universe view,
regarding the universe as a timelessly existing four-dimensional world,
is the only one that is consistent with special relativity.

Second, to argue that special relativity alone can resolve
the debate on whether the world is three-dimensional or four-dimensional.
The argument advanced in the paper is that
if the world were three-dimensional
the kinematic consequences of special relativity and
more importantly the experiments confirming them would be impossible.

In Scientific American's " That Mysterious Flow " article ( Sep 2002 ),
we read:

Urgrue.ORG/lib/mysterious-flow.html

From the fixed past to the tangible present to the undecided future,
it feels as though time flows inexorably on. But that is an illusion.

In Plato.Stanford.EDU's " 4D View of Time " article, we read:

Plato.Stanford.EDU/entries/time/#8

According to The 4D View, temporally extended objects have temporal parts,
temporal extension is perfectly analogous to spatial extension...

In Wiki_Pedia's " Block Time " article, we read:

WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time

Block time is one way of approaching the problem of the nature of time.
Its name is derived from its description of space-time as
an unchanging four-dimensional " block "...
.....+.+.+

Hi Bill_Sheppard, I don't think you can reply to this post
because I only read Sci.Physics and you only read Alt.Astronomy
and Webtv.NET won't let you crosspost.

Art_Deco ( a.k.a. Phineas the Duck ) can't distinguish models from

intrinsic reality. He usually tells me something like:

You're a kook ! you're a kook ! you're a kook !
If time is truly a _Spatial_ dimension ( i.e. falsely directional )
then why don't all _Models_ describe it that way ?

As to what causes gravity, the following is how I think of it:
( from my web site, www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf )

Gravity is " caused " by mass-energy ( i.e. density and pressure )
precisely because they are one and the same.
The distinction between the two is entirely virtual, not real.

In a similar manner, time is truly spatial ( i.e. falsely directional )
and all changes ( including so-called choices ) are virtual, not real.
Virtual life arises from the cosmic consumption of Gibbs Free Energy.

Dark Energy is the virtual energy " debt " incurred by
a " black hole " when it creates a " vacuum ". Likewise, Dark Matter is
the virtual energy " asset " acquired from a black hole.
" Assets = Liabilities " and the " bank " ( i.e. the cosmos )
is collecting interest, diminishing the density/pressure of our Universe.

As even Hawking now admits... there's not enough time or energy in our Universe
to form a true event horizon... Infinite gravitational acceleration
means infinite Unruh radiation... It can't happen, anywhere, ever.

Likewise, there's not enough time or energy in the Universe
to create an ideal vacuum... any gravitational field at all
means spontaneous particle creation ( i.e. Unruh radiation ).

The cosmos has no birth or death, just a limit to what we can observe.
Like ever-active yeast in a loaf of bread,
the cosmos expands everywhere all the time.
In 2-D, I visualise cosmological " time " as the Y axis,
and ( an ever-flat, 4-D ) Minkowskian spacetime as the X axis.
But the Y axis is " Cosmic Gravitational Deceleration, CGD ", not " time ".
" d CGD " ( a function of density and pressure ) is a slice of spacetime.

Adding up the slices forms a 5-D, horn shaped, " white hole ".

w(z) always equals -1 and Omega_Lambda is always .74 ( I posit ).
So Rho_Lambda ( and inflation ) was higher when Rho_Crit was higher.
( Because higher densities create stronger vacuums )
And: Pressure_Cosmos = - ( .74 / .26 ) * Density_Matter * c^2
See: www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/W.PNG

Where does spacetime warp into, if not gravitational acceleration ?
What place and time has absolutely no gravitational acceleration ?
How is it that Mass can be defined the same way as Length and Time ?
( i.e. as M, L and T oscillations of a special laser )

Already, a portable LaCoste-Romberg gravimeter can measure 10^-9 g's, and
the FINAQS project is developing atom lasers for " quantum gravimeters " which:

...may even permit a new definition of the kilogram
­ at present based on the mass of a metal artefact kept in Paris ­
in terms of the fundamental physical constants.

www.Finaqs.Uni-Hannover.DE/

.+.+.+....
General Relativity's ether is static ( spatial ), to wit:

The speed of light in an ideal vacuum is
the same in any local frame of reference that's in constant acceleration
( relative to some " far distant " frame ).

In " Ether and the Theory of Relativity " ( 1920 ), Einstein wrote:

TUHH.DE/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html

But this ether may not be thought of as
endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media,
as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time.

The idea of motion may not be applied to it.

In 1949, Einstein wrote ( in " The World As I See It " ):

EinsteinAndReligion.COM/sciencereligious.html

But the scientist is possessed by
the sense of universal causation. The future, to him, is
every whit as necessary and determined as the past.

At the loss of Einstein's close friend, late in Einstein's life, he wrote:

SpeakingOfFaith.PublicRadio.ORG/programs/einsteinsgod/unheardcuts.shtml

People like us, who believe in physics, know that
the distinction between past, present, and future is
only a stubbornly persistent illusion.

Hawking said:

In relativity,
there is no real distinction between the space and time coordinates,
just as there is no difference between two space coordinates.

Hawking said:

In summary, the title of this essay was a question,
" Is Everything Determined ? " The answer is yes, it is.
But it might as well not be, because we can never know what is determined.

In " Is There an Alternative to the Block Universe View ? ", Petkov wrote:

Philsci-Archive.Pitt.EDU/archive/00002408/

This paper pursues two aims. First, to show that the block universe view,
regarding the universe as a timelessly existing four-dimensional world,
is the only one that is consistent with special relativity.

Second, to argue that special relativity alone can resolve
the debate on whether the world is three-dimensional or four-dimensional.
The argument advanced in the paper is that
if the world were three-dimensional
the kinematic consequences of special relativity and
more importantly the experiments confirming them would be impossible.

In Scientific American's " That Mysterious Flow " article ( Sep 2002 ),
we read:

Urgrue.ORG/lib/mysterious-flow.html

From the fixed past to the tangible present to the undecided future,
it feels as though time flows inexorably on. But that is an illusion.

In Plato.Stanford.EDU's " 4D View of Time " article, we read:

Plato.Stanford.EDU/entries/time/#8

According to The 4D View, temporally extended objects have temporal parts,
temporal extension is perfectly analogous to spatial extension...

In Wiki_Pedia's " Block Time " article, we read:

WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time

Block time is one way of approaching the problem of the nature of time.
Its name is derived from its description of space-time as
an unchanging four-dimensional " block "...
.....+.+.+