Anti-matter and Time

Nov 19, 2021
Visit site
Hartmann 352 in a previous thread said, if I remember correctly, that anti matter particles can be regarded as 'ordinary' +ve particles but heading opposite in time.
I believe he also said that both anti particles and +ve particles move through time in a positive way. That is they both move to the future and not back to the past.

At first sight this seems contradictory, However there is a scenario where this is logically resolved and, also, resolves the issue "where is the antimatter" without threatening universe annihilation . This would concern a hypershere and an assumption that time for a particle is a movement physically through a 4th Spatial dimension. The movement in an opposite direction of one partcle to another (in an additional direction to the 3 constituting 3d space) as is possible in a hypersphere, designates opposite charges. Which is positive and which is negative would depend on the location of an observer.

So at one location in a hypersphere (perhaps our universe) where an observer exists - all particles in that hemisphere can be observed positive and also all particles in the opposite hemishere may then be regarded as negative. Simply put, in an hyperspherical universe all the anti matter is on the opposite side to us. This situation would exist for anyone located anywhere; particles would always locally to be positive (mostly).
The solution would be the nature of Time itself. Time would have to be movement in a fourth spatial dimension. That is not only is the 3d space in the universe expanding but there is 4d space which is expanding (where we, are like 2d flatlanders who cannot move a 2d plain) in an additional spatial dimension. A different interpretation to spacetime I think.

Look - a better idea of what time is... Lets say we draw a little man on a piece of paper. There is no obvious method by which the man can move about! But we can introduce time as a whole pile of pieces of paper. On each adjacent piece we can draw the man in a slightly different place. If we flick through the papers it seems as if the man is moving. So, time for the man is the depth of the pile - a direction at right angles to each of his pieces of paper. A dimension he might call time; a spatial dimension.

Oops moving off the subject, lol. What do you think?
Time's conceptual passage is cyclical, there are no loose ends. Though such a supreme construct can be imagined in many artistic forms – a golden sphere, a doughnut, an exploding firework – time in full does not actually exist from our limited perspective. The only bit that makes any sense is the bit that flows, the present moment.

The rest of time is immeasurable, invisible, ready but not real. It has purpose and potential, and worth, and may present itself with careful consideration. Time hides in plain sight by assimilation with our material existence, and it's just a matter of digging around to find out where it hides.

The General Theory of Relativity also alludes to the warping of space by gravity through a fourth dimension. It is described mathematically though appears undetectable. Recently, however, a variety of astro-physics experiments including the discovery of gravity's bending of light from distant stars, has proven without a doubt that Einstein's evaluations were correct and that invisible dimensions exist.

While such phenomena could be described as illusions, or mirages, where light is bent by heat energy, when it comes to time and distances being bent, what can it be called? The fourth dimension of time hides in plain sight and is not an illusion, it is a real transition of physical form that we are unable to see while being influenced by time. We age.

A dimension is a degree of freedom of a system. In simple words, it is the number of ways or directions in which change can take place in a system.

Though this fourth spatial dimension is not time, itself, we may consider it the platform upon which time propagates. We experience a passage of time but we can't see why that is, other than relative displacement. Now we have a bases for understanding the evocation of change, though it requires we take an objective view.

Everything around us seems to be on the move: trees, clouds, mountain ranges, continents; none of them predictable in how. Things influence output, and the more inputs there are the greater the impossibility of predicting an outcome.

Time is change; perceived or otherwise. Something as fathomless in appearance as a tree or as bizarrely beautiful as a fractal image does have some method to its madness. There are rules in Chaos – or equations when developing fractal graphics – so there is purpose in progression; and that purpose has a name: evolution. Not just the evolution of life and its repetitive nature, but the evolution of all inanimate, crystalline, cultural and indeed, cosmic phenomena.

It doesn't have to be an intelligent purpose, it is inherent in all things that move.

By adding the dimension of time to us and our planet, we simply add the repetitive nature of progress, from the past to the future.

The fourth dimension of time manifests itself solely within the present moment as a sense of flow. The greater the differential impact between one moment and the next, the greater is that rate perceived.

However, we define an object’s speed as its displacement per a given time. But some researchers now theorize that this Newtonian idea of time as an absolute quantity that flows on its own, along with the idea that time is the fourth dimension of spacetime, are incorrect. They propose to replace these concepts of time with a view that corresponds more accurately to the physical world: time as a measure of the numerical order of change.

According to Amrit Sorli, Davide Fiscaletti, and Dusan Klinar from the Scientific Research Centre Bistra in Ptuj, Slovenia, in Physics Essays, we never really measure t. What we do measure is an object’s frequency, speed, etc. In other words, what experimentally exists are the motion of an object and the tick of a clock, and we compare the object’s motion to the tick of a clock to measure the object’s frequency, speed, etc. By itself, t has only a mathematical value, and no primary physical existence.

This view doesn’t mean that time does not exist, but that time has more to do with space than with the idea of an absolute time. So while 4D spacetime is usually considered to consist of three dimensions of space and one dimension of time, the researchers’ view suggests that it’s more correct to imagine spacetime as four dimensions of space.





So is time a real dimension where the greater differential impact between one moment and the next means the greater that rate is perceived? Or is time merely a mathematical value with no real physical dimension or existence? Will we ever truly know. This question has perplexed mankind for a long, long...time.
Nov 19, 2021
Visit site
Interesting comments, thank you for your thoughts. They have clarified my thinking. It seems to me now that time is no more mysterious than "How/why the universe is expanding". It may also be that there is evidence to support this impression (that can be considered later in this post).

Clearly, there is an apparent difference in our perception; space we think we can "see". Whereas time is percieved by us only in the present. I say "apparent" because there actually is no difference in principle between the two: We cannot actually see space because - as you have mentioned in another post - all things at a distance are "as was in the past" and this is true even in the absence of objects. All space is "past". Similarly all time viewed from the present is "past" (and maybe future too but that's off thread).

Time and space then are the same thing except as far as our perception is concerned as we are limited by having fantastic eyesight, which in our local perception, describes only three dimensions. Our perception of time is much more limited; memory becomes analogous to eyesight. All this is acknowledged by science as spacetime of course. All I am doing here is approaching the subject from a layman's logic, as expalnation, instead of forcing the logic using mathematics.

So, it seems to me, that the movement of the present into the future has the same cause as the expansion of space.

As space expands, once done, it is impossible to return to any pre expansion just as it is impossible to return to any pre present. None of this is surprising of course but again we can attempt to use a layman's logic instead of forcing our way forward with beautiful mathematics. So far both are on the same page - I hope you agree.

Maybe this can be developed further: Einstein did the mathematics to show the relationship between time and space in his dilation formula for distance and time. However it may be easier to consider the following:
Take the acknowledged equivalence of 299792458 metres and one second. These two descriptions are interchangable in calculation although convention determines that we use them in everyday perception mostly.

In our universe an addition of distance (movement) modifies the time available (time dilation). This is easily illustrated ( I will attempt to include a diagram in a following post) and amounts to our progress into the future and expanded space as being 1 unit of spacetime where no spatial movement allows 1 second and 1 second allows (and is illustrated by light) 299792458 metres of distance. Variations in between these values are nailed by Einstein. Words become a hard case whereas the diagram I'll try to post makes it very easily understood.

Lets see whether you and I are on the same page with this before we proceed further!
Let's not forget gravitational time dilation and the impact of velocity.

If acceleration is equivalent to gravitation, it follows that the predictions of Special Relativity must also be valid for very strong gravitational fields. The curvature of spacetime by matter therefore not only stretches or shrinks distances, depending on their direction with respect to the gravitational field, but also appears to slow down the flow of time. This effect is called gravitational time dilation. In most circumstances, such gravitational time dilation is minuscule and hardly observable, but it can become very significant when spacetime is curved by a massive object, such as a black hole.

A black hole is the most compact matter imaginable. It is an extremely massive and dense object in space that is thought to be formed by a star collapsing under its own gravity. Black holes are black, because nothing, not even light, can escape from its extreme gravity. The existence of black holes have been verified thanks to the work of Andrea Ghez of UCLA and her team and their work on Sgr A*, the Super Massive Black Hole in the center of the Milky Way.

Major advances in computation are only now enabling scientists to simulate how black holes form, evolve, and interact. They are betting on powerful instruments now under construction to confirm that these exotic objects actually exist.

Time as measured by a clock a certain distance from a black hole will slow down (as measured by a far away observer) by a factor


In which G is the gravitational constant of the universe, M is the mass of the black hole, r is the distance from the black hole to the clock.

Einstein’s theory of special relativity also teaches us that motion through space actually creates alterations in the flow of time. The faster you move through the three dimensions that define physical space, the more slowly you’re moving through the fourth dimension, time––at least relative to another object.

Time is measured differently for the twin who moved through space and the twin who stayed on Earth. The clock in motion will tick more slowly than the clocks we’re watching on Earth. If you’re able to travel near the speed of light, the effects are much more pronounced.

Unlike the Twin Paradox, time dilation isn’t a thought experiment or a hypothetical concept––it’s real. The 1971 Hafele-Keating experiments* proved as much, when two atomic clocks were flown on planes traveling in opposite directions. The relative motion actually had a measurable impact and created a time difference between the two clocks. This has also been confirmed in other physics experiments (e.g., fast-moving muon particles take longer to decay).

So in your question, an astronaut returning from a space journey at “relativistic speeds” (where the effects of relativity start to manifest—generally at least one-tenth the speed of light) would, upon return, be younger than same-age friends and family who stayed on Earth. Exactly how much younger depends on exactly how fast the spacecraft had been moving and accelerating, so it’s not something we can readily answer. But if you’re trying to reach an exoplanet 10 to 50 light-years away and still make it home before you yourself die of old age, you’d have to be moving at close to light speed.

* "During October, 1971, four cesium atomic beam clocks were flown on regularly scheduled commercial jet flights around the world twice, once eastward and once westward, to test Einstein's theory of relativity with macroscopic clocks. From the actual flight paths of each trip, the theory predicted that the flying clocks, compared with reference clocks at the U.S. Naval Observatory, should have lost 40+/-23 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and should have gained 275+/-21 nanoseconds during the westward trip ... Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanosecond during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations. These results provide an unambiguous empirical resolution of the famous clock "paradox" with macroscopic clocks."

J.C. Hafele and R. E. Keating, Science 177, 166 (1972)

Screen Shot 2021-11-24 at 3.12.41 PM.png




Time dilation, it can be seen from above, arises due to the gravitational impact of mass (M) and from the impact of velocity as it approaches the speed of light (c). Time, you are a slippery devil.
Nov 19, 2021
Visit site
Oh that's disappointing. It tries to show a Spacetime Unit and how it relates to our perception of Time and space with a particular slant re Anti matter. Unfortunately very difficult to read. Ah I see you click on the thumb nail to get the image! Great.
I am posting to see what you might make of it. Just noticed I need to make a correction: I said 'travels from O to C' . I should have said 'travels the distance of O to C'


  • Special Relativity.jpg
    Special Relativity.jpg
    157.1 KB · Views: 3