Do Astronauts Experience Time Differently in Space?

[Truthseeker007]

Interesting. How did they figure him to be 5 milliseconds younger then his twin?

 

[Jem]

Interesting. How did they figure him to be 5 milliseconds younger then his twin?

Same question how do they measure that?

 

[Jem]

Shouldn't time be how you perceive a full day is? not a full spin cycle of the earth even if your out in space it should be how you perceive it.

 

[rod]

Shouldn't time be how you perceive a full day is? not a full spin cycle of the earth even if your out in space it should be how you perceive it.

FYI. The answer is found in #2 of the article, gravity and speed differences. "This form of time dilation is combined with relative velocity time dilation, which is what the atomic clock experiment was testing. ISS astronauts experience both gravitational and relative velocity time dilation."

You need very sensitive atomic clocks to measure this tiny differences, not blood lab work comparing the differences

 

[Truthseeker007]

Same question how do they measure that?

I guess they don't know.lol!

 

[David-J-Franks]

Interesting. How did they figure him to be 5 milliseconds younger then his twin?

Looks like there's a bit of confusion here, some of the experiment is actually looking at changes to his body due to being in zero gravity. The 5 millisecond age difference was not deduced by examining his body. There would be an atomic clock on the space station and an atomic clock on the ground, the two would be compared with a radio signal and they must have been found to be 5 millisecond different after a year in space, so because the clock was 5 milliseconds seconds slower on the space station it's assumed that the same effect also applies to Scott's body.

ln other words the time dilation affects all movement including the biochemistry of Scott as well as the movement( internal mechanism) of the clock. It literally means the biochemical age of Scott is 5 milliseconds younger than his twin because the chemicals in his body have been moving about that much slower over his year in space.

As to the why, this is where I get confused. it doesn't seem like it's straightforward velocity dilation because Scott is going round in a circle, that is classed as acceleration, even though he's moving round at a constant speed. But in physics his velocity is changing because he is being continuously dragged into a curve and that takes a force, so that's still called acceleration. There's also a principal in physics that says acceleration and gravity can't be distinguished from each other with any experiment. So in other words is there also some kind of gravity dilation going on here as well?

It's all a lot simpler in my theory 'Steady State of The Infinite' because I don't believe there such a thing as time anyway. There's only movement and regular or periodic movement, and for me that still explains everything. So in my theory, gravity slows clocks not time.

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end

 

[Hawkstein]

Needs to be more sci-fi movies/shows using time dilation as a major plot device... Interstaller and Planet of the Apes are the main ones I can think of... also recall one of the best Voyager eps was related to time dilation (though it didn't actually make sense as is the time dilation was backwards).

 

[Truthseeker007]

Looks like there's a bit of confusion here, some of the experiment is actually looking at changes to his body due to being in zero gravity. The 5 millisecond age difference was not deduced by examining his body. There would be an atomic clock on the space station and an atomic clock on the ground, the two would be compared with a radio signal and they must have been found to be 5 millisecond different after a year in space, so because the clock was 5 milliseconds seconds slower on the space station it's assumed that the same effect also applies to Scott's body.

ln other words the time dilation affects all movement including the biochemistry of Scott as well as the movement( internal mechanism) of the clock. It literally means the biochemical age of Scott is 5 milliseconds younger than his twin because the chemicals in his body have been moving about that much slower over his year in space.

As to the why, this is where I get confused. it doesn't seem like it's straightforward velocity dilation because Scott is going round in a circle, that is classed as acceleration, even though he's moving round at a constant speed. But in physics his velocity is changing because he is being continuously dragged into a curve and that takes a force, so that's still called acceleration. There's also a principal in physics that says acceleration and gravity can't be distinguished from each other with any experiment. So in other words is there also some kind of gravity dilation going on here as well?

It's all a lot simpler in my theory 'Steady State of The Infinite' because I don't believe there such a thing as time anyway. There's only movement and regular or periodic movement, and for me that still explains everything. So in my theory, gravity slows clocks not time.

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end

Thanks for that explanation that makes more sense. 5 milliseconds isn't very much at all after a year. And how do we know it wasn't the atomic clock itself that had a 5 millisecond malfunction? I notice depending on the clocks in my house you can set them all at the same time and they will all differ after awhile. I mean what is an atomic clock exactly?

I don't think time exists either. It is more of a measurement we use on this Earth in our daily life. If you in outer space the Sun don't rise and set. I think you got a pretty good theory there.

 

[Hawkstein]

Thanks for that explanation that makes more sense. 5 milliseconds isn't very much at all after a year. And how do we know it wasn't the atomic clock itself that had a 5 millisecond malfunction? I notice depending on the clocks in my house you can set them all at the same time and they will all differ after awhile. I mean what is an atomic clock exactly?

I don't think time exists either. It is more of a measurement we use on this Earth in our daily life. If you in outer space the Sun don't rise and set. I think you got a pretty good theory there.

If you don't believe in relativity, you might as well stop thinking all together, as you'd be a quack on par with flat-earthers. Time dilation is tested and proven again and again (as with all of Einstein's theories of relativity). Satellite clocks have to be continuously reset to account for time dilation effects.

Of course 5 milliseconds is nothing, that's not the point, the fact that time is relative at all is an amazing feature of spacetime. Once you start getting up to 90%+ percent the speed of light you're going to see some crazy time dilation effects. Ever see Planet of the Apes?

If you traveled for 10 years (relative to yourself) at 99% the speed of light, 75 years would have passed by on earth. This is not science-fiction.

Or travel for 10 years at 99.9% the speed of light, 230 years would have passed by on earth.

Or travel for 10 years at 99.999% the speed of light, 2300 years would have passed by on earth.

 

[David-J-Franks]

Thanks for that explanation that makes more sense. 5 milliseconds isn't very much at all after a year. And how do we know it wasn't the atomic clock itself that had a 5 millisecond malfunction? I notice depending on the clocks in my house you can set them all at the same time and they will all differ after awhile. I mean what is an atomic clock exactly?

I don't think time exists either. It is more of a measurement we use on this Earth in our daily life. If you in outer space the Sun don't rise and set. I think you got a pretty good theory there.

And how do we know it wasn't the atomic clock itself that had a 5 millisecond malfunction?

Pack two or more clocks

I mean what is an atomic clock exactly?

Most domestic clocks use a quartz crystal to keep the time. If you bang an iron bar it rings, if you bang a quartz crystal it vibrates, except instead of banging the Crystal a small electric pulse is applied and that will start it vibrating and a feedback pulse is continuously applied to the Crystal which keeps it vibrating at a constant frequency just as if you keep hitting an iron bar it will keep ringing at a constant frequency. The frequency in the case of the quartz clock is is probably around mHz. Then electric electronic divider circuits are used to divide the pulses down into usable seconds minutes and hours which are then displayed on the display. In the case of an atomic clock an atom is suspended or a cloud of atoms, and a laser or maser is shone on them, this causes them to rapidly oscillate between two different energy levels, well into the gigahertz range I guess. In other words a kind of a ring or resonance and once again this resonant frequency is divided down with electronic circuits just as in the case of a quartz clock. Because it's a natural resonance it's assumed to be extremely accurate - up to a few seconds for the entire age of the universe!

I don't think time exists either. It is more of a measurement we use on this Earth in our daily life.

As I suggest time doesn't exist so therefore you can't measure time. clocks don't measure anything they don't have any sensors feelers or detectors, they are mechanisms unto themselves, mostly disconnected from the rest of the universe, except for radio controlled clocks. Rather, they represent the rotational position of the Earth, which is a regular periodic movement.

If you in outer space the Sun don't rise and set.

I like that

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end

 

[Truthseeker007]

Pack two or more clocks

Most domestic clocks use a quartz crystal to keep the time. If you bang an iron bar it rings, if you bang a quartz crystal it vibrates, except instead of banging the Crystal a small electric pulse is applied and that will start it vibrating and a feedback pulse is continuously applied to the Crystal which keeps it vibrating at a constant frequency just as if you keep hitting an iron bar it will keep ringing at a constant frequency. The frequency in the case of the quartz clock is is probably around mHz. Then electric electronic divider circuits are used to divide the pulses down into usable seconds minutes and hours which are then displayed on the display. In the case of an atomic clock an atom is suspended or a cloud of atoms, and a laser or maser is shone on them, this causes them to rapidly oscillate between two different energy levels, well into the gigahertz range I guess. In other words a kind of a ring or resonance and once again this resonant frequency is divided down with electronic circuits just as in the case of a quartz clock. Because it's a natural resonance it's assumed to be extremely accurate - up to a few seconds for the entire age of the universe!

As I suggest time doesn't exist so therefore you can't measure time. clocks don't measure anything they don't have any sensors feelers or detectors, they are mechanisms unto themselves, mostly disconnected from the rest of the universe, except for radio controlled clocks. Rather, they represent the rotational position of the Earth, which is a regular periodic movement.

I like that

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end

Thanks for the well thought and great explanation. I totally agree also with infinite space-infinite universes-no beginning and no end.

So if everything is always happening all at once. Meaning past, present and future are always happening. Do you think it is possible to build a time machine and travel to the past and present? I would think it would be possible but I think the hard part would be pinpointing a certain timeline if their is an infinite amount of timelines. Like for instance say you wanted to go in the past to say goodbye to your dog you never got to say goodbye to. How would you even find the correct timeline your actual dog was on? Or could you even?

 

[Truthseeker007]

If you don't believe in relativity, you might as well stop thinking all together, as you'd be a quack on par with flat-earthers. Time dilation is tested and proven again and again (as with all of Einstein's theories of relativity). Satellite clocks have to be continuously reset to account for time dilation effects.

Of course 5 milliseconds is nothing, that's not the point, the fact that time is relative at all is an amazing feature of spacetime. Once you start getting up to 90%+ percent the speed of light you're going to see some crazy time dilation effects. Ever see Planet of the Apes?

If you traveled for 10 years (relative to yourself) at 99% the speed of light, 75 years would have passed by on earth. This is not science-fiction.

Or travel for 10 years at 99.9% the speed of light, 230 years would have passed by on earth.

Or travel for 10 years at 99.999% the speed of light, 2300 years would have passed by on earth.

Isn't relativity still a theory though? I would feel I am a quack if I don't question everything. Why should I believe everything I am told without question? That to me is quackery.

Einstein was also a Socialist Zionist so I am not going to take everything he has said word for word. It is obvious the Earth is not flat just by looking at the Sun and the Moon. Not sure why now everybody who asks questions is on the same boat as a flat earther. Maybe it is that they don't want us asking questions and proving all these theories wrong. It would throw the whole education system out of whack. If the whole education system is based on a fraud then that would mean most of what everybody is taught is fraudulent.

Yea I understand what is said to happen when traveling at the speed of light. We see that in many of the Sci-Fi movies. Even the original planet of the Apes was pretty interesting because that is exactly what happened. By the time they came back the Apes took over. Or did they end up on another timeline then they were originally on?

I was merely saying in this experiment that the atomic clock could of had a malfunction. Especially if it was made in China.

 

[David-J-Franks]

Thanks for the well thought and great explanation. I totally agree also with infinite space-infinite universes-no beginning and no end.

So if everything is always happening all at once. Meaning past, present and future are always happening. Do you think it is possible to build a time machine and travel to the past and present? I would think it would be possible but I think the hard part would be pinpointing a certain timeline if their is an infinite amount of timelines. Like for instance say you wanted to go in the past to say goodbye to your dog you never got to say goodbye to. How would you even find the correct timeline your actual dog was on? Or could you even?

So if everything is always happening all at once. Meaning past, present and future are always happening.

No, I didn't say that. A slight, no a big misunderstanding. Take a look around, what you see is what you get, that's all there is. My theory actually suggests there's no past, present or future. First, let me start from the beginning with some quotes from the theory 'Steady State of The Infinite'

"There's no such thing as time, there is only movement and regular or periodic movement."

"Clocks represent this movement not time."

"Clocks do not measure anything, they don't have any sensors or detectors, they're not physically linked to the rotation of the earth or anything else in the universe, they are isolated mechanisms and are synchronised to the rotation of the earth by astronomical observation which can only ever be approximate."

"Time is only a word used to describe our experiencing of, and observing of, a changing environment and universe. It's is a word used when experiencing the spacing and sequencing of events relative to other known movements or periodic events or to our memory of known movements or periodic events, i.e. our internal sense of movement. It's not real, it's a human thought construct."

"There's no such thing as the past, present or future, only the smooth, continuous movement and rearrangement of matter and forces."

"It's simple, the past was just a different arrangement and movement of the things you see around you now, that previous arrangement doesn't exist any-more – you can't go back to it!"

"Using the word moment or now suggests to me 'reality' has been paused and singled out so that it can be called a moment or now. However, 'reality' is in continuous motion, it's smooth down to infinitely small scales, there are no stop gaps, lines or markers and no processes begin or end instantaneously. There is no present moment or now, even an infinitely small one." (Please nobody mention Planck time and length )

"The future doesn't exist because it hasn't happened yet, it's just going to be a rearrangement of the things you see around you now. So, no such thing as time travel."

So, referring back to my caption "- no beginning - no end" I'm not saying "everything is always happening all at once." I'm saying 'the infinite' is in a constant state of change, just as everything around you is, and that there was a past (with no beginning) and is future (with no end) to it, in the everyday meaning of those words.

Do you think it is possible to build a time machine and travel to the past and present? I would think it would be possible but I think the hard part would be pinpointing a certain timeline if there is an infinite amount of timelines.

You use the word travel, but there is nowhere to travel to. You can travel to the same place where you were yesterday, and some or all of the things that were there yesterday may well be also there today, but they may have rearranged, or changed.

There are no timelines, as above, there isn't even a 'now'. Both of these are just concepts which are formed in your mind. You experience a 'now' because your brain has made a short video of the recent happenings, which have already changed before you're conscious of your video recording. Likewise, the past is just a memory, and the future is a constructed, predicted vision - all in the mind

If your interested there is a theory which includes all of space-time as existing all at once called the 'block universe', it might even be part of Einstein's theory, I'm not sure, google it.

Have you recently lost a dog? sorry if that's the case.

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end​

 

[Truthseeker007]

No, I didn't say that. A slight, no a big misunderstanding. Take a look around, what you see is what you get, that's all there is. My theory actually suggests there's no past, present or future. First, let me start from the beginning with some quotes from the theory 'Steady State of The Infinite'

"There's no such thing as time, there is only movement and regular or periodic movement."

"Clocks represent this movement not time."

"Clocks do not measure anything, they don't have any sensors or detectors, they're not physically linked to the rotation of the earth or anything else in the universe, they are isolated mechanisms and are synchronised to the rotation of the earth by astronomical observation which can only ever be approximate."

"Time is only a word used to describe our experiencing of, and observing of, a changing environment and universe. It's is a word used when experiencing the spacing and sequencing of events relative to other known movements or periodic events or to our memory of known movements or periodic events, i.e. our internal sense of movement. It's not real, it's a human thought construct."

"There's no such thing as the past, present or future, only the smooth, continuous movement and rearrangement of matter and forces."

"It's simple, the past was just a different arrangement and movement of the things you see around you now, that previous arrangement doesn't exist any-more – you can't go back to it!"

"Using the word moment or now suggests to me 'reality' has been paused and singled out so that it can be called a moment or now. However, 'reality' is in continuous motion, it's smooth down to infinitely small scales, there are no stop gaps, lines or markers and no processes begin or end instantaneously. There is no present moment or now, even an infinitely small one." (Please nobody mention Planck time and length )

"The future doesn't exist because it hasn't happened yet, it's just going to be a rearrangement of the things you see around you now. So, no such thing as time travel."

So, referring back to my caption "- no beginning - no end" I'm not saying "everything is always happening all at once." I'm saying 'the infinite' is in a constant state of change, just as everything around you is, and that there was a past (with no beginning) and is future (with no end) to it, in the everyday meaning of those words.

You use the word travel, but there is nowhere to travel to. You can travel to the same place where you were yesterday, and some or all of the things that were there yesterday may well be also there today, but they may have rearranged, or changed.

There are no timelines, as above, there isn't even a 'now'. Both of these are just concepts which are formed in your mind. You experience a 'now' because your brain has made a short video of the recent happenings, which have already changed before you're conscious of your video recording. Likewise, the past is just a memory, and the future is a constructed, predicted vision - all in the mind

If your interested there is a theory which includes all of space-time as existing all at once called the 'block universe', it might even be part of Einstein's theory, I'm not sure, google it.

Have you recently lost a dog? sorry if that's the case.

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end​

Thanks now my mind is completely boggled. What you said there does make sense. But then that makes me think about how long it takes for light to get here. So when we look at the stars at night we are seeing the past from a very long time ago. Those stars we are seeing now are already in the future yet we are seeing them in the past. So just by that the past, present and future are all happening at once. From that past we know the future is there but we won't be able to see the future until the light gets here but the future is happening. Does that make sense?

I did lose a dog a year ago because the the jerk died before I got home from Iraq.lol! Thanks. I think it is also a good example because who hasn't lost a pet?

 

[David-J-Franks]

Thanks now my mind is completely boggled. What you said there does make sense. But then that makes me think about how long it takes for light to get here. So when we look at the stars at night we are seeing the past from a very long time ago. Those stars we are seeing now are already in the future yet we are seeing them in the past. So just by that the past, present and future are all happening at once. From that past we know the future is there but we won't be able to see the future until the light gets here but the future is happening. Does that make sense?

I did lose a dog a year ago because the the jerk died before I got home from Iraq.lol! Thanks. I think it is also a good example because who hasn't lost a pet?

When you look at the stars you're not seeing the past you are seeing light produced by the star which contains information to form an image of how matter was once arranged. Even if the star has exploded and doesn't exist any more the light from the star is real and exists in the here and now, just as the matter from the star still exists, but in a now different arrangement due to eternal change and motion. Once again, only 'now' exists, but as I said in the last post, even that is an illusion due to your personal video memory of things. Just the same as looking at a photo you're not seeing the past, you are seeing an image of how matter, that's still around 'now', was previously arranged. Only an instantaneous 'now' exists along with its change and motion, not time.

Those stars we are seeing now are already in the future yet we are seeing them in the past.

The stars are not in the future, they are in the present, along with everything else, they are changing, rearranging and in motion. The light from the star is a kind of stored image that's travelled a long way, and that is real and exists 'now',

So just by that the past, present and future are all happening at once.

Only 'now' is happening, what you call the past is now just memory of how things were. You're still surrounded by the same stuff from the past, but it's just changed, rearranged and moved.

What you call the future, is only going to be a further change of that same stuff, and since it hasn't changed yet, there isn't a future yet. There's still only a changing 'now'.

From that past we know the future is there but we won't be able to see the future until the light gets here but the future is happening.

The future is not there. Only the changing present is there.

The future is not happening, but it is going to happen, only now is happening now.

That which applies to stars applies to all the things you see. If you watch an animal running then by the time the light from it reaches your eyes, it will have moved to a different position and changed shape. So you never really even see 'now'. You're seeing a slightly delayed mental video of it!

Going back to the star, if you really want to do your mind in, then you need to add relativity. According to that, 'now' becomes even more confusing, as 'now' depends on the speed, position and gravitational experience of the observer. You can never get a universal agreement of when 'now' is. All that's well beyond me, so I'm going (now)

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end​

 

[Truthseeker007]

When you look at the stars you're not seeing the past you are seeing light produced by the star which contains information to form an image of how matter was once arranged. Even if the star has exploded and doesn't exist any more the light from the star is real and exists in the here and now, just as the matter from the star still exists, but in a now different arrangement due to eternal change and motion. Once again, only 'now' exists, but as I said in the last post, even that is an illusion due to your personal video memory of things. Just the same as looking at a photo you're not seeing the past, you are seeing an image of how matter, that's still around 'now', was previously arranged. Only an instantaneous 'now' exists along with its change and motion, not time.

The stars are not in the future, they are in the present, along with everything else, they are changing, rearranging and in motion. The light from the star is a kind of stored image that's travelled a long way, and that is real and exists 'now',
Only 'now' is happening, what you call the past is now just memory of how things were. You're still surrounded by the same stuff from the past, but it's just changed, rearranged and moved.

What you call the future, is only going to be a further change of that same stuff, and since it hasn't changed yet, there isn't a future yet. There's still only a changing 'now'.
The future is not there. Only the changing present is there.

The future is not happening, but it is going to happen, only now is happening now.

That which applies to stars applies to all the things you see. If you watch an animal running then by the time the light from it reaches your eyes, it will have moved to a different position and changed shape. So you never really even see 'now'. You're seeing a slightly delayed mental video of it!

Going back to the star, if you really want to do your mind in, then you need to add relativity. According to that, 'now' becomes even more confusing, as 'now' depends on the speed, position and gravitational experience of the observer. You can never get a universal agreement of when 'now' is. All that's well beyond me, so I'm going (now)

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end​

How you said It makes sense but I guess there are more then one way of seeing things. If I have a picture of my grandpa when he was a kid in my mind I think of that as the past. But yea it also makes sense that I am looking at matter that is now rearranged. On that matter I heard somewhere isn't the light from the sun we are getting today from 1,000 years ago or so? So we won't even live in this time to get the light that the energy the sun has now. What do you make of that?

 

[Catastrophe]

Truthseeker007

You asked: "On that matter I heard somewhere isn't the light from the sun we are getting today from 1,000 years ago or so? So we won't even live in this time to get the light that the energy the sun has now. What do you make of that?"

It is difficult to follow the path of any one photon (if, indeed, that statement means anything at all) but, as theory goes, energy swaps around between photons for (what I regard as) an absurdly long time in the radiative zone (1000 years may be a puny estimate) but once it leaves the photosphere I think it only takes 8 minutes or so to reach us.

As I said, it may be meaningless to try to follow the existence of a single photon as it begins in the gamma ray part of the electromagnetic spectrum and gradually 'degrades' (but not as the same photon) until emitted in visible wavelengths.

Oh well, more coffee is what I need right now ...

Cat

 

[Truthseeker007]

Truthseeker007

You asked: "On that matter I heard somewhere isn't the light from the sun we are getting today from 1,000 years ago or so? So we won't even live in this time to get the light that the energy the sun has now. What do you make of that?"

It is difficult to follow the path of any one photon (if, indeed, that statement means anything at all) but, as theory goes, energy swaps around between photons for (what I regard as) an absurdly long time in the radiative zone (1000 years may be a puny estimate) but once it leaves the photosphere I think it only takes 8 minutes or so to reach us.

As I said, it may be meaningless to try to follow the existence of a single photon as it begins in the gamma ray part of the electromagnetic spectrum and gradually 'degrades' (but not as the same photon) until emitted in visible wavelengths.

Oh well, more coffee is what I need right now ...

Cat

Yes you are correct I was thinking of how long it takes light to get out from the inside of the Sun. Which I found this:

According to the famous 'drunkard's walk' problem, the distance a drunk, making random left and right turns, gets from the lamp post is his typical step size times the square root of the number of steps he takes. For the sun, we know how far we want to go to get out....696,000 kilometers, we just need to know how far a photon travels between emission and absorption, and how long this step takes. This requires a bit of physics!

The interior of the sun is a seathing plasma with a central density of over 100 grams/cc. The atoms, mostly hydrogen, are fully stripped of electrons so that the particle density is 10^26 protons per cubic centimeter. That means that the typical distance between protons or electrons is about (10^26)^1/3 = 2 x 10^-9 centimeters. The actual 'mean free path' for radiation is closer to 1 centimeter after electromagnetic effects are included. Light travels this distance in about 3 x 10^-11 seconds. Very approximately, this means that to travel the radius of the Sun, a photon will have to take (696,000 kilometers/1 centimeter)^2 = 5 x 10^21 steps. This will take, 5x10^21 x 3 x10^-11 = 1.5 x 10^11 seconds or since there are 3.1 x 10^7 seconds in a year, you get about 4,000 years.

NASA IMAGE satellite,Ask the Space Scientist Archive

I love coffee.lol!

 

[Catastrophe]

We have the "Open University" here which is more or less what it says. Opportunities for people to study for qualifications; optionally part time. They produce some excellent literature.
the "Sun and Stars" gave similar information to yours. My copy is 2007 and I got it from Ebay.
You can always supplement it with more up to date information on line. I find it useful as a source of structured information aimed at a certain standard. They actually use the term "random walk".

 

[Truthseeker007]

We have the "Open University" here which is more or less what it says. Opportunities for people to study for qualifications; optionally part time. They produce some excellent literature.
the "Sun and Stars" gave similar information to yours. My copy is 2007 and I got it from Ebay.
You can always supplement it with more up to date information on line. I find it useful as a source of structured information aimed at a certain standard. They actually use the term "random walk".

That sounds interesting. So I take it your not in the US or did I read that wrong? That is a great idea to have a "Open University".

 

[Catastrophe]

That sounds interesting. So I take it your not in the US or did I read that wrong? That is a great idea to have a "Open University".

Correct. I am in the UK midlands near Leicester (pronounced Lester)
Vaguely near Birmingham, England!

 

[Truthseeker007]

Correct. I am in the UK midlands near Leicester (pronounced Lester)
Vaguely near Birmingham, England!

That is cool. I have been meaning to travel to England but have not got around to it yet.

 

[Catastrophe]

That is cool. I have been meaning to travel to England but have not got around to it yet.

England (or UK including Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland).
Seems strange we nearly conquered the world. Such a small country and we could not annex Eire (Ireland) right next door. Just a little bit in the north.

 

[David-J-Franks]

How you said It makes sense but I guess there are more then one way of seeing things. If I have a picture of my grandpa when he was a kid in my mind I think of that as the past. But yea it also makes sense that I am looking at matter that is now rearranged. On that matter I heard somewhere isn't the light from the sun we are getting today from 1,000 years ago or so? So we won't even live in this time to get the light that the energy the sun has now. What do you make of that?

Great subject you've got started, but the 1000years is way too soon

'Steady State of The Infinite' theory
infinite space - infinite universes - no beginning - no end​