[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao the things that live the longest are the tiniest.

what?¿?

acording to this, I will live longer than the universe.........well, long life is waiting for me!?

Originally Posted by AntonioLao once a direction is set, its course cannot be altered.

I strongly disagree with this statement and so, with the concept we were talking about (can't remember the name). Today we had discussion about destiny in social education class ( what I call: wasting our time and money class) and it got quite uinteresting (not as ussually: people my age don't wnat to think: to ask; to know; to understand! I always wonder how they cna live like this,......).

[AntonioLao]

at the quantum level where the distance is Planck length. time and direction are the same thing.

[Guille]

q7,

I find your time theory interesting since I first saw some posts of it a few months ago: In this one you have culminated your explenation.

I have a pair of questions:

what does the Taylor series have to do with your time equation?

just brieflly if you can, explain me what the ! numbers are (n!): I have never met them.

Last, you don't really show in your post why or how can time have 3dimensions: just because objects need it? or your time geometry implies them?

learning for wisdom:
Guille

by saying that we can travel at one without travelling at the other one (space and time), are you indirectly saying that Einstein was wrong and that space and time shouldn't be unifyed by callign them spca-time?

and, to travell a distance we always need time: we can't go at infinite speed. I won't say it also works vce versa because I'm not sure.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE Einstein was wrong and that space and time shouldn't be unifyed by callign them spca-time?

Einstein (circa 1905-1915) was not wrong as much as he is using the improper physical connotations for modern thinkers (circa 2005). But if we rename the 3 space dimensions and 1 time dimension as 4 directions with 8 degrees of freedom then some of the confusions can be eliminated.

what i'm trying to say is that dimension and direction can mean the same thing.

[Marketa]

Time - and even space, but time particularly - is a very subjective thing. Since that we can "travel" in time without travelling in space and travel in space without travelling in time.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by Marketa Time - and even space, but time particularly - is a very subjective thing. Since that we can "travel" in time without travelling in space and travel in space without travelling in time.

I think we can't travell in time without travelling in space and we can't travell in space without travelling in time......

Travelling in space without time, would mean infinite velocity/speed.

Travelling in time without space, would mean no motion, thus, no time.

q7,

for you,

are we, humans, 4 dimensional or not? if not, what dimensions are we in?

Well,

If linear time is actually only an "observational illusion" of the 3d time, then, it doesn't matter: we can say to be 4 dimensional as well as 6 dimensional. But if they are not the same, no.

Thanks for the quick reply to the chat post.


If I don't actually express what I say correctly it's probably because it's 3:45 am here. Yoy must notice from this that I'm not the kind of person that likes sleeping much...

EDIT: When I said "are we, humans,..." I didn't ask about if we were humans, of course, but in the sense of "we, the humans,....." sort of.

[Mr. Nobody]

The connection between energy and time! Does time exist without energy? We perceive our world through reflection of photons. We literally live in the past only, since it takes time for the photons to reach our eyes. A true present time, the moment does not exist in reality.
So, is there a tangable unit of time? Is it the photon?

[dleviwing]

Hi Mr. Nobody;
Dose a bear dodo in the woods? The fact that we cannot or do not observe the actions, dose not mean we cannot deduce the premise to be an axiom by definition. Time itself dose note need to be observed; only if we wish to define the motion of an object do we require a physical reference that misbehaves causing us to make corrections based on Relativity.

[Mr. Nobody]

My bear shits in the woods
I am trying to look beyond time as a measurement for motion or change. I am trying to find a fundamental definition for time (if it exists) as in the spirit of this thread. Maybe it is, as you so anounced, nothing more than the measurement of change, change in location as motion or change in energy. The basic question then becomes: If there is no energy present in the universe, no object in motion, just space, does time still exist? Can time exist without matter, energy? Does the absence of time also mean absence of space? If the universe continues to expand and does not experience a contraction and all energy gets endlessly diluted, will time and space become meaningless?
And what about the arrow of time? The relentless direction towards ever higher entropy?

[JAK]

Originally Posted by Mr. Nobody ... I am trying to find a fundamental definition for time (if it exists) as in the spirit of this thread. ... Can time exist without matter, energy? ...

My vote is for "time" to be separate from "matter" and "energy." If "the big bang" is to be believed, then there was a "before the big bang" and an "after the big bang" Both of these concepts relate to time. The "before" did not have matter or energy.