[RascalPuff]

Again, this elicits a question: If we are to seriously consider gravity as a repelling force, how might it be meaningfully construed as such? That is to say, how do we apply Newton's Gravitational Alternative, combined with Einstein's General Principle, to correspond with the anthropomorphic Gravitational Experience?

We will return to this question and its answer by way of a brief comparative investigation of what relationship if any exists between Einstein's concept of gravity, derived from the General Theory Of Relativity, and Einstein's concept of the 4th Dimension, which is also, as we shall see, more than coincidentally derived from the General Theory Of Relativity.

A brief review the definition of dimensions as applied to the Three recognized Dimensions of Space, follows. Let it be qualified firstly that, in colloquial language, the term 'dimensions' may be correctly applied to any number of descriptions, such as 'dimensions' of music or thought or color for example. But, in physics there is only one definition for dimensions. Which we will reconsider, immediately after the following statement concerning contemporary academic physics and its representative posturing toward the subject of the (Einstein's) allegedly 'acknowledged' *4th Dimension (*of 'time and motion').

Mathematicians and physicists are of the consensus agreement that, when the definition of the 4th Dimension is applied to Reality-At-Large as Einstein proved it is in fact, then one automatically departs the realm of conscious experience and comprehensibility. This is the reason for example, that in one renowned case the reputedly omniscient, ever-present yet conceptually elusive 4th Dimension was professionally referenced as, 'a mathematical abstraction on anyone's wrist-watch'. This is also the reason the 4th Dimension is a favorite conscript among science fiction writers and metaphysicists.

There is unflappable security in speculations and improvisations of a subject, about which there is no recognized non-mathematical comprehension; no recognized absolutes or authorities (when the allegory expert falsely emerges everywhere, waxing of discovery, while swearing his subject is functionally unfindable).

A haven for befuddled academic refugees. A jingoistic proving ground that endorses (and/or ambivalently disqualifies) everything and/or anything; according to the needs of the sometimes desperately ignorant, pretentious, scientifically name-saked 'authorities' and historical revisionists. Innocent ignorance is exonerated in this consideration.

No discourse on the 4th Dimension, whether it be physics or science fiction, would be complete without directly suggesting that it is 'unimaginable', or, 'incomprehensible', or 'something else', or 'someplace else' ('far out').

Yet, it is agreed that the 4th Dimension is 'time & motion' ; somehow integrally combined with the 3 recognized Dimensions of Space; existing always and everywhere. Therefore we need very little imagination or faith in Einstein, to know that we are perpetually witnessing and experiencing the 4th Dimension, in simply being conscious of the reality we are part of; by which we are constantly surrounded.

We can correctly go one step further. We can be confident that the 4th Dimension has been, and continues to be overlooked. That is, we can know that some very fundamental constituent or phenomenon of reality - with which we are all familiar, but which has yet to be recognized, is the 4th Dimension. The 4-Dimensional space-time continuum to be exact.

Today's physical scientists tell us that 'the 4th Dimension is time and motion'. They say this because they know Einstein proved it mathematically. But it is not a non-mathematically satisfactory answer; because it does not contribute to any further comprehension of what the 4th Dimension is, relative to The colloquial 3-Dimensional Experience.

Time and Motion are measurable and comprehensible in Three Dimensions. Why not in 4? What is it about proven and measured 4-dimensional reality, that has not been recognized? Why has it not been recognized?
The Physical Dimensions, 1 thru 4 (Revisited):
The mathematical definition for the 4th Dimension is also the geometric definition. In order to consider the geometric definition for the 4th Dimension we will first review the singularly scientific and formal definition for the Three recognized Dimensions of Space. Then we will consider the 4th Dimension's relationship if any, to Einstein's General Principle of Relativity and/or Newton's Gravitational Alternative.
(Refer to Drawing 1 Illustrations 1 & 2)

The (only known; geometric; metrically spatial) definition for physical dimensions, begins with no dimensions whatsoever - specifically a geometric point. We will call it 'point zero ('0'). Any motion of point '0' will inevitably be at right angles from itself, and, any motion, at any speed, for any length of time, generates a One Dimensional Straight Line 'O' - 'A', of arbitrary length.

It cannot be a curved line yet, because it has no dimension(s) to curve into. It may become a longer or shorter One Dimensional Straight Line, but it cannot change its dimensional quality until it moves at right angles (90 degrees, perpendicular) from itself (again). Then it generates a Two Dimensional Plane 'A'- 'B'.

When a Two Dimensional Plane ('A'-'B') moves at right angles to itself (yet a third time), it generates a Space and/or Solid 'B'-'C' of Three Dimensions.
(Picture a line-drawn cube; progressively generated from 0 dimensions to 3-Dimensions: by the right angle extrapolation of the geometric point 0, to 0-A, generating a One Dimensional Straight Line <0------->A>.

The Straight Line 0-A then moving at right angles to itself, generating A-B Two Dimensional Plane. The Two Dimensional Plane A-B moving at right angles to itself B-C; generating a Three Dimensional Solid, occupied or occupiable-by 3-dimensional matter).

The rule here is the right angle/perpendicular projection of each dimension from out of the preceding dimension. This is how physical dimensions are generated, hence, this is their singular physical and philological definition.

That leaves us here and now with the conceptual-geometric credentials to contemplate the Three recognizable Dimensions of Space occupied - or occupiable - by matter. A familiar enough concept; by-way of its Universal physical-conditional manifestation in the entire reception of physical-sensory, instrumental and therefore psychological-conceptual human experience (at large).

[neutralino]

I've never heard of the fourth dimension to be called "time and motion"; the fourth dimension in Einsteinian gravity is time. That is, it is the fourth dimension of a four dimensional spacetime manifold of which the remaining three dimensions are spatial dimensions. I don't understand your questioning of "what are dimensions." The number of dimensions of a space(time) are the number of degrees of freedom, or the number of coordinates that one needs to give to a point in order to determine its position uniquely. In four dimensional spacetime, this is 4; (t,x,y,z). Note that there is nothing to do with motion here; I can slice through the spacetime at a particular moment, and find the position of the particle, whether it is moving or not.

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by neutralino I've never heard of the fourth dimension to be called "time and motion"; the fourth dimension in Einsteinian gravity is time. That is, it is the fourth dimension of a four dimensional spacetime manifold of which the remaining three dimensions are spatial dimensions. I don't understand your questioning of "what are dimensions." The number of dimensions of a space(time) are the number of degrees of freedom, or the number of coordinates that one needs to give to a point in order to determine its position uniquely. In four dimensional spacetime, this is 4; (t,x,y,z). Note that there is nothing to do with motion here; I can slice through the spacetime at a particular moment, and find the position of the particle, whether it is moving or not.

Einstein's tensor equations find the 4th dimension to be prevalent in all matter. All matter is in motion. Motion is interchangeably synonymous with time (the interval - distance - between two or more events). The definitional context of dimensions at issue here is that of right angle motion - perpendicularity - relative to preceding coordinates, as described and illustrated in the subected text. Until further notice, there are no particles that are not in motion. You may slice through time with calculus or other non metric mathematical means, but you cannot flash freeze a moving particle in real - metric - time. In lieu of 0o K being observed or achieved in the laboratory, everything has something to do with motion (Timotion).

[ThirdWorld]

Yet, it is agreed that the 4th Dimension is 'time & motion' ;

*** Time and motion sounds like two things to me. Do you mean 4th and 5th dimensions?

Further a dimension is a fundamental quantity that is independent of all other quantities. However, motion depends on space and time therefore it is not a dimension but can be reduced in every case to its constituent parts.

This in my view is one of the blunders Einstein also made and it has led to the erroneous theory of time dilation: he [ or his advocates] seem/s to be taking the velocity of a photon as equivalent to time so that if you travel as fast as a photon and the photon appears to stand still that to him means that time is standing still.

This is clearly an elementary view and a thinker of a century ago can be pardoned for holding such a view but not thinkers of this modern era: I think better is expected of us.

Actually, I am quite willing to consider math that deals with 5 dimensions: three for space, one time and one matter/ mass. I might even be convinced by math that talks of 11 dimensions if they can show that orientation and location need also to be each defined by three spatial dimensions separate from the three required for size in order to completely describe an object in space.

Anything apart from this has to be false math in my view.

Roger

[RascalPuff]

Time and motion =
Timotion.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Time and motion = Timotion.

Time and motion cause me to reflect to a time many years ago,when i did some temporary work in a factory where there was time and motion study going on,this
resulted in the men working faster for less money,(more for less)is that expansion?



regards michael.

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Time and motion cause me to reflect to a time many years ago,when i did some temporary work in a factory where there was time and motion study going on,this resulted in the men working faster for less money,(more for less)is that expansion? regards michael.

It may indeed be, Michael, and here is a form of inflation:

***The whole concoction about 4-D space-time Dimension and 4-Dimensional expansion are just slights of the hands of a trickster/ magician to distract the audience from the inevitable errors in this theory.

All it is trying to say is that the universe is expanding in volume and it is doing so in a manner that results in all its constituent parts [planets etc] accelerating outwards as opposed to moving with constant velocity.

It is further alleging that this acceleration is responsible for gravity in the same way the accelerating elevator causes "weight".

This is not the most disingenuous theory I have heard but it is nonetheless incorrect.

If you try to stand below the floor of the elevator that is accelerating upwards you will experience no force: you must stand on [ie at the top of] the floor to experience this force.

In like manner, if gravity was being caused in the way Einstein explained then those on one side of the earth [ ie on top] will experience g forces whereas those obliquely opposite [ie those down under] will fall off.

Further this theory cannot explain why the person in the upward accelerating elevator experiences weight/ g-like forces in the fist place. It cannot explain inertia or reluctance to move: why are objects reluctant to move?

Roger
(Third World)
_______________________

(Good to hear from you, Michael. - RP)

[RascalPuff]

Double entry

[Mohsen]

So, what happened to world expansion. Let's go back to the main topic.

Let's outline the facts based on most popular theories,

The burst of energy at the time of Big Bang created the initial rapid inflation of space.

The residual expansion had continued for another 7 billion years.

Mattr creation increased the gravity which have slowed down the expansion.

It is proposed that the space expansion of the next seven billion years is due to dark energy.

The nature of dark energy is not known.

The expansion of the universe is accelerating is accelerating.

If the matter density in the universe is constant (critical density), Then matter creation has to continue along the space expansion.

The above are few points which should be able to to bring the discusssion in the track.

Cheers

[ThirdWorld]

It may indeed be, Michael, and here is a form of inflation: ***The whole concoction about 4-D space-time Dimension and 4-Dimensional expansion are just slights of the hands of a trickster/ magician ...

*** Ok, I see you are not interested in engaging in intelligent debate about the ideas you are proposing so I will leave you to engage yourself and those who might be entertained by your posts.

Roger