Modes of Time

[Storm]

Can someone explain spacetime to me? "Time is the fourth dimension of space," but what the hell does that mean?! It just doesn't make sense to me. I don't reject it, for that very reason, but I'm sorely tempted because it strikes me as utterly nonsensical.

First off, is spacetime a theory, or a hypothesis? If the former, how in the world was it tested?

Anyway, even if it's true, it seems to me that there would be two different modes of time. Spacetime, and linear progression. There was still something before the Big Bang.

 

[Super Universe]

Einstein came up with quite a nugget. His theory was based upon little to no actual experimental evidence. He was a dreamer who figured things out purely with mathematics but he had a little secret help from someone you would call "Angel".

Here is my explanation of space/time. You won't find this in any science book.

Space is composed of a type of energy that we know little about, we call it Space/Time. It is formed by energy strings. There are eleven densities of this space/time but only the seven outward most densities are of sufficient density to be considered material. Each space/time density surrounds an earlier (prior formed) density just like the peel surrounds the orange. At the center of all densities is God and heaven.

God emits energy strings that vibrate as they travel outward. Now, think of the energy strings as being emitted from a base to create a fountain of golden strings that fly upward (really outward). Think of these strings as being one dimensional objects (having only length and no width or height). As these strings travel outward from heaven they vibrate which forms the densities. The strings change frequency as they get farther away from their source which causes the effect of time. This also causes space/time to change, as you get farther from heaven space/time becomes MORE dense. So, closer to heaven time is slower, farther from heaven time is faster. This is why the bible says that to them 1,000 years is like a day.

The Big Bang was simply a very short opening of a higher density. Energy poured through and condensed into what we call matter. What we consider our universe is the outward most density in a series of densities that surround.

We are about as far from heaven as you can get, still we are as close as you can get as well because God connects to us with the soul and information is transmitted instantaneously. He experiences His great creation through you.

 

[Storm]

Here is my explanation of space/time. You won't find this in any science book.

I was asking about physics, not the Urantia book.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Here is the wiki....good luck :areyoucra

Spacetime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[michel]

Urgh....I am far too uninteligent to understand that; it reminds me of when I was told by my physics lecturer that parallel lines meet at infinity.:cover:

 

[Storm]

Here is the wiki....good luck :areyoucra

Spacetime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Over my head, but thanks for trying.

 

[Super Universe]

I was asking about physics, not the Urantia book.

Sigh... so you ask a Physics question on a religious forum and then complain when you don't get a purely scientific answer?

Also, nothing I posted came from the Urantia Book.

 

[Storm]

Sigh... so you ask a Physics question on a religious forum and then complain when you don't get a purely scientific answer?

Also, nothing I posted came from the Urantia Book.

I've deleted three replies because they were just mean. "So why don't we just ignore each other till we go away?"

 

[tumbleweed41]

Sigh... so you ask a Physics question on a religious forum and then complain when you don't get a purely scientific answer?

Also, nothing I posted came from the Urantia Book.

Science VS Religion thread.
Since your answer deals in pseudoscience mixed with religion, it is in the wrong thread.
Moving on....:run:

 

[themadhair]

Can someone explain spacetime to me? "Time is the fourth dimension of space," but what the hell does that mean?!

Let me have a bash at simplifying this.

Basic idea - every object is travelling at a constant speed. That’s it in a nutshell. Every object travelling through spacetime has a constant speed.

How does this work? If you are stationary in the spatial dimensions you would be travelling through the temporal with a speed X. If you move through the spatial dimensions with a speed S, your speed through the temporal dimension would decrease to (X-S). Basically the faster you move through the spatial dimensions the slower you travel through the temporal dimension.

This was the crux of Einstein’s realisation and what connects the spatial dimensions to the temporal one. This reduction of speed through the temporal dimension has been experimentally verified - Time dilation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Einstein also realised the effect of gravity on spacetime but that’s a discussion for another day. The above is the connection in the most basic way I can think of expressing it.

You won't find this in any science book.

And with good reason.

 

[linwood]

You should point Mr.Spinkles to this thread.

He`ll give you an answer you can understand.
It still won`t make any material sense but at least it`ll be understandable and then he and I can go on endlessly debating the possibilities of the hypothesis yet again.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Let me have a bash at simplifying this.

Good job.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Additionally, the effects of time dilation are measurable. In fact, GPS would not work without taking relativistic effects into account.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Can someone explain spacetime to me? "Time is the fourth dimension of space," but what the hell does that mean?! It just doesn't make sense to me. I don't reject it, for that very reason, but I'm sorely tempted because it strikes me as utterly nonsensical.

I think you raised two different issues:

- what does "time is the fourth dimension" mean?
- what is spacetime?

In regard to your first question, maybe it would help to think of things mathematically: any quantifiable property can be thought of as a variable... i.e. a dimension for the purposes of an equation. However, only certain variables are completely independent.

For example, say I want to come up with a mathematical function that represents every point within this room. Let's call it f, where f equals air pressure, say. What determines f? Well, it might be a number of things:

- distance from an open window
- wind speed and angle outside
- location relative to objects in the room
- etc., etc.

If you break each of these things down, you can express each one as its own function of measurements along basic dimensions:
- distance from the open window is a function of the x, y and z co-ordinates measured from some reference point.
- wind speed and wind angle are functions of time as the wind changes
- location relative to objects in the room is a function of both spatial co-ordinates (i.e. where you are and where the object is) but also potentially of time: if the curtains are fluttering or the cat is walking across the floor, then your location is a function of time as well.

However, you can't express time as a function of the spatial dimensions x, y and z, and f depends on time; there's no single answer for f(x,y,z); you need a fourth variable to get an answer: f(x,y,z,t).

First off, is spacetime a theory, or a hypothesis? If the former, how in the world was it tested?

I'm not sure if you're talking about relativity here, but it seems like you might be. Our movement in space affects the passage of time for us. This effect is only really measurable with very precise instruments or at extreme conditions, but it is measurable. Gravity affects the passage of time. Speed affects the passage of time. For the most part, testing this just comes down to taking two ultra-precise clocks, synching them, subjecting them to different gravitational fields or speeds, and then seeing how much they're different.

Also, we can test this by looking at distant stars and galaxies. Remember the Doppler effect from science class? Well, it applies to light as well. When we make astronomical observations, the frequency of the light is shifted by the Doppler effect - we call this redshift. However, when we observe objects moving close to the speed of light, we see that the redshift that we predict using classical equations is off: the frequency it predicts isn't the frequency we see. The difference between the two is due to relativistic effects: the movement of the object through space has effected how time passes for it.

Redshift - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyway, even if it's true, it seems to me that there would be two different modes of time. Spacetime, and linear progression. There was still something before the Big Bang.

I think you may be confusing concepts here. Spacetime is what we move through as time passes; linear progression is how we move through it.

 

[Shahzad]

There are two ways to look at time. The first one is the familiar four dimensional spacetime of general relativity, which is the classical view. In this view time is a continuum which objects move through, each tracing it's worldline. However, this view breaks down in quantum mechanics, being incompatible. Since the universe is a quantum mechanical system one ought to have a quantum description of time, which we don't have.

Time is better thought of as state transition. Fundamentals particles changing their states according to the laws of quantum mechanics, whenever a particle's wavefunction collapses into a new state, that's a moment in time.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

The most important thing to understand relativity is to examine the results of physics experiments. The results are strange. Strange results sometimes require strange explanations.

 

[Super Universe]

The most important thing to understand relativity is to examine the results of physics experiments. The results are strange. Strange results sometimes require strange explanations.

Then how do you explain Einstein's theories? There was NO experimental evidence leading to the Theory of Relativity and space also being time. He came up with it completely out of the blue and put it on a chalkboard, hardly experimental.

 

[themadhair]

Then how do you explain Einstein's theories? There was NO experimental evidence leading to the Theory of Relativity and space also being time. He came up with it completely out of the blue and put it on a chalkboard, hardly experimental.

Two very key points you may not have been aware of:

1) Newtonian gravitation is a first approximation of the equations of general relativity. This, combined with GR's explanation of the then anomalous Mercury orbit, meant that his ideas were on sound theoretical grounds from the start. These were key reasons for their early reception.

2) Einstein's theories made definite testable predictions. By producing such testable predictions GR provided the means to verify or disprove the theory.

 

[Super Universe]

Two very key points you may not have been aware of:

1) Newtonian gravitation is a first approximation of the equations of general relativity. This, combined with GR's explanation of the then anomalous Mercury orbit, meant that his ideas were on sound theoretical grounds from the start. These were key reasons for their early reception.

2) Einstein's theories made definite testable predictions. By producing such testable predictions GR provided the means to verify or disprove the theory.

Space is Time? No evidence anywhere suggested this. No prior experiment even came close. Like a massless particle exceeding the speed of EMR this idea was over 100 years ahead of it's time.

It seems the point you are trying to make is that no one should postulate any theory that is not immediately testable, one of the typical arguments against String Theory. You might have to accept that this might not be possible. How can you test whether or not another density of space/time or dimension exists while you and your test are in this one? Still, other dimensions might well be there.

And so I ask you, how did Einstein come up with his idea of Space/Time with absolutely NO experimental evidence suggesting it?

 

[fantome profane]

First let me give you a very simple answer.

Can someone explain spacetime to me? "Time is the fourth dimension of space," but what the hell does that mean?! It just doesn't make sense to me. I don't reject it, for that very reason, but I'm sorely tempted because it strikes me as utterly nonsensical.

You are absolutely right. To say that "Time is the fourth dimension of space," is nonsense. Your instinct are bang on (good for you).

What you should say instead is that “time is the fourth dimension of spacetime”. Space is not spacetime. Even if you don’t understand that at the moment keep it in mind. I am not quibbling, it is an important difference.

Ok, moving on. 4 dimensional spacetime consists of 3 dimensions of space plus one dimension of time. Lets imagine that you and I decide to meet somewhere in New York City. So how many points of information would you have to give me (or I give you) to insure that we do actually meet? Well you could give me the location that you intend to meet me, the longitude(1) and latitude(2) and since New York contains many tall buildings you might also have to tell me what floor to go to – height(3). So there are three coordinates that refer to the three dimensions of space. But obviously this is not enough information, you will also have to tell me what time(4) you want to meet. So there you have time being the fourth dimension of spacetime. Every point in our four dimensional universe* can be defined by four coordinates.

(string theory says there are 10 dimensions, 9 space +time, and M theory says there are 11 dimensions, 10 space + time – but that is way to complicated for the moment).