It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"Will Time Be Replaced by a New Dimension?"

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 30 2008 @ 10:24 AM
An ATS search for this particular article showed no relevant results.
If I have missed them, please remove the thread.

An interesting article from The Universe Today:

Will Time Be Replaced by a New Space Dimension?

[edit on 30-5-2008 by Vanitas]

posted on May, 30 2008 @ 11:33 AM
Very interesting.

Is this what is coming in 2012?

posted on May, 30 2008 @ 12:14 PM
It seems the jury is out. And has been.
I'm not sure how many dimensions there are in M-theory, but Plasma Cosmology only considers four.
There's some strong new math that indicates TWO time dimensions. And some other people say there is no time.

posted on May, 30 2008 @ 12:45 PM
reply to post by djerwulfe

... and the String Theory has eleven - and the Kabbalah, of course, has ten.

I hear you...
But the fact that the "jury" IS out, for legitimate reasons, is interesting enough.

P.S. Where is the other reply that the main page, with all the threads, is showing for this thread...? In some other dimension? :-)

[edit on 30-5-2008 by Vanitas]

posted on May, 30 2008 @ 01:35 PM
... and I repeat:

Where IS the third (now fourth) reply?

What's going on?

posted on May, 30 2008 @ 01:51 PM
my 2 bits, regardless if its thought provoking or paradigm shifting ....

Time, is not a seperate thing as in a dimension part or component.
Time itself is tied to and interlaced with everything observed and present in this 3 dimensional, material universe... declaring 'time' as a 4th element is merely a theoretical, higher mathematics, exercise for the academics in the world.

When it comes to another 'dimension' lets include the boson, higgin thingy...
where mere contemplative observation either creates reality or fashions the world as we see it into a present reality, measurements being instantaneous instead of traversing 'time-space' at the slower 'speed-of-light'

~or something to that effect - if the theoretical physiscists haven't already pit that into their bag of tricks & paradoxes ~

posted on May, 30 2008 @ 08:08 PM
reply to post by St Udio

I agree with this general idea of what "dimensions" might be - and I thought that's what they meant, too...?

top topics


log in