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.


"Spacetime has No Time Dimension" -- New Theory Claims that Time is Not the 4th Dimension

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 1 2011 @ 06:17 PM
I explained a lot about my perception of what time is and why the idea of space and time being related in any way is completely false. While we do use time in relation to space to be able to calculate somethings position, that doesn't mean that time and position(space) are related directly. Claiming time as another dimension (aka the 4th dimension) is mislabeling it completely, time isn't a dimension it is nothing more than a variable used in our equations to calculate things in a more detailed and accurate way. The truth is that technically there is no such thing as dimensions, its merely a set of variables based on how we perceive the world around us

Much more info here:

posted on May, 1 2011 @ 06:26 PM
my ideas conflict within myself.

on one hand I believe time in some sense exists. what I am doing now, is not what I was doing then and vice versa.
time passes with each "moment" but only in relation to other "moments".

but on my other, I believe there is no time on a universal scale. it's always been because it can. things that can happen, will happen. the universe happened because it could. no external force necessary. the laws fell into place because they worked, anything that didn't work was ultimately rejected by the other laws.

whichs leaves me where I began.

posted on May, 1 2011 @ 07:36 PM
How could "time" ever be any dimension unless humans directly invented, implemented, and controlled this dimension? Mankind created the concept of time, so if we ever wanted to say that time was a dimension we would first have to create and implement the idea of time into an area where there is no matter or space for it to become its own dimension.

posted on May, 2 2011 @ 05:09 PM
time is whatever.

we label things for reason , time is no exception

isnt it innate to know we predict the future?

posted on May, 2 2011 @ 07:08 PM

Originally posted by MissSmartypants
reply to post by polit

Thank you! Exactly! I have always experienced time as being a concept that we've constructed to give us a way to wrap our minds around the linear quality of our existence. It is not a real "thing". It is an idea. Dimensions are spatial.

If time is fake, then why is space time slower than earth time...?

Why do we age slower in space...

Why do our clocks tick slower in space...

We didnt invent time, it exists because it ticks differently in different locations.

You guys just aren't educated in the field, and frankly I don't wish to be your teacher.

Before you call Einstein a fail, try understanding his theory of space time first....

posted on May, 3 2011 @ 01:41 PM
Dimensions are a property of mathematical spaces. Some mathematical spaces are attempts to analyze physical reality. Euclid invented a 3D mathematical space which serves as an analogy for a frozen moment of reality. Minkowski invented a 4D mathematical space-time which serves as an analogy of physical events with both size and duration. Whether time is a dimension of physical reality is open to question, but time is unquestionably a dimension of Minkowski space-time; it's part of the definition.

Physical reality has properties which are analogous to the dimensions of our invented mathematical spaces. This is the basis of the widespread belief that reality has dimensions. Whether this is true is simply a matter of semantics. Those who attribute dimensions to reality tend to equate the universe with the analogy; and that is a philosophical assessment, not a scientific one.

The number of dimensions attributed to physical reality depends on the number of mathematical dimensions required to analyze reality. Until an absolutely perfect analogy is invented, the number of dimensions in reality remains unknown. Even then, there will be attempts to simplify the analogy and reduce it to the fewest possible dimensions, in keeping with Occam’s razor.

posted on May, 3 2011 @ 01:46 PM
The fourth dimension is really Kung Po Chicken.

Seriously if you are to make such a statement, then you have to unpick an awful lot of
current theories one by one to support your argument.

posted on May, 3 2011 @ 06:57 PM
Any instant in time if infinitely divisible, mathematically speaking. Ergo: there can be no such thing as an 'instant' in time. There can only be intervals, or periods. So, what about the 'instant' of death?

When you die, there is a point when you're still alive and a point when you're dead. In between, there is a period. But as we have already said there is no such thing as an instant in time, there must be a point when you're half-dead, half-alive.

The death process cannot start and end in a (non-existant) single instant. It must happen over a period. What on earth is happening during that period? Is it the soul leaving the body? Something must be happening independently to your body.

Is there a point when you're both dead and alive?
Is there no such thing as death as we know it? Is death just the movement of an ever-present, and ever-in-the-present, consciousness moving into a different state?

Ultimately, I don't think human language is capable of answering such questions. We end up in the swamp of definition.
edit on 3-5-2011 by FOXMULDER147 because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in