The fourth dimension is not time, but why?

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Bishwas Bhandari, Nov 20, 2021.

  1. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,515
    This statement is wrong.

    Just as your grasp of physics is tenuous, it seems that your grasp of grade school formulaic manipulation is likewise too tenuous. Hint: You have the units wrong.

    And that should be a clear indicator to you that you literally do not know what you are talking about.

    Have some humility. Go study.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2021
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,319
    One of those reoccurring, great enigmas: Why people squabbling about a four dimensional framework refer to Einstein comments about special relativity.

    It's like debating whether or not Neil Armstrong flubbed his "That's one small step..." line by citing details of his earlier Gemini 11 flight.

    At the start, Einstein rejected Minkowski's interpretation of his first theory as "superfluous learnedness". But soon changed his mind, with it being a springboard and inspirational trigger to produce his GR, since Minkowski's model did not address gravity.

    Cornelius Lanczos: "At a time when Minkowski was giving the geometrical interpretation of special relativity by extending the Euclidean three-space to a quasi-Euclidean four-space that included time, Einstein was already aware that this is not valid, because it excludes the phenomenon of gravitation. He was still far from the study of curvilinear coordinates and Riemannian geometry, and the heavy mathematical apparatus entailed. "

    Vesselin Petkov: Not only the general public, but even students of physics appear to believe that the physics concept of spacetime was introduced by Einstein. This is both unfortunate and unfair. It was Hermann Minkowski (Einstein's mathematics professor) who announced the new four-dimensional (spacetime) view of the world in 1908, which he deduced from experimental physics by decoding the profound message hidden in the failed experiments designed to discover absolute motion. Minkowski realized that the images coming from our senses, which seem to represent an evolving three-dimensional world, are only glimpses of a higher four-dimensional reality that is not divided into past, present, and future since space and all moments of timeform an inseparable entity (spacetime).

    Einstein's initial reaction to Minkowski's view of spacetime and the associated with it four dimensional physics (also introduced by Minkowski) was not quite favorable: "Since the mathematicians have invaded the relativity theory, I do not understand it myself any more. However, later Einstein adopted [...] Minkowski's spacetime physics (which was crucial for Einstein's revolutionary theory of gravity as curvature of spacetime)...
    --Space and Time Minkowski’s Papers on Relativity

    Again, before the developments of "Mink" and GR. Whether ultimately correct or not, they had their own origin for the supposed "flow" back then.

    The rough idea of a "block-universe" was hardly new; mathematicians of the late 19th-century first introduced the conception of time fitting a 4D profile. With H.G. Wells reading their material and outputting "The Time Machine" in 1895. At the very first of that tale, his "traveler" explains that it is not time that flows, but consciousness -- or cognition via its discrimination into a sequence of incremental, distinct states and experiences. (Wells appropriated that from the applicable experts of the era, too).

    The brain becomes a dimensionally extended worm-like form in a block-universe paradigm, with each of its differing, but co-existing neural states regarding itself as a solipistic island of "now". Each narrowly treats only its own experience as real, not the others. But the sequential development of shared memory subsumes them under an overarching identity that -- combined with that order and "logic" of cognition -- yields the cinematic illusion of something flowing.

    Hermann Weyl: "The objective world simply IS, it does not HAPPEN. Only to the gaze of my consciousness, crawling upward along the life line [4D worm] of my body, does a certain section of this world come to life as a fleeting image in space which continuously changes in time." --Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2021
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,585

    Nope. You did your math wrong.
    Indeed.
     
    Kristoffer likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,526
    IMO, Time is a not a separate dimension, but a single permittive condition that incorporates all 3 physical dimensions. Regardless of direction in the 3 D space it always involves a mathematical permission that becomes measurable after the beginning of an event in any or all of the 3 D physical dimensions.

    The name spacetime suggests the inclusion of time regardless of direction or duration of change.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    World line, worldsheet, and world volume, as they are derived from particles, strings, and branes.

    What is time?
    http://sciforums.com/attachments/what-is-time-3-pdf.4525/

    But time itself has no independent existence apart from space. Outside space there is a timeless permittive condition of nothingness.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  8. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,149
    Regarding e = mc² that equates to a lot of energy

    Was Einstein aware of how much energy, in that he had calculated the amount? It is strange in that e = m is fine since it had been established m was in essence compressed energy

    But from whence cometh the speed of light squared?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389
    I posted before the formulas of Einstein stated temporally instead of time.

    Your inputs are very welcome and it's time to reveal more about Einstein's ideas about time when is about mathematics and when is about physical reality.

    Neither Einstein or Minkowski were scientists doing experimental work but mathematicians. Einstein tried once to do experimental work but his attempts failed and he quited.

    For Minkowsky, Einstein said, "time passed from a happening into an existence" which will cause a fourth dimensional world. Here is where Minkowski was wrong.

    Then, Einstein explained that it happens that for him, in the world of mathematics, the word dimension acquires a different meaning. He expanded himself saying that in mathematics calling time a fourth dimension simply means a fourth variable which is inserted into a equation which will cover events, because events ocurr not only inside the three dimensional world but also in an instant in time.

    For Einstein a fourth dimension of time in mathematics was just a variable inserted in his formulas representing an instant in time. For this reason his interpretation of this instant was called by him t = temporally.

    Eventually, under the influence of Minkowski and by inertia of stupidity, Einstein himself also ended adopting the idea of a phyisical fourth dimensional space-time continuum in his theories.

    He never understood his own theory. For example, when he was asked what is time, he responded: time is what clocks measure.

    His position was far away from describing physical reality, and in his own world of abstract mathematics, the bodies acted in a perfect path and behavior. His ideas of constant speed of light, a top speed of light, light never expiring if no resistance is on its way, and similar ideas, those fit perfectly in his theories but no so in the real physical universe.

    Sure, if such was what The Time Machine was about, then hypnosis rather than a machine shoukld be the vedette in that novel.

    Your example does not imply a feeling of flowing of time but a linear sequence of memories. What it causes the illusion of flowing time is just percepotion of motion compared to a clock or any regular motion. You don't need a clock but perceiving the Sun disappearing at the horizon in a bored day with no much to do, and you will feel time passed slow. It is a bunch of inserted concepts or ideas in your mind combined with events around you.

    In simply words, only the objective things in the present exists. I discovered a law about this issue. It is food for another topic in another opportunity.
     
  10. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,503
    You are so clueless, you should really quit while you are behind...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Kristoffer likes this.
  11. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,348
    If I recall my 6-7th grade maths Dumbald lost by over 7 million votes, but I could be wrong and I might have forgot to square Biden's votes in Arizona...
    Or Luchito is just a dumbass from Putin's trollfarm...
     
  12. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,158
    Hmm, no, I think there are signs of genuine stupidity here. If he's a St. Petersbug troll, the fakery is nothing short of brilliant.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,526
    And that's true. Time is a mathematical variable. Until it is associated with a physical event or chronology. At that time, time becomes part of the equation where "t" is a real component of the mathematical expression.
    You're missing the point that the universe is a physical phenomenon and has time (of duration) as a real component of the mathematical equation.

    Hence, spacetime. Not space + time, or space-time. After the inflationary epoch , space became spacetime, as it is today. The Universe is now represented as the "worldline" (age) of spacetime, which has time as a real property of the object itself.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2021
  14. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389
    Well, Einstein "quited" the experimental side of science because such was "quite" right doing so, not so he "quitted" because he was a zero at left side of numbers, even when he was.

    I can't quit reviewing science theories, somebody must do it.
     
  15. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389
    A political view in a science discussion, very interesting.... that was not trolling but drolling...
     
  16. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389
    I'm glad you are catching up.

    But to be honest with you, in reality Einstein never said " in mathematics calling time a fourth dimension simply means a fourth variable which is inserted into a equation which will cover events, because events ocurr not only inside the three dimensional world but also in an instant in time." I added that part. He only said we live in a space-time continuum. (no wonder the other guys above said I'm from Russia... because telling stories...)

    The point here is the boundaries between real physical world and a variable in a mathematical equation. Poor Einstein took the wrong way when empirical scientists looked for mathematicians help to explain nature. The conflict caused by such different meanings of what a dimension is is physics and mathematics caused doubts to he himself.

    You must be aware that your spacetime is the name of a creature of yours, like my last pet was named Copper. In the physical universe there are only three dimensions, and the rest are addicionals which are conditioned to different factors. Time is a measure conditioned to the finding of a regular or fixed motion ussed to be compared to other motion or decay.

    If you don't obtain a regular motion, as a day, a year or the vibration frequency of the atom of Cesium, then you can't figure time.

    If you don't have clocks (calibrated devices with fixed functional work) then you only see things moving around and the concept time won't be ever imagined.

    But you can perceive everything that is under the other three dimensions, and mathematical calculations are not needed for this perception.

    The physical universe is understood by observing it, and mathematics weren't to be the explainers of it but just the givers of amounts to settle better the understanding.
     
  17. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,503
    You are still clueless about about physics. If you are interested in physics, I suggest you learn some physics. Who knows you might enjoy it.
     
  18. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,526
    Yes, it seems you are misunderstanding what he meant by that.
    Yes, we do live in the spacetime continuum of this universe. Since the BB the Universe already has a worldline which consists of 3 spatial dimensions plus one temporal dimension. This is how we can represent the age of the universal spacetime as being 13.8 billion years old by our standards.
     
  19. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,515
    Is that so?

    By your "perception", just how far is it to the Andromeda galaxy, or any other galaxy?

    No mathematical calculations means no measurements of Cepheid Variables and no use of the Cosmic Distance Ladder.

    (Oh. Right, you don't know what those are.)
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2021
  20. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389
    Temporal measurement, not temporal dimension.

    Temporal measurement because will change continually.

    The misunderstranding comes from both of you: you and that loony dude, the inventor of those Relativity theories.
     
  21. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,158


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,515
    Nah. He's not cuckoo. That would give him an excuse.

    He's just troll, looking for attention. (I think we're supposed to gasp that a brave rebel would dare impugn the holy name of Einstein.)
     
  23. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389
    Oh, my rough calculation using my telescope, I can say those are located at the end of the world plus four more street blocks.

    Why you make science so complicated for you?

    Again, mathematics is nothing but amounts.

    You won't explain anyone what is life in base of numbers, equations, formulas. You are going to use those in order to acquire amounts and these amounts will be used to back up your explanation.

    Of course, if you use abstract mathematics, those amounts will be just entertainment.
     

Share This Page