Notices
Results 1 to 22 of 22
Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By Daecon
  • 1 Post By KJW
  • 1 Post By Schneibster

Thread: Is time an asymmetrical dimension?

  1. #1 Is time an asymmetrical dimension? 
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    I was pondering about the idea of an asymmetrical dimension, one where instead of left/right, up/down, front/rear being equal "both ways" there could (in theory) be a dimension where there is a bias in one of the two directions, creating an asymmetry.

    I think that this description would seem to apply to Time. I'm not sure what the notion of an asymmetrical spacial dimension could imply, though. Perhaps if such a notion was plausible then it could lead to the idea that the universe has some kind of polarization (which I'm sure has already been theorized and disproved) unless our reference point of Planet Earth is no more than a single point from a three-dimensional Universe's perspective, in which case the experimental distances we have to work with are too short for it to be physically possible to tell. But now I just feel like I'm rambling.

    The thought of Time being an asymmetrical dimension is really no more than at the "flash of inspiration" stage at this point, but I thought I'd throw the idea out there and see what happens.


    Schneibster likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    The general consensus seems to be that time does indeed have a direction associated with it.
    However in his book The Grand Design Steven Hawking says that there is no unique history for the universe. He says that the present has to be treated as the sum of all possible paths, just like Feynman says you must do for subatomic particles. So if you go backwards you end up with the past just as unpredictable as the future is. I think that would destroy the idea that there is any arrow to time and make it a symetric dimension.

    I went looking for a quote to back this answer up and went through the wikipedia page on his book. It had a list of criticisms of the book.
    Surprisingly to me most of the criticisms were about his statement rejecting God.
    I would think his comments about time are much more disturbing than his comment about religion.
    After all, we can all remember our history.

    The Hyperphysics page that criticizes/summarizes his book only wastes one line on his comment about history not existing


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Ohio, U.S.
    Posts
    17
    I'm not sure what the notion of an asymmetrical spacial dimension could imply, though.
    Is time a spacial dimension? I don't think so. You cannot go a time away, but you can go a distance away. So what would you call that kind of dimension?
    It's not that I'm smarter than everybody else, it's just that I stick with problems longer. -Albert Einstein
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    Time isn't a spacial dimension, I think it would be called a "temporal" one?

    An asymmetrical spacial dimension would be one where it's easier to move through space in one direction than in the opposite direction. For example, you could go left twice as fast as you could go right, or that you can't move to the right at all and are only able to move left. If that makes sense?

    The notion of an asymmetrical spacial dimension seems rather silly, but the idea that you can only move forwards in time and not backwards in time would seem to match with this idea of an asymmetrical dimension, but a temporal dimension and not a spacial one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    KJW
    KJW is offline
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,562
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    However in his book The Grand Design Steven Hawking says that there is no unique history for the universe. He says that the present has to be treated as the sum of all possible paths, just like Feynman says you must do for subatomic particles. So if you go backwards you end up with the past just as unpredictable as the future is. I think that would destroy the idea that there is any arrow to time and make it a symetric dimension.
    It seems to me that there is a problem with this view. When we apply a "sum over all histories" to calculate the probability of a future state, we only use those histories that follow from the known initial state. From the many-worlds perspective, we don't include the alternative pasts in calculating the future. It could be said that we are quantum entangled with the past. However, I think Hawking is correct in the sense that from a given state, we can't calculate the past that led to that state. The unitarity of quantum state evolution implies that running the equations backward is the same as running them forward, and in the many-worlds interpretation, there is no wavefunction collapse so the evolution of the universal wavefunction is strictly unitary.
    dan hunter likes this.
    There are no paradoxes in relativity, just people's misunderstandings of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Maybe we just perceive time the way we do because we change along with everything else, in the same way. Everything changes in a certain way (based on physics), and we therefore perceive it that way because of the way our brains work (the state of our brains depends on the past but not the future) and physics.
    Why do things change differently going forward in time than backwards? In other words, why does time have a much more uniform structure than other dimensions?
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    215
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Time isn't a spacial dimension, I think it would be called a "temporal" one?

    An asymmetrical spacial dimension would be one where it's easier to move through space in one direction than in the opposite direction. For example, you could go left twice as fast as you could go right, or that you can't move to the right at all and are only able to move left. If that makes sense?

    The notion of an asymmetrical spacial dimension seems rather silly, but the idea that you can only move forwards in time and not backwards in time would seem to match with this idea of an asymmetrical dimension, but a temporal dimension and not a spacial one.
    To continue to exist in the present is a balancing act. Humans are almost perfect at maintaining the balance as we record the past while anticipating the future. This also makes us good predators so we can fuel ourselves. If you believe time is an open system like yourself its concept is straight forward. Think of it as a car motor which has an endless supply of air and fuel. The present is the cylinder moving up the past is the cylinder moving down the exhaust is the production of space. Both past and present will have the possibility of returning to being the endless supply of air and fuel from which it came.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    There is only the succession of events, very real.Everything else concerning time, is happening in our brains as contemplation on and structuring of those events.
    That is my oppinion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    There is only the succession of events, very real.
    And how do events succeed one another if time only happens in our brain?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,487
    More nonsense from Noa...

    Despite leaving in the huff because no-one here takes you seriously you're back (again), still having trouble finding a forum that will not laugh at you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Monterey
    Posts
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    I was pondering about the idea of an asymmetrical dimension, one where instead of left/right, up/down, front/rear being equal "both ways" there could (in theory) be a dimension where there is a bias in one of the two directions, creating an asymmetry.
    This is a great question.

    In fact, time's relation to space, instead of being circular, like the space dimensions' relations to one another, is hyperbolic. And instead of being circularly symmetric, it's hyperbolically symmetric. Since the shape of a hyperbola contains two branches, so does time. It's not like a circle where you can rotate any way you iike. In fact, the right angle, what we call the normal in circular geometry, is at infinity degrees; you can't get there. Quite literally. If you were ever wondering what the "hyp" key does to the sin, cos, and tan functions on your calculator, it's function is to make them hyperbolic: sinh, cosh, and tanh, and the rest are accessible as inv or arc as you're used to. SOH CAH TOA still works, but the "triangle's" sides don't add up to 180 degrees. Another way to think of this is as if you were performing trig on the inside surface of a hyperboloid of revolution.

    This is not another analogy; spacetime is actually shaped like this, which is why Minkowsky's interval formula, the equivalent in spacetime of the Pythagorean distance formula, makes the time a negative and multiplies it by the speed of light. This places time on the same basis with space, and it's why Minkowski said time and space considered separately would fade away in physics, and all that would remain is the geometry of spacetime.

    So time, in fact, is symmetric, but it's a limited type of symmetry. And this is why it appears to "pass," and why it seems to have a "direction." In fact, there is another time, that runs negatively, and that "advances" in the opposite direction. If one chooses this time when fixing a gauge, then our universe is shrinking, and all the matter in it is antimatter. (Time reversal turns matter into antimatter; this is because of the Poincaire symmetry of spacetime.)

    If any of this doesn't make sense, satisfy your curiosity by asking copious questions.
    Daecon likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    There is only the succession of events, very real.
    And how do events succeed one another if time only happens in our brain?
    A leaf falls, a planet orbits, what would a so-called 'time' have to do with that ? Other then us humans placing it on a timeline that we invented for our own benefit ? Those events don't need us nor 'time' to simply take place.
    We can talk of past , present , future, time dimensions etc, but that causes nothing in the fysical reality.
    And that fysical reality with events happening does not cause time, it could however indeed cause us humans to contemplate on it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    A leaf falls, a planet orbits, what would a so-called 'time' have to do with that ? Other then us humans placing it on a timeline that we invented for our own benefit ? Those events don't need us nor 'time' to simply take place.
    Huh?
    Of course they need time to take place.
    If time isn't required then how does a leaf manage to be on a tree at one point and on the ground at a different point?
    If these aren't points in time what exactly are they?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,487
    Just more crap from Noa, please try harder to find another forum, none of your posts since your hissy fit incline me to take your nonsense seriously in any way whatsoever...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    A leaf falls, a planet orbits, what would a so-called 'time' have to do with that ? Other then us humans placing it on a timeline that we invented for our own benefit ? Those events don't need us nor 'time' to simply take place.
    Huh?
    Of course they need time to take place.
    If time isn't required then how does a leaf manage to be on a tree at one point and on the ground at a different point?
    If these aren't points in time what exactly are they?
    You have now created for yourself a timeline to understand the events as one happening before or after the other.
    The events did not need that so called time indication,you needed it, in this hypothetical picture.
    That is my dry and unspectacular observation, still just an oppinion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    You have now created for yourself a timeline to understand the events as one happening before or after the other.
    The events did not need that so called time indication,you needed it, in this hypothetical picture.
    That is my dry and unspectacular observation, still just an oppinion.
    And you managed to completely avoid answering my question.
    But you DID manage to make another unsupported claim AND voice an uninformed opinion.
    I suppose that counts for something in your book.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Just more crap from Noa, please try harder to find another forum, none of your posts since your hissy fit incline me to take your nonsense seriously in any way whatsoever...
    I did not post it on other forums, i would encounter the same opposition probably.
    I decided to test if my findings would sound rediculous to great scientists, i emailed 2 scientist with a worldwide excellent reputation,
    and informed them of a summary containing also the parts i consider novel and did not post here.


    One responded twice upto now, each time within one day, which was rather overwhelming for me personally.
    I honestly thought they would not respond, or perhaps months later, with a short 'thank you, but no thank you'.
    I have no idea what will come of it, i can only say he was slightly less pessimistic than your avarage response to me...


    I was very honest in my approach, not trying to be a theoretical scientist or a hobbyist in that area, but explaining that complementary skills exist etc,
    and that i used that to construct the causal outlines of a unifying model, using a very basic almost non scientific language to convey it.
    I also backed some parts up with calculations, of a very simple nature really.


    I had a suspicion that a true scientist is driven by an unstoppable curiosity, and that a novel idea could trigger that,
    regardless of my non-reputation, a long shot.






    I don't need you to take my nonsense seriously in any way.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,487
    Yep, in the clueless crackpot catalogue unsupported claims and uninformed opinions are given weight. Among people who are able to think critically and evaluate evidence those opinions are treat with the contempt they deserve. This is why we laugh at Noa.... You say you emailed your crap to some scientists, I've lost count of the amount of clueless toss that hits my inbox you may have got an automatic response but trust me you will be in the nutjob file...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    You have now created for yourself a timeline to understand the events as one happening before or after the other.
    The events did not need that so called time indication,you needed it, in this hypothetical picture.
    That is my dry and unspectacular observation, still just an oppinion.
    And you managed to completely avoid answering my question.
    But you DID manage to make another unsupported claim AND voice an uninformed opinion.
    I suppose that counts for something in your book.
    Perhaps you should read the intent in post 1 again, and the section it is posted in.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Yep, in the clueless crackpot catalogue unsupported claims and uninformed opinions are given weight. Among people who are able to think critically and evaluate evidence those opinions are treat with the contempt they deserve. This is why we laugh at Noa....
    Do you have other hobby's ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,841
    Yeah.
    You're still wrong.
    Your claims have bugger all to do with the OP.
    And you're also deviating significantly from Daecon's premise.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    I'm not quite sure what your comments have to do with the geometry of spacetime. Perhaps if I'd phrased it as more of a question instead of an idea it could have been more suited to the proper cosmology section of the forum.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. if time is a dimension why isn't light?
    By curious mind in forum Physics
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: January 27th, 2012, 06:24 AM
  2. Did albert Einstein wrong when he turn to the time Dimension
    By cohen avshalom in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: April 30th, 2009, 12:29 AM
  3. Time as a spatial dimension
    By Obviously in forum Physics
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: October 13th, 2008, 08:09 PM
  4. String theory, time as a dimension
    By twoeyes in forum Physics
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: August 18th, 2007, 11:27 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •