Notices
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Is Time Really a Dimension?

  1. #1 Is Time Really a Dimension? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    3
    Disclaimer: Before paste in your auto-reply for this question, this is more of a what if, theory crafting post. Feel free to find holes, or to take the idea deeper.

    So I was thinking about time today, and how time does not fit in the category of the other dimensions, and how it is a special dimension. This lead me down the road of wondering if time was not even a dimension at all. Now obviously, time is a 'thing', but I feel that we do not have a good grasp of exactly what it is. We know that on the quantum level, things do not follow time in a way we deem as logical, and that leads me to the feeling that time as we know it emerges as a larger system from a behavior that occurs on the quantum level.

    What I am proposing is time is nothing but increasing correlation. If something is in complete steady-state equilibrium, then time no longer holds any meaning. Nothing changes in time. Time stops existing. If time relies on non-equilibrium, then can we not simply say that time is the flow of increasing correlation? And if this is the case, time is nothing but an illusion our brain invents to more effectively observe our surroundings.

    This is all fine and good, but where does relativity fit in this? Well if time is nothing but the flow of increased correlation, then time is inherently not a fixed rate phenomenon. Altering your rate of increasing correlation would cause two separate frames of reference in regards to the rate at which you are becoming in equilibrium with the larger system around you, and insert general relativity here.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Bo0m5l4ng View Post

    This is all fine and good, but where does relativity fit in this? Well if time is nothing but the flow of increased correlation, then time is inherently not a fixed rate phenomenon. Altering your rate of increasing correlation would cause two separate frames of reference in regards to the rate at which you are becoming in equilibrium with the larger system around you, and insert general relativity here.
    Pseudoscience (more like Off Topic Babbling), please. Before it balloons into yet another babbling thread like the two on "absolute motion"


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by xyzt View Post

    Pseudoscience (more like Off Topic Babbling), please. Before it balloons into yet another babbling thread like the two on "absolute motion"
    I never claimed it was. It is simply a thought experiment. Instead of just yelling fake and running away, at least give some constructive feedback as to what discredits this idea.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Bo0m5l4ng View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by xyzt View Post

    Pseudoscience (more like Off Topic Babbling), please. Before it balloons into yet another babbling thread like the two on "absolute motion"
    I never claimed it was. It is simply a thought experiment. Instead of just yelling fake and running away, at least give some constructive feedback as to what discredits this idea.
    After it gets moved to Pseudoscience, you will get all the feedback you are clamoring for. I promise.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by xyzt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bo0m5l4ng View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by xyzt View Post

    Pseudoscience (more like Off Topic Babbling), please. Before it balloons into yet another babbling thread like the two on "absolute motion"
    I never claimed it was. It is simply a thought experiment. Instead of just yelling fake and running away, at least give some constructive feedback as to what discredits this idea.
    After it gets moved to Pseudoscience, you will get all the feedback you are clamoring for. I promise.
    Are you always this hostile? I am not clamoring for anything... I just wanted to discuss an idea. Just delete the thread, i don't want a nonscientific discussion, i wanted an intelligent one. Sorry my idea was so blasphemous to you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: August 4th, 2014, 05:48 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 3rd, 2014, 05:26 PM
  3. Is time an asymmetrical dimension?
    By Daecon in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: March 7th, 2014, 06:31 PM
  4. 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
  5. Time as a spatial dimension
    By Obviously in forum Physics
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: October 13th, 2008, 09:09 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
  •