# Thread: String theory, time as a dimension

1. I am familiar with the basics of string theory and how at the time the universe expanded only our 3 dimensions "got big". The other 7 or so dimensions stayed sub-atomically small, but what about time? In string theory is time dealt with as another physical dimension or simply as some sort of constant (i know its obviously not constant but i mean not as a physical dimension)? If its the former, how "big" is time?

2.

3. String theory is what's called "background dependent", which means it assumes that space and time are simply there, and does not explain them. I think this will be its downfall in the end.

Other theories such as General Relativity are "background independent", hence the things we call space and time aren't taken as read. A much better approach in my view.

Do a bit of googling for a more detailed picture. There seems to be a tendency for string theory to lay claim to anything and everything.

4. Remember that time as you know it does not actually exist. Time in the cosmological sense is simply a cause and effect construction from one event to the next which causes the next and so on. In other words "time" started with the big bang and will continue until the end of the universe. However, in and of itself it does not actually matter at all and does not need to have any function in any theories etc. etc.

At least this is how I see it anyway!

5. Originally Posted by Dave Singleton
Remember that time as you know it does not actually exist. Time in the cosmological sense is simply a cause and effect construction from one event to the next which causes the next and so on. In other words "time" started with the big bang and will continue until the end of the universe. However, in and of itself it does not actually matter at all and does not need to have any function in any theories etc. etc.

At least this is how I see it anyway!
You're wrong about that Dave Singleton. My name is Dave too. I have a Phd in Astrophysics and Astronomy. I am currently researching the mystery behind the very fabric of time and I found out that time might have been made of a multi-layer dimensions in which one of the five most dominant dimension is similar to a layer matrix where fiction meets reality.

6. ...super string theory is correct to a point. I beleive there are five vertices in a graph should be plotted. They are.

Force axis I
Input Power axis II
Gravity axis III
Light axis III
Bend - gravity loop given it's displacement in the event horizon
Center of bi-modal axis containing the event horizon.

So to plot it would be three dimensions in 3-d plus a bend from axis II to axis three in the lower fields. Then center being the nexus. I don not use since calculus is a badly programmed function in itself. Convulutions based upon misaligned properties.

7. Originally Posted by youdiehard
Originally Posted by Dave Singleton
Remember that time as you know it does not actually exist. Time in the cosmological sense is simply a cause and effect construction from one event to the next which causes the next and so on. In other words "time" started with the big bang and will continue until the end of the universe. However, in and of itself it does not actually matter at all and does not need to have any function in any theories etc. etc.

At least this is how I see it anyway!
You're wrong about that Dave Singleton. My name is Dave too. I have a Phd in Astrophysics and Astronomy. I am currently researching the mystery behind the very fabric of time and I found out that time might have been made of a multi-layer dimensions in which one of the five most dominant dimension is similar to a layer matrix where fiction meets reality.
I see time as a definition of the course of actions. Not to be confused as a "thing" to be manipulated or to be a part of something. It's only used in different concepts and measurements so that we understand certain things. I don't know much about dimensions and such, but I find time as nothing more than a description. You can't bend or alter time, because there's nothing there. Time's just a word, in my opinion.

I think I understand what spacetime is about, but perhaps it should rather be called spacedistance?

Please correct me if I'm wrong in my understanding.

8. Originally Posted by youdiehard
I have a Phd in Astrophysics and Astronomy.
I tend to doubt that - nobody with that qualification would be unaware that it's a PhD. I may be wrong, let's see
am currently researching the mystery behind the very fabric of time
Ah, post-doctoral scientists don't describe their research projects as "mysteries", now do they. "Problems" is what scientists tackle
one of the five most dominant dimension is similar to a layer matrix where fiction meets reality.
This is complete gibberish, at least to me; define "dominant dimension", define a "layer matrix", and wtf has "fiction meeting reality" to do with science?

9. I think we are beginning to agree that "time" as a concept needs to be revised.......officially, and not assumed as a linear one-dimension construct.

10. Originally Posted by streamSystems
I think we are beginning to agree that "time" as a concept needs to be revised.......officially, and not assumed as a linear one-dimension construct.
Yes, we do need to do that, but that takes a long time of directed creative thinking to do, We can make a thread about it if you wish.

11. Just quickly though, there are two type of "time" we are symbolically bombarded with: "circular" time (clocks, sun dials....etc etc etc (the King and I)), and "linear" time (god only knows what type of symbol should be used for that).

In brief, if we could form equations suggesting that time is circular, if we could derive equations of the circle and sphere for instance "relevant" to time being circular, if we could create a new set of axioms that addresses time as being circular and not linear, I really do think we can get a "better" idea of how time is realted to a thing called space, and yes, ultimately, how time is related to matter.......and, yes, ALL associated "cause and effect" laws.

I am keen to start a new thread, but I don't want to seem too "pseudo" for all the "linear junkies" (excuse the pun).....I have been cautioned about being too "pseudo".

I have also been accused for enjoying myself too much.........but, technically, if you have something, you have to use it.........at least celebrate it..........and if no one else in the world wants to know, imagine the feeling in yourself in knowing you are right, and not giving a damn about anyone else.

And now I must caution you all: this cyber image I am using, well, she is an Angel, a cyber Angel, I use to grab your attention, like poor goat herders in the field looking for that shimmering disc in the sky to take you away from whatever simple and very screwed reality you all seem to be living in. I understand I was cautioned about snide remarks, however, this is an evolution that should be regarded as compliant and relevant without damaging in any way the initial thrust of opinion primarly delivered. In my understanding of this system, flying through walls of opinion, not being bound by normal human parameters that have made people "set" in their ways (people who seems to already have "defined" reality) well, it (flying through) is more "powerful" than being stuck in a system, a system that assumes more "primarily" than it "delivers"......this, in comparison to the philosophy of the time of those initial "assumptions" modern science still relies, or should one say, "rests" upon.

12. Originally Posted by streamSystems
Just quickly though, there are two type of "time" we are symbolically bombarded with: "circular" time (clocks, sun dials....etc etc etc (the King and I)), and "linear" time (god only knows what type of symbol should be used for that).

In brief, if we could form equations suggesting that time is circular, if we could derive equations of the circle and sphere for instance "relevant" to time being circular, if we could create a new set of axioms that addresses time as being circular and not linear, I really do think we can get a "better" idea of how time is realted to a thing called space, and yes, ultimately, how time is related to matter, "cause and effect" laws.

I am keen to start a new thread, but I don't want to seem too "pseudo" for all the "linear junkies".
Time of the object is the impression of reality that is recorded in /fusioned with the perceptual unit. It can be coffee, it can be a pretty face in the mirror, it is not exterior to the object since it then wouldn't percept it. The clock on the wall is an incommon reference. This is proven like this:

The perceptual unit has "n" dimensions, a^2 + b^2 +... + q^2 - (ict)^2 = 0
Its perception cannot extend the smallest units length in any direction, thus ict^2 must be constructed by dimensions with plancklength, being:
a^2 + b^2 + ... + q^2

Time is hence not a line.

13. Yes.

Time of the object is "witnessed".

But, what if you were FAST enough to realize you are looking in a BIG MIRROR in terms of looking at reality.........that the thing within you, well, "it's all around you", scientifically speaking.

So........let's just theorise time, and be done with it.

If I am a nurse, as I look upon you all, who is the "doctor"?

Im talking about time quite a lot..........aren't I.

How does time speak for itself?

How does it "speak"?

Should we not "share" time?

Can that which exists within and also be all around be "time"?

A common thing, yet nothing to be treated with "one dimensional rules"............one would think, or at least....."respect".

Imagine time "speaking": what of "your time"?

If we are spending time with one another, it may as well be forever, right?

If we want to understand ALL TIME, it is an "eternity", right?

Is there a philosophy that science can encroach upon that addresses such "masonic" issues of a thing we call "time"?

Two eyes (is that "american indian?)....should a new thread be started?

14. Originally Posted by streamSystems
Two eyes (is that "american indian?)....should a new thread be started?
Done it already, check relative time.

15. No, "two eyes" is the guy/gal who started this thread........we don't want to highjack his/her "party".

Let us not highjack a thread..........if you want to start a new one, OK.

Still, I think I know what you're talking about, "two eyes"......"relative time".......ST1_ST2.

16. Originally Posted by streamSystems
No, "two eyes" is the guy/gal who started this thread........we don't want to highjack his/her "party".
Fine, but string theory makes false presumptions about the universe.

17. Unless you want to convict them to a reality that should not exist, yes, FALSE.

There are many things about this social reality we can opportion to people who's only GAIN is going further with a science that is "not all there" with time.........without their even knowing it..............one learns sometimes from the mistakes of others............while (one) still needs to make the effort to help without being a troll or gollum.

(in continuing....therefore)

What new thread do thee speak of?

18. Well, yes it is a nice party *brews coffee for us*

You know you have to make flaws to get to the right theory, though there's no meaning with commenting others theories, unless you have some spare time. It would be better if we all started making some fundamental conclusions as foundations instead of drawing a completely new picture. Some axioms, if we all please.

gives last reply a second look... yes with the add of that ofcourse.

It (the new thread that is) is here, in physics, looks alot like minkowski&einstein stuff.

19. I agree.

Making a fundamental conclusion as an axiom is like saying, "how big is this ring of time.........and is it relevant to our ability to travel in time?"

"Are we up for it?"

That sort of thing, right?

Can we deal with such a responsibility that would be landed on us?

What new planet, for instance, must we eventually colonise, much like this one?

You know.......if we had the "power".

20. Originally Posted by streamSystems
I agree.

Making a fundamental conclusion as an axiom is like saying, "how big is this ring of time.........and is it relevant to our ability to travel in time?"

"Are we up for it?"

That sort of thing, right?

Can we deal with such a responsibility that would be landed on us?
I believe so. *takes a sip of coffee*. I actually thought out something yesterday. A fundamental axiom.

You see experience only adds to the experienced, then given that it is something, a perceptual unit that is energy quant can not be destructed. The smallest energy quanta that can be released as a photon is therefor relative to the object that releases it, in itself it might be unable to split. Have you heard about that kind of photon?

21. "eyes without a face".......maybe the US citizens have been touched by ancient wisdom?

Or was he UK trying to be US (author of "eyes without a face")?

If we can agree "time" is the second cousin to the 3 dimensions of space itchy for a change to happen, why not have 3 second cousins.....or even 6.......for time to be attributed to "must catch up soon to space willing to change" space?

Fundamental axioms you can think out.........realise that they are yours..........even if someone else gave you a "hint".

If you can afford the time for others to spell them out better, like I can't, it's yours to afford the time to spell out.

22. Originally Posted by streamSystems
"eyes without a face".......maybe the US citizens have been touched by ancient wisdom?

Or was he UK trying to be US (author of "eyes without a face")?

If we can agree "time" is the second cousin to the 3 dimensions of space itchy for a change to happen, why not have 3 second cousins.....or even 6.......for time to be attributed to "must catch up soon to space willing to change" space?

Fundamental axioms you can think out.........realise that they are yours..........even if someone else gave you a "hint".

If you can afford the time for others to spell them out better, like I can't, it's yours to afford the time to spell out.
Yes, that twoeyes comment, that was indeed poetic. *eats some sausages*

Oh, come now. I don't think the animals rare end minds more then the carrots do.

Think about it, either the animal lives on and heats selfishly all its life, or we eat it and everything will be more even.

*makes ready to heat some sausages only for streamSystems*

23. I'm being (if you think I am a sausage (or even a sausage "aperture") Islamic on this one........

..........do you want me to eloborate?

I know you do, but I can't.....I'm assuming you are all "educated" and above all.........."fair"..........

You know, Gabriel and Mary.......well, they probably knew this would happen........."they"...........you knoiw, the reference of someone understanding the system and being turned into some type of pig that is up for the spit, right.........where ever you choose to place it, right?

.........(and to all "moderators", I am highlighting the usefuleness of ALL religious beliefs, am I not?).

OK........why not insult my intelligence, and no try to go for one of the angels?

24. Originally Posted by streamSystems
I'm being (if you think I am a sausage (or even a sausage "aperture") Islamic on this one........

..........do you want me to eloborate?

I know you do, but I can't.....I'm assuming you are all "educated" and above all.........."fair"..........

You know, Gabriel and Mary.......well, they probably knew this would happen........."they"...........you knoiw, the reference of someone understanding the system and being turned into some type of pig that is up for the spit, right.........where ever you choose to place it, right?

.........(and to all "moderators", I am highlighting the usefuleness of ALL religious beliefs, am I not?).

OK........why not insult my intelligence, and no try to go for one of the angels?
You are saying that I will be "pigified" if I eat pig? Well then they who eat the pigified man will be pigified aswell. But I understand that's the way your family&friends work. I ain't repainting your flat.

*Tee?*

25. No.

no no no.

Define the "sow"...........right?

Is not "linear time" a "swow" going "sweak sweak sweak"..........?

26. Originally Posted by streamSystems
No.

no no no.

Define the "sow"...........right?

Is not "linear time" a "swow" going "sweak sweak sweak"..........?
I understand, you like the pig. Did you know the protestantic bible consider them to be minion?

Well, define the unlinear time then.

PS. I can't change habits, I live in my family.

27. The lin e-a-r time will bite u in the as sss if u r not care-ful..........right?

........thnak God for the "linear head"...right?

The one that has a fucking halo, right?

28. I'm sorry if I made you sad: *sends a bukay of roses*
I didn't mean to make you upset

I agree, I'm no better then you.

29. ............

why don't we talk about "everyone else".........?

30. Originally Posted by streamSystems
............

why don't we talk about "everyone else".........?
We can do that, but the highest selfishness is to make the best effort to make all obtain as high gain as possible.

Just look at the buddhists; what they sit there for, do nothing behave like dead guys.

Next page (page 3)

31. ........you fail.........you think for them.....when I do not..........

........u sympathise for..........something I can not explain..........they never say "oh, I was wrong".......

32. Girl, they just sit there and do nothing. It is no higher gain.

PS. I dislike their ways, that's what I am saying. Those buddhists.

I'm just saying I never felt extremely bad just because I ate pig. But you never know what weird stuff those foreign pigs eat.

I oftenly incline I was wrong, you need to error to become right. I might be wrong.

Though when minion asked "may we posses the pigs then, if we may not posses the humans?" and god said "yes" and the pigs ran out of the barn and drowned themselves, did then god really mean that we may no longer eat pigs? Doesn't sound logical.

33. mmmmmmmmm

they do, don't they........

and we don't.........

which makes us their "pinyata"........ .........

..........as a nurse I should not "diagnose"........you need to ask a "sincere question" to get the "intention" of anyone else relevant to whatevere it is you want to sshake hands on.........and even then "find where you are at"........

34. Originally Posted by streamSystems
mmmmmmmmm

they do, don't they........

and we don't.........

which makes us their "pinyata"........ .........
*shivers* i don't want to be a pinata

But it can't be worse then being a pig! Do you agree?

35. neither do I........

Have no idea what the xxxx that is......

36. Originally Posted by streamSystems
neither do I........

Have no idea what the xxxx that is......
It's toys and candy in a little box that children are to open with sticks as a game.

I just ate some fried paprika. Are you okay with that, it's nice, isn't it?

37. ..........yes..........imagine how that could be told to eveyone else...........in their prams............

38. Originally Posted by streamSystems
..........yes..........imagine how that could be told to eveyone else...........in their prams............
It was a special paprica, with garlic&herb in oil, mom&dad bought it before they went on vacation.

A nice place that island, loads of restaurants and seawater, and a really nice hotel. You might even see a babe now and then. But they are probably all buisy.

39. I am a big believer in the butterfly effect in an unmanaged reality, so I think a new thread should be started......I don't want to be accused one day of really highjacking something.

 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   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement