Do you see time as a series of discrete events, a line through infinite perceptions or something else?
I see it as a dimension.
Time
1,788 Views | 38 Replies
Time is a pretty interesting dimension.
By the Plank model (as i understand it anyway, i am by no means an expert), Time is a ray. It starts at zero and goes on presumably into infinity. So to say "What happened before zero Plank time?" Is equivalent to asking "What is north of the north pole?"
At 8/25/05 08:24 PM, 0wnage_Incarnate wrote: And the purple barrier thing seems kind of interesting. Want to flesh it out?
I just think purple is the most time-ish color. But seriously, I don't think time is really something entirely visible on a color spectrum. If anything I belive this barrier is made out of an unseen and undiscovered element. I also believe other dimensions are really just different types of matter that are not visible to us.
At 8/25/05 08:42 PM, fastbow wrote: Time is nothing but a dimension. Which one? I don't know. But in the book Flatland, there is an interesting tidbit on the Time Dimension. If time is the 4th dimension, then a 4th dimensional being would have the power to manipulate the flow of time...
I think time would, more likely, be the plane in which the other three dimensions are set. Sorta like a tunnel. But that's just me.
At 8/25/05 08:47 PM, Empanado wrote: I think time would, more likely, be the plane in which the other three dimensions are set. Sorta like a tunnel. But that's just me.
Thats feasable. But then we have moles, who can manipulate the dirt around the tunel, so the possibility of time manipulative beings still exists...
At 8/25/05 08:49 PM, fastbow wrote: Thats feasable. But then we have moles, who can manipulate the dirt around the tunel, so the possibility of time manipulative beings still exists...
Tomorrow I saw that you would post this.
time is a river and we are just twigs moving along on the current helpless to turn around or stop
At 8/25/05 10:28 PM, Matomic wrote:At 8/25/05 08:21 PM, axeslash wrote: I see time as a barier. It keeps things moving forward. I also think that this barrier is a purple-ish color (don't ask why.)DAMN! I think you might have synesthesia. That is, if you percive time in the normal way but ALSO as a color/colors. Googlize it.
Yeah, that sounds about right. I checked it out on Wikipedia. I don't have autism or any other type mental disease (except ADHD, if you think it really exists), so I guess I'm just one of those weird kinds of people who arbitrarily sees colors and what not.
I think time is a hoax, we created it when we got here, but the had to have been something before we got here. So we say time began when we got here. ('we' encompasing.... well, everything) So if we created time, why does it control us? Heck, if i build something, I want to control it, not vice versa. People say time travel is impossible, that's because time isn't real! How can one travel through something that isn't there? I wrote a loooong poem about all this, but I can't seem to find it in my portfolio... If i do, I'll be sure to post it...
Since we can do fourth dimensional (and nth dimensional, for that matter) calculations, it would seem as if time would be a little easier to grasp if it were simply another dimension. Time can be manipulated, it can be slowed down. We can think Einstein for this gem of a discovery. Time is related to speed somehow, since the faster you are going, the less you are affected by time, thus time is not the universal "independant variable" as is so commonly accepted. For all practical purposes, yes, but this is theoretical time. Since time can be manipulated within the 3rd dimension, that also makes it seem to me that it is not, in fact, the fourth dimension. However, why does velocity have an effect on time, what does simply going faster have to do with the progression of time?
Seeing as how there is an inverse relationship between speed and time, is it possible that the two are simply opposites of each other? If so, would that explain a state suspended animation (most practically accomplished through freezing) theoretically allowing a person to advance in time unscathed, seeing as how in a state of suspended animation, a person's molecules are moving substantially slower than normal? It seems like it works both ways, which seems to support the idea that speed and time are opposite values. Of course, there must be a substantially large or small coefficient (depending on which side of the equation it's on), seeing as how you have to be going extremely fast or slow in order to have any effect on time.
Think you're pretty clever...
At 8/26/05 12:58 AM, DeadlyOpulence wrote: Really? And where do you glean all of this information?
The stuff about the 4th dimensional calculations was from Differential Equations. I've done 4th dimensional calculations, they aren't that tough, they just take longer, once you know how to do multi-dimensional calculations, you can do them in any number of dimensions you want, it just gets really messy really quick.
The stuff about Einstein's Theory of Relativity is widely known physics at this point, it's been around for decades. The basic premise is that time slows down as you approach the speed of light.
The theoretical stuff is the part I've been thinking about for years now. Time has always fascinated me. If you think about it, what I said about time and velocity being opposites makes sense. At least for increasing velocities. The part about freezing I was just playing around with now. That part is flat-out wrong. I mistakenly used the outside world as a reference, a stupid mistake, since it's the object that's getting frozen. Both freezing and speeding up cause time to slow down for an object, however, the only reason why cryogenic freezing would slow down time has nothing to do with relativity, it's just a matter of biology.
That would mean that the relationship between time and velocity is opposite, however, instead of having no upper limit, it just becomes logarithmic towards the top and eventually reaches an asymptote.
Think you're pretty clever...
