I'm trying to grasp the concept of relativity, and for the most part I get it. but I fail to see how space-time is allegedly 4 dimensional. From my understanding, Time is roughly dependent on your positioning and movement from an energy source. So since time is dependent from where you are in the plain of space, wouldn't that mean that there is room for an infinite number of dimensions, given an almost unlimited area to be positioned. so dependent on how large the universe is, the dimensional value of space time is roughly equal to that? can you comprehend my fuzzy science for me?
M-theory indicates there are 11 dimensions of existence. Then there's string theory, which appears to have changed its mind since I educated myself on these things. A bit of investigation into either theory might clear some things up for you. Other than that, I'm not sure if it's your fuzzy science I fail to comprehend, or the way in which you word it.
there are infinite dimensions in chaos this failed universe and its "physical laws" are an artificial restriction placed by a tyrant demiurge who we will soon destroy and ascend back to our glorious chaos
Relativity seems a little cutesy around the edges to me. As though it were an essentially sound explanation (albeit very old) that had to be re-packaged for popular consumption in U.S. (non-European) market.
Ah Galileo and Einstein would be proud of your interest. I'm not so sure that relativity would make an immediate inference that there's infinite dimensions, nor that there's an unlimited area to be positioned...so much as it infers that there is really no "absolute motion." Einstein really did say it best.... If time is converted to distance by multiplying it with the speed of light, than all "time" really is the observable "length" it takes for light to reach a specific point from it's "energy source" (starting point). So you're understanding that, "Time is roughly dependent on your positioning and movement from an energy source" would be right...at least as far as I know....which is very little. If the perception of time is indeed dependent upon where you are located in the plain we know as space then I think that only really the spacetime interval that would allow for two locations to view an objects movement (observable due to light) as "time correlated". If that makes any sense? Basically, two "things" observing the object by means of inertial observation would view the same spacetime interval. We haven't even touched on length contraction or time dilation either....two subjects of which I only know a little about anyways. Someone please feel free to explain to me their entire significance....As I understand "it" (them) the invariance of the spacetime interval allows for the concepts of relativistic length contraction and time dialation to take place. Because of this we are not able to know whose perception of "time" is more "right," rather we are able to know what location (if there are two locations observing a moving object [light]) will measure the shorter distance between any two events of which an object or objects undergoe. The dimensoinal value of space would be defined as any dimensional value would be right? It would be dependant upon the number of coordinates needed to locate every point contained within that given "area." That's where the ideal of multiple dimensions really boggles my mind....I mean I understand why we would need three dimensions, because we need an X, Y, Z as for the fourth...well could it be time? Then again, if time is relative to ones position then who'se to say that there couldn't be an infinite number of dimensions...and so Ocean Bionic...I find myself in the same inquisitive position as you are after all of this.....
a dimension is an absolute description of where something is in space. space-time is four dimensional because something has a where (xyz) and a when (t) You can only be one place for each value of T. so space is four dimensional. I just woke up and am a bit fuzzy, so I think I answered your question, but the answer was so absurdly direct that I doubt that it is what you were asking for.
If they are in the same position and motionless, yes. but that's where i'm befuddled. this video tries to explain, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2VMO7pcWhg I could mistaken, but I believe gravity is a cause for time dialation and contraction. Not to sure. But the plain of space 'bends' for objects of mass and light traveling near these objects 'bend' with the 'bent' plain of space? :cheers2: to that. basically, it's a 4D coordinate system. I guess I understand. Even though our bodies and perspective can exist in a single point in space, we are not the same instances of ourselves within each separate moment in time. and I guess this is where dimensional time travel comes into play, which is a giant mind fuck to me.
That's one thing that's always really tripped me out. You'll notice that in the video they make it clear that the photons never travel less than or faster than light speed. So, what trips me out is just how constant the speed of light is, to the point that space has been known to "bend" for it. Imagine you are running and you throw a ball of some kind, your velocity will then be applied to the balls incurrent velocity. However no matter how fast we are moving, when we create a source for photons (ie. light) it moves at the SAME speed......My mind is continually fucked by that on a daily bases. According to Einstein, objects in motion traveling at the speed of light will appear to be smaller or larger, dependent upon where you are observing it from. This also distorts our notion of "time" when we look at it's "path" and try to calculate when it will arrive at a given point. To one observer it may appear to arrive earlier or later than it would to another observer in a different location. Well gravity is a law of physics, so I don't doubt it plays a role in both time dilation and length contraction, but I'm not so sure it's the main factor. Length contraction only states that the visible length of an object within a moving frame (a 90 degree angle for example) will appear to be contracted (shortened) in the direction of motion. There was/is a formula to calculate the amount of contraction, but I cannot remember it....it was named after some guy though (go figures). So I'm sure gravity plays a role in it, as gravity would allow the object to "move" in the first place. Time dilation if I remember correctly is the ideal that a clock or "time keeping device" will appear to run slow (dilated) when under the same circumstances as above (for Length Contraction). But because we have Einstein's theory of general relativity I think we can also assume that a clock will appear to run slower whilst in a gravitational field (which is all space right?). If we knew more regarding this we could probably better understand black holes too, because they utilize such a strong gravitational field that not even light can escape their pull...yet another mind fuck! Indeed....here's to the never ending process of questions yielding answers, then producing yet even more "developed" questions in turn... Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the representation of the 4th dimension as time still theory? I realize that most everything if not everything is theory by definition, but you understand where I'm coming from...it's not as "concrete" if you will. It seems to be the most probable explanation, but still.....
Right. but I still wonder about gravities roll in dilation and length contraction because, apparently, gravity moves as fast as light. So I guess length contraction would occur if being pushed or pulled by the speed of gravity. If the sun were to miraculously vaporize, we wouldn't instantly be thrown out of orbit. The time it takes light to reach earth from the sun is roughly 8 minutes, and the same goes for gravity, allegedly. So once the sun vaporizes, it causes a wave to form in the fabric of space because the suns instant absence causes the 'bent' plane around it to instantly straighten out after it disappears. this causes a ruffle in space that sends a wave traveling at the speed of light towards earth. So 8 minutes after the sun vaporizes, we see it happen and are simultaneously thrown out of abort. but its dependent on whether we can be pushed or pulled by a gravity wave, so I guess light only effects length contraction. maybe this is what we need to do in order to travel the speed of light.. vaporize a star and ride its gravity wave!
we'd be better off building a black hole, and riding behind it. and then causing it to cease to exist before we got where we were going.
how nihilistic of you. it's kinda like mothers who spend months growing a baby and give birth, then flush it down the toilet.
no, not really, it would actually work quite well, and it's not at all nihilistic. to travel faster than the speed of light you need an infinite amount of fuel where is an easy place to find an infinite amount of fuel? a black hole. the problem is, they're hard on the neighborhood. so, once we figure out how to build, contain, and destroy them, we have FTL travel, zero point energy (or vacuum energy, which ever term you prefer) easy gravity manipulation, and all kinds of other really super toys.
Hi, bird here with a little clarification. Your position in space is relative to time, as vice versa. Because time is arbitrary it means that any given dimension is part of an infinite cycle of chaos. Hope this helps.
