Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Time Is The Third Dimension.


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#1 quickquestion

quickquestion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 55 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 10:51 AM

We percieve 2 dimensional visual sensations.

 

We can only see cubes in 3d because they are in motion in time and our consciousness is in present and past.

Space is the fourth dimension.

Space refers to hypothetical data points, later verified by moving forwards or backwards in time.

 

Cubes: are a theory, the theory of cubes lets us know that a cube is a 3d object.

Some cubes violate this theory.

If we see a picture of a cube, this is a false cube and not a 3d cube. Thus the theory of cube is not a gaurantee.

 

The theory of cube is an inherent perception we get with our DNA.



#2 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 03:55 PM

Logically, the act of seeing any dimension at all requires the dimension of time, and following that logic, we experience 4 dimensional spacetime.  Without time, space is irrelevant, and without space, time would also be irrelevant.



#3 A-wal

A-wal

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1316 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 04:01 PM

We percieve 2 dimensional visual sensations.

 

We can only see cubes in 3d because they are in motion in time and our consciousness is in present and past.

Space is the fourth dimension.

Space refers to hypothetical data points, later verified by moving forwards or backwards in time.

 

Cubes: are a theory, the theory of cubes lets us know that a cube is a 3d object.

Some cubes violate this theory.

If we see a picture of a cube, this is a false cube and not a 3d cube. Thus the theory of cube is not a gaurantee.

 

The theory of cube is an inherent perception we get with our DNA.

No there's three dimensions of space. With one eye closed (both are needed for true depth perception by our brains making a comparison) we see is two dimensional image of a three dimensional landscape, no time needed for that, although time is needed to comprehend an image.

 

We have a limited view and we perceive time differently because of our nature, not the nature of reality. There's no evidence I'm aware of to suggest that there's any real distinction between the four dimensions other than the way that we perceive them. We can only 'see' in one direction of time but there's no physical reason why we couldn't in principle remember the future. But then we would perceive four dimensions of space with no time so consciousness (at least at our current level) wouldn't be possible.


Edited by A-wal, 20 April 2017 - 04:01 PM.


#4 JMJones0424

JMJones0424

    412.63 ppm

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1241 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 01:05 AM

Cubes: are a theory, the theory of cubes lets us know that a cube is a 3d object.

Some cubes violate this theory.

If we see a picture of a cube, this is a false cube and not a 3d cube. Thus the theory of cube is not a gaurantee.

 

The theory of cube is an inherent perception we get with our DNA.

I don't agree with your use of "theory" here.

 

Regardless, a cube is defined as an object that has equal length, width, and height.  No cube is not a 3d object.  Three dimensional objects can easily be shown to exist.  I'm pretty sure you live in one.  Moreover, I am quite confident that you are one.  You are an entity that has a property called volume.  If I dunk you in a vat of water, then the water you displace is equivalent to your volume.  Volume is only possible if there are (at least?) three spatial dimensions.  If we see a picture of a cube, it is a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional object.  Of course this is an inadequate representation in all circumstances.  In the same way, a two-dimensional map can never accurately portray the shape of landmasses and relative distances on the three-dimensional surface of the Earth.



#5 quickquestion

quickquestion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 55 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 11:37 AM

I don't agree with your use of "theory" here.

 

Regardless, a cube is defined as an object that has equal length, width, and height.  No cube is not a 3d object.  Three dimensional objects can easily be shown to exist.  I'm pretty sure you live in one.  Moreover, I am quite confident that you are one.  You are an entity that has a property called volume.  If I dunk you in a vat of water, then the water you displace is equivalent to your volume.  Volume is only possible if there are (at least?) three spatial dimensions.  If we see a picture of a cube, it is a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional object.  Of course this is an inadequate representation in all circumstances.  In the same way, a two-dimensional map can never accurately portray the shape of landmasses and relative distances on the three-dimensional surface of the Earth.

Theory of cube was probably a poor choice of words, but I couldn't think of the proper word.

 

 

Logically, the act of seeing any dimension at all requires the dimension of time, and following that logic, we experience 4 dimensional spacetime.  Without time, space is irrelevant, and without space, time would also be irrelevant.

 

No there's three dimensions of space. With one eye closed (both are needed for true depth perception by our brains making a comparison) we see is two dimensional image of a three dimensional landscape, no time needed for that, although time is needed to comprehend an image.

 

We have a limited view and we perceive time differently because of our nature, not the nature of reality. There's no evidence I'm aware of to suggest that there's any real distinction between the four dimensions other than the way that we perceive them. We can only 'see' in one direction of time but there's no physical reason why we couldn't in principle remember the future. But then we would perceive four dimensions of space with no time so consciousness (at least at our current level) wouldn't be possible.

Some spiritual mystics believe that they can stop time and go into eternal Nirvana.

I don't know if they are talking mumbo-jumbo but I do know this.

Time is simply the apparent motion of things. So if you stare at a still photograph, thoughtlessly, you are not moving through or utilizing the dimension of time. Thus 2d is the default inherent consciousness, time is an added bonus and 3d is another added bonus.



#6 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 04:06 PM

 

Time is simply the apparent motion of things. So if you stare at a still photograph, thoughtlessly, you are not moving through or utilizing the dimension of time. Thus 2d is the default inherent consciousness, time is an added bonus and 3d is another added bonus.

If you are looking at an object, the eyes require light to bounce off the object and into your eyes.  Absent vision you can use sound and ears to visualize, and absent ears you may still feel the effects of vibrations caused by the sound waves, and then you can also reach out and feel the object directly, using all four of the dimensions that we exist in.



#7 A-wal

A-wal

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1316 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 06:45 PM

Some spiritual mystics believe that they can stop time and go into eternal Nirvana.

I don't know if they are talking mumbo-jumbo...

They're not. Deep mediation and some drugs cause a sense of timelessness.

 

Time is simply the apparent motion of things. So if you stare at a still photograph, thoughtlessly, you are not moving through or utilizing the dimension of time. Thus 2d is the default inherent consciousness, time is an added bonus and 3d is another added bonus.

But a still hologram is a three dimensional image. There's clearly three dimensions of space (at least). Time is the fourth.



#8 Darky

Darky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 83 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 07:48 PM

Hi,

For us to evaluate on this further, we need to understand and make sure everyone is on the same front.

Regardless, a cube is defined as an object that has equal length, width, and height. No cube is not a 3d object.



By that, I suspect they meant a filled in cube with a certain density and mass giving us its volume.

Time is a dimension. However, the relation of the third-dimension with it is purely nonsense. The reason there is a third dimension is due to perspective, not time.

Let me get back to the point in proving time is in fact a dimension (we can't visualize it yet). Our brains have only accepted 3D as of now. How would 3D be? Let's start from the beginning (0D). Let's take a point (0D) - with no spacial extent - stretch it into a line (1D), slide it sideways (2D). Then take our 2D space, and sweep it up making our finished 3D space. There you go, that's our understanding of dimensions. A number of infinite thin 2D slices make up 3D. Imagine the fourth-dimension (4D) being a number of infinite 3D slices stapled together. No relation to a cube whatsoever, no idea where you got that from.

If it helps, just consider a set of 2D spatial planes being stapled in a timey way to make a 4D space (with 2 spatial dimensions and 1 time dimension). This would look like a flip book, right? Each page has 2 spatial dimensions, and motion in the time coordinate amounts to flipping forward or backward in the book.

I hope I helped. Good discussion.

#9 JMJones0424

JMJones0424

    412.63 ppm

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1241 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 11:49 PM



Theory of cube was probably a poor choice of words, but I couldn't think of the proper word.

 

...

 

Some spiritual mystics believe that they can stop time and go into eternal Nirvana.

I don't know if they are talking mumbo-jumbo but I do know this.

Time is simply the apparent motion of things. So if you stare at a still photograph, thoughtlessly, you are not moving through or utilizing the dimension of time. Thus 2d is the default inherent consciousness, time is an added bonus and 3d is another added bonus.

I am disheartened that my argument against your use of "theory" is the portion of my response you chose to respond to instead of the rest of my response where I tried to show that your claim is demonstrably false.  Some spiritual mystics say many things.  This is a science forum.  Three spatial dimensions can be easily understood as width, length, and height.  You inhabit three spatial dimensions.  To claim otherwise is silly.  If you can, I recommend you read Flatland to try to better understand how spatial dimensions work.  


Edited by JMJones0424, 21 April 2017 - 11:50 PM.


#10 Darky

Darky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 83 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 01:30 AM

I am disheartened that my argument against your use of "theory" is the portion of my response you chose to respond to instead of the rest of my response where I tried to show that your claim is demonstrably false.  Some spiritual mystics say many things.  This is a science forum.  Three spatial dimensions can be easily understood as width, length, and height.  You inhabit three spatial dimensions.  To claim otherwise is silly.  If you can, I recommend you read Flatland to try to better understand how spatial dimensions work.


Hi,

Clearly you don't tend to read other's post. I just showed you how time being a 4th dimension is possible.

#11 JMJones0424

JMJones0424

    412.63 ppm

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1241 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 01:37 AM

Hi,

Clearly you don't tend to read other's post. I just showed you how time being a 4th dimension is possible.

Hi,

 

Clearly you don't tend to read other's post[s].  I made no claim whatsoever, in any of my posts, about time.  I would agree that it is useful to consider time as another dimension added to the three spatial dimensions that we inhabit.  Had you bothered to read my replies to this thread, you would have realized that i am not arguing against time as a dimension, instead I am arguing that there are clearly (at least?) three spatial dimensions.


Edited by JMJones0424, 22 April 2017 - 01:41 AM.

  • Darky likes this

#12 Darky

Darky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 83 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 01:39 AM

Hi,
 
Clearly you don't tend to read other's post[s].  I made no claim whatsoever, in any of my posts, about time.  I would agree that it is useful to consider time as another dimension added to the three spatial dimensions that we inhabit.  Had you bothered to read my replies to this thread, you would have realized that.


Hi,

If so, I apologize for myself. My mistake.

#13 JMJones0424

JMJones0424

    412.63 ppm

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1241 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 01:43 AM

No worries, I'm pretty sure I edited my post after you responded, but it's only because I was trying to better articulate my point and I don't think I changed the flavor of my argument.

 

Off-topic, but I hate English.  Why is the correct spelling "edited" instead of "editted"?


Edited by JMJones0424, 22 April 2017 - 01:45 AM.


#14 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 04:06 AM

. The reason there is a third dimension is due to perspective, not time.

 

The three spacial dimensions may exist without time, but they just would be irrelevant.  If nothing is happening, then there is  no possibility of perception.



#15 Darky

Darky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 83 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:58 AM

The three spacial dimensions may exist without time, but they just would be irrelevant.  If nothing is happening, then there is  no possibility of perception.


Hi,

Perspective can change without time. As our knowledge goes, we know width (w), height (h), volume (v), and time being 't' for short.

For it to be calculated into a formula: w-t would equal 0 as the value of t would be undetermined. In other terms these are the equations if you make a correlation with time to the three spacial dimensions we know, it's silly. Perspective is the way you look, you can change h without changing something's w, v, or t.

To calculate the universe time, the astronomers use this famous formula made through Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity : (infinity(v(w + h))) = t, but if you can determine the volume of our universe, you can determine the time. Only then can you relate the three spacial dimensions to the 4th dimension, time.

I hate adding math but you made me this time..

#16 quickquestion

quickquestion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 55 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 11:35 AM

Hi,

Perspective can change without time. As our knowledge goes, we know width (w), height (h), volume (v), and time being 't' for short.

For it to be calculated into a formula: w-t would equal 0 as the value of t would be undetermined. In other terms these are the equations if you make a correlation with time to the three spacial dimensions we know, it's silly. Perspective is the way you look, you can change h without changing something's w, v, or t.

No...you can't "change" h without Time. You need Time to change anything.

 

 

If you are looking at an object, the eyes require light to bounce off the object and into your eyes.  Absent vision you can use sound and ears to visualize, and absent ears you may still feel the effects of vibrations caused by the sound waves, and then you can also reach out and feel the object directly, using all four of the dimensions that we exist in.

Sound is a 2d circular panning sensation.

The only true 3d sensation is Kinesthetic touch which is largely impractical for use in philosophic or scientific discussion.

 

 

They're not. Deep mediation and some drugs cause a sense of timelessness.

 

But a still hologram is a three dimensional image. There's clearly three dimensions of space (at least). Time is the fourth.

No a hologram is 2d. We need time to understand it as a 3d object. Thus time is the third dimension. It is needed for there to be 3 spatial dimensions. Kinesthetic touch is the only exception to this rule.

 

 

I am disheartened that my argument against your use of "theory" is the portion of my response you chose to respond to instead of the rest of my response where I tried to show that your claim is demonstrably false.  Some spiritual mystics say many things.  This is a science forum.  Three spatial dimensions can be easily understood as width, length, and height.  You inhabit three spatial dimensions.  To claim otherwise is silly.  If you can, I recommend you read Flatland to try to better understand how spatial dimensions work.  

The only time i inhabit 3 dimensions is with Kinesthetic touch. In all other purposes, Time is needed for their to be a third spatial dimension. Thus, the third spatial dimension is the fourth dimension, time is the third.

 

If i see a cube, and a picture of a cube mixed in to match the background, I must use time to verify if my theory of cube, whether or not the cube is a true cube.

 

Also, as scientists we should investigate spiritual mystics. Otherwise we may be ignorant of deeper truths. Spiritual mystics often go on with incoherent babble, but it is so incoherent we cannot truly even be sure what it is they are talking about. We should investigate them further, in order to actually be sure what it is we are trying to disprove about them. Similarly, we should ingest whatever substances they ingest, to truly say if they are charlatans and also to describe what manner of charlatans they are. Or, to prove they are not charlatans, and are onto something.


Edited by quickquestion, 22 April 2017 - 11:36 AM.


#17 Darky

Darky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 83 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 11:44 AM

No...you can't "change" h without Time. You need Time to change anything.


Hi,

Clearly you can. Here's the math:

h = 3
W = 2
v = 8
t = -(infinite)

h-t = 0. For t is able to take the opposite form of h since it has an infinite set. However, when you do same with values considering all of them, you get the math:

h+v+w-t = 0, solve the equation. As t takes the opposite of w making it -2.

h + v + 2 - 2 = 0.
Leading the equation to be h + v = 0. Making h = -v and thus changing the value of h.