Re: 3D Time

At 10:04 PM 7/18/2005, rmiller wrote: All, You may find this interesting.<> Back in the early 1990s I corresponded with astronomer William Tifft at the U of Ariz. (Flagstaff). See

3D Time

All, You may find this interesting.<> Back in the early 1990s I corresponded with astronomer William Tifft at the U of Ariz. (Flagstaff). Seems he had possibly found evidence of q

Re: The Time Deniers and the idea of time as a "dimension"

chris peck wrote: > >>[c^2] is exactly an expression of the presence of 2 temporal dimensions > >>orthogonally configured, >>computing against a sheet region not a linear > >>one. [Rose(c)1995]. > > What then would it mean for two events to occur in temporally perpendicular > directions? simil

Re: The Time Deniers and the idea of time as a "dimension"

Dear Chris, A the risk of being a smart-alek, you answer your own question! The difference between Spatial and Temporal "dimensions" is that the former is such that movements can occur that are reversible without any involvement with any kind of "thermodynamic" laws. Temporal movements are

Re: The Time Deniers and the idea of time as a "dimension"

Hi James; Only mirrored back what you wrote first .. Your search for symmetry is all encompassing! 'If the quantum paradigm' There are plenty of them. At least two! Democritus vs. Anaxagorus. Newton vs. Leibniz. Atomism vs. Holism. M-Theory vs. Bohm/Chew. Concurrently, this implies that

Re: Just a question

Le 17-juil.-05, à 11:12, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit : Yes, it's obvious. Bruno, if only everything you said were so obvious! (I was asking if the proposition: is obvious).Bigger = strictly bigger, to be sure. I am pleased you find the propositions obvious. Thanks to Stephen assessing th