Abram,
I agree with Brent. In relativity theory space and time are
intermingled in a geometrical way to give the Minkowski structure.
Actually you can make it into an Euclidian space by introducing an
imaginary time t' = sqr(-1)*t = it. The metrics becomes dx^2 + dy^2 +
dz^2 + dt'^2.
In quant
2009/1/6 Abram Demski :
>
> Thomas,
>
> If time is merely an additional space dimension, why do we experience
> "moving" in it always and only in one direction? Why do we remember
> the past and not the future? Could a being move in some spatial
> dimension in the same way we move through time, an
On 06 Jan 2009, at 14:07, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> 2009/1/6 Abram Demski :
>>
>> Thomas,
>>
>> If time is merely an additional space dimension, why do we experience
>> "moving" in it always and only in one direction? Why do we remember
>> the past and not the future? Could a being move in
Abram,
With General Relativity, time is so geometrical that you can make it
circular.
(Cf the Gödel's solutions to Einstein's GR Equation, which gives hope
to some to build a time machine, and even infinite computers!).
Give me just a sufficiently massive cylinder ...
Bruno
On 06 Jan 2009
Stathis,
I would not deny causality in such a universe so long as the logical
structure enforces the Life rules (meaning, the next level in the
stack is *always* the next life-tick, it couldn't be something else...
which is true by supposition in the block world).
Perhaps that still counts as a
Bruno,
This I know... yet I want to say that it doesn't necessarily make time
*spatial*. But, I can't say exactly what that would mean. It seems to
me that the word "spatial" becomes less meaningful if time is said to
be spatial...
--Abram
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> 2009/1/6 Abram Demski :
>> Thomas,
>>
>> If time is merely an additional space dimension, why do we experience
>> "moving" in it always and only in one direction? Why do we remember
>> the past and not the future? Could a being move in some spatial
>> dimension in the
Abram,
an intuition I have come to concerning time is the following (it is only
qualitative and may or may not be helpful in thinking about time):
From relativity theory we know that there is no universal now, and that
the invariant between two "points" in the physical universe is spacetime
Lewis Carroll Epstein says the reason we can't go faster than light is that we
can't go slower than light, c is our speed along the time axis.
Brent
Günther Greindl wrote:
> Abram,
>
> an intuition I have come to concerning time is the following (it is only
> qualitative and may or may not be
9 matches
Mail list logo
