- Thank you received: 0
Is Time Round?
21 years 6 months ago #6011
by heusdens
Reply from rob was created by heusdens
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
The acceptance of the Big Bang Theory has led to the general consensus that space-time is round. Our observable universe is often compared to the surface of a balloon where time is the radius and space is the surface, a closed round surface. I don't know where they got the idea it was round. Certainly not from Einstein. Even if it was round, the expansion would not be a horizontal stretching of the balloon; it would be would be little dimples perpendicular to the surface. Spacetime stretches through time, not space. Or have I got it wrong?
A straight forward euclidian 4-space seems to make a lot more sense. The other way you end up with a singularity, not only in time but but also in space AND density.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
If time is round then THIS MOMENT already happened infinite number of times......
Well it explains my deja-vue.,,,,,
The acceptance of the Big Bang Theory has led to the general consensus that space-time is round. Our observable universe is often compared to the surface of a balloon where time is the radius and space is the surface, a closed round surface. I don't know where they got the idea it was round. Certainly not from Einstein. Even if it was round, the expansion would not be a horizontal stretching of the balloon; it would be would be little dimples perpendicular to the surface. Spacetime stretches through time, not space. Or have I got it wrong?
A straight forward euclidian 4-space seems to make a lot more sense. The other way you end up with a singularity, not only in time but but also in space AND density.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
If time is round then THIS MOMENT already happened infinite number of times......
Well it explains my deja-vue.,,,,,
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 6 months ago #5760
by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
The acceptance of the Big Bang Theory has led to the general consensus that space-time is round. Our observable universe is often compared to the surface of a balloon where time is the radius and space is the surface, a closed round surface. I don't know where they got the idea it was round. Certainly not from Einstein. Even if it was round, the expansion would not be a horizontal stretching of the balloon; it would be would be little dimples perpendicular to the surface. Spacetime stretches through time, not space. Or have I got it wrong?
A straight forward euclidian 4-space seems to make a lot more sense. The other way you end up with a singularity, not only in time but but also in space AND density.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
spaceman
time has no shape,it is the arbitrary measurement(man made) of movement.i don't think that time is a true dimension anyway.
The acceptance of the Big Bang Theory has led to the general consensus that space-time is round. Our observable universe is often compared to the surface of a balloon where time is the radius and space is the surface, a closed round surface. I don't know where they got the idea it was round. Certainly not from Einstein. Even if it was round, the expansion would not be a horizontal stretching of the balloon; it would be would be little dimples perpendicular to the surface. Spacetime stretches through time, not space. Or have I got it wrong?
A straight forward euclidian 4-space seems to make a lot more sense. The other way you end up with a singularity, not only in time but but also in space AND density.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
spaceman
time has no shape,it is the arbitrary measurement(man made) of movement.i don't think that time is a true dimension anyway.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 6 months ago #5931
by SpaceMan
Replied by SpaceMan on topic Reply from Tyler Keys
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
time has no shape,it is the arbitrary measurement(man made) of movement.i don't think that time is a true dimension anyway.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I'm sorry. I now see what you mean by time not being a dimension. It's nothing more than the speed of propagation through a medium of varying density. Gravitational density. But I have to say the 4th orthagonal dimension analogy works very nicely.I think its easier to visualize that way. But it is just an analogy
time has no shape,it is the arbitrary measurement(man made) of movement.i don't think that time is a true dimension anyway.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I'm sorry. I now see what you mean by time not being a dimension. It's nothing more than the speed of propagation through a medium of varying density. Gravitational density. But I have to say the 4th orthagonal dimension analogy works very nicely.I think its easier to visualize that way. But it is just an analogy
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 6 months ago #5762
by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I'm sorry. I now see what you mean by time not being a dimension. It's nothing more than the speed of propagation through a medium of varying density. Gravitational density. But I have to say the 4th orthagonal dimension analogy works very nicely.I think its easier to visualize that way. But it is just an analogy
[/quote]
spaceman
you have it partly right,movement does not necessarily need a medium,movement that i mean is in the macro and micro universe.it is in the cells of your body,the atoms that make up your cells,to the galaxies that are in the universe,suns, planets,moons etc.without movement nothing is!
time to me is not a true dimension because it can only go in one direction,forward therefore one dimensional and one dimensional things cannot exist.if i take the other dimensions,each to me can be three dimensional within themselves,they are to me SOLID dimensions(each on its own can have depth,height,width)now some people have different ideas of time as illusion or its existance,but this is mine!
by the way if using the orthagonal analogy works for you, keep it,unless you feel at sometime you find something better!
.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I'm sorry. I now see what you mean by time not being a dimension. It's nothing more than the speed of propagation through a medium of varying density. Gravitational density. But I have to say the 4th orthagonal dimension analogy works very nicely.I think its easier to visualize that way. But it is just an analogy
[/quote]
spaceman
you have it partly right,movement does not necessarily need a medium,movement that i mean is in the macro and micro universe.it is in the cells of your body,the atoms that make up your cells,to the galaxies that are in the universe,suns, planets,moons etc.without movement nothing is!
time to me is not a true dimension because it can only go in one direction,forward therefore one dimensional and one dimensional things cannot exist.if i take the other dimensions,each to me can be three dimensional within themselves,they are to me SOLID dimensions(each on its own can have depth,height,width)now some people have different ideas of time as illusion or its existance,but this is mine!
by the way if using the orthagonal analogy works for you, keep it,unless you feel at sometime you find something better!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Emmanuelle
- Offline
- New Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
21 years 5 months ago #6286
by Emmanuelle
Replied by Emmanuelle on topic Reply from
Mmmmm...Time....more mmmmmm...
Well, this is how I see it:Time is an illusion in the ultimate sense...but it exists in a relative one.So if one's consciousness is bound by relativity/duality, then one will experience time's passing and its effects...
Once you trascend duality tho, you can play with it...and there you see its plasticity...You can go backward, forward or exist simultaneously on two different timelines mindfully, i.e be aware of it...
You don't have to age either...since it's time that's passing and not you anymore...
And YES, that means you don't have to die either, not in the accepted sense at least!Once you know you have completed your function here(wherever that may be at any given time), you can just go at will.
So no, it's not round and it's not linear either...it's like a tube filled with countless parallel lines(each one representing a moment in time)all existing NOW and ALWAYS in the lap of eternity but quite apart from it
Well, this is how I see it:Time is an illusion in the ultimate sense...but it exists in a relative one.So if one's consciousness is bound by relativity/duality, then one will experience time's passing and its effects...
Once you trascend duality tho, you can play with it...and there you see its plasticity...You can go backward, forward or exist simultaneously on two different timelines mindfully, i.e be aware of it...
You don't have to age either...since it's time that's passing and not you anymore...
And YES, that means you don't have to die either, not in the accepted sense at least!Once you know you have completed your function here(wherever that may be at any given time), you can just go at will.
So no, it's not round and it's not linear either...it's like a tube filled with countless parallel lines(each one representing a moment in time)all existing NOW and ALWAYS in the lap of eternity but quite apart from it
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Lotto Cheatah
- Offline
- Junior Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
21 years 4 months ago #5966
by Lotto Cheatah
Replied by Lotto Cheatah on topic Reply from Ron
All things in the physical universe are either a sphere or a combination of spheres. "Time", while not a physical entity, is intimately associated with the physics of the universe and can be best understood in the same perspective. Ergo, time is a sphere [or a combination of spheres], just like everything else.
You can conceptually disect time to get a closer look at its structure. If you take a thin slice of a sphere you get a circle. Webster says "A circle ends where it begins" and so it likely is with time.
It is an important concept to those exploring time travel theory as it suggests that just a smidgen past the speed of light exists the beginning of time.
You can conceptually disect time to get a closer look at its structure. If you take a thin slice of a sphere you get a circle. Webster says "A circle ends where it begins" and so it likely is with time.
It is an important concept to those exploring time travel theory as it suggests that just a smidgen past the speed of light exists the beginning of time.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.344 seconds