Science Forums 2

[Boerseun]

A very ponderous issue, indeed.

I believe that "Time" could very well be described as the fourth dimension, for ease of calculation. It depends on the issue at hand. For instance, when we describe ballistic trajectories, time is essential to visualize the path followed by the falling object on a 2D graph paper. When we consider a brew-bucket filled with your latest homemade beer to ferment, time is just a pain in the ass.

If you take it to be a dimension, I put it to you that time is the very first dimension, and not the fourth. If you lived in a one-dimensional world where only straight lines are possible, how would you even perceive it in the absence of time?

Alternatively, the following:

Each object exist universally, in every conceivable location in the universe. If you have Moontan's 6" cube in your hand, that is clearly not the case. That cube is in your hand, and nowhere else. But, that cube has the potential to be everywhere. At the quantum level, the particles appear and disappear at random. There's a common name for it, but not being English, I've forgotten it. But bear with me:

This 6" cube's location in space is the statistical mean of the quantum uncertainty of the whereabouts of all the particles it consist of. If you were to kick this cube into the air, you impart a moment to all constituent particles, which will in turn reflect in the quantum uncertainty of all particles involved. At the macro scale, you see it as a cube flying through the air. But as far as time is concerned, the cube existed in all the points in its trajectory already (being a hypercube and all) - all you did was to raise the chances of which cube will next be observed. And time is just the linear progression of the statistical coordinates of any given object - which already exist in all possible locales in the universe, but can only be perceived one at a time because time itself is quantized?

Not having English as a first language really sucks in this regard...

I'll be back...