PDA

View Full Version : Space Time



eyeoneblack
24th April 2011, 03:06 PM
A while back CFTraveler and I had a small discussion about the 4th dimension - she maintaining it being the dimension of Time and I suggesting a little different concept that would describe the dimension of dreams (or something).

I’ve noticed reading articles re physics in Nature magazine physicists still referring to the 4th dimension of Time which should settle the matter. But when my limited knowledge and a STRONG intuition tell me otherwise, I can’t turn away from it.

I just happen to meet three young physics majors last night and put the question to them. Whether it has anything to do with the condition of dreamland or not my hypothesis is simply this: Time and Space are a requirement of a single dimension - SpaceTime as Albert coined it. Time should not be considered as a dimension unto itself.

Now these three kids are brilliant but not yet authorities, still, they were in agreement with me. I asked them if the concept of Time as a separate D was necessary in the calculations of physical laws - that perhaps it was merely of convention of the math involved. They agreed it was not necessary.

Heisenberg tells us we cannot know the position of a particle and its momentum at the same time - the one measurement destroys the possibility of the other. This to me is sufficient proof that Time and Space are really one and same. Or, at least, you can’t have one without the other.

Take a cat running around the house (like mine does after I feed her Fancy Feast) and we determine where in the house she is, but in doing so we destroy the cat. In other words we can no longer know how fast she was going. Can’t take that measurement because the conditions have been destroyed with the first measurement. Likewise if we determine how fast she’s running, then we can no longer locate her.

We cannot know where she is (Space) and how fast she’s running (Time) at the same time because the condition collapses if we take either measurement. Which tells me that that condition is SpaceTime, a unitary Dimension.

Anyone’s thoughts on this would be fun. :)

eyeoneblack
24th April 2011, 04:19 PM
I just read CF’s “Please don’t read this” thread and suddenly realized I don’t need to explain a thing to you guys, which then leaves me with a different question. Humor me on this if you will. 8) The three D’s of Space are only conceivable in Time, so what is Time to the D of dreams?

That to me is the real puzzle. I think CF refers to non-local as a characteristic of dreamland - i.e. a wave function. All I’m saying is that THIS non-local experience is the true next D and it is the 4th D where Time is plastic and nothing we can bring from the D of SpaceTime can really inform us as to the nature of this 4th D.

The problem is we DO bring our experience in the physical heavily to bear on our experience in the Astral and beyond and maybe, just MAYBE, we might do better to disenfranchise our biases and conditioning from and in the physical to better investigate the higher planes.

There's no lack of knowledge here, but could we walk the talk better? :?

CFTraveler
25th April 2011, 12:25 AM
Heisenberg tells us we cannot know the position of a particle and its momentum at the same time - the one measurement destroys the possibility of the other. This to me is sufficient proof that Time and Space are really one and same. Or, at least, you can’t have one without the other.

Heisenberg is talking about a quantum particle, simply because its position can only be measured by the collision of another particle, which destroys the first one, and the speed can only be measured after it has traversed its space, making location impossible to figure out.
I agree what you are saying about time and space being possibly characteristics of 'the same thing' (Bohmian style) but I'd like to read how you come to that conclusion.



I think CF refers to non-local as a characteristic of dreamland - i.e. a wave function.
I don't necessarily refer to nonlocality as a wave function, but I do think that a wave function can be a characteristic (or explanation) of nonlocality- superposition can also be a way of explaining nonlocality- that is, what we see locally (in timespace) isn't 'really' there- it's out of 'timespace'- we just see a sort of 'reflection' of it in timespace.
I know, not that easy to explain or conceptualize, but Bohm said it much better than I possibly can, and so far I like his explanation better than almost anyone else-for now.
ps. BTW, I don't know that dreamtime may be nonlocality- but at times it seems that it is possible that what we get info from nonlocal states and describe this info in our dreams or projections. It just seems right, at least sometimes.


we might do better to disenfranchise our biases and conditioning from and in the physical to better investigate the higher planes.
That may be true, but some of us aren't sufficiently prepared to do so- my mind just doesn't work that way.


There's no lack of knowledge here, but could we walk the talk better?
Better than what?

eyeoneblack
26th April 2011, 04:49 PM
I agree what you are saying about time and space being possibly characteristics of 'the same thing' (Bohmian style) but I'd like to read how you come to that conclusion.

I'd like to read that too :lol: . Like I said, limited knowledge and strong intuition. I've been thinking about it a long time though, prob since reading Hew Price's Archimedes Point and the Arrow of Time. If I can think of anymore clues I'll let you know. :|
Sri Yukteswar in Autobiography of a Yogi speaks of bubbles of universes long before, I think, any cosmologist thought of it. It's possible to get information that isn't built from the ground up - it's just there to wonder about....



I don't necessarily refer to nonlocality as a wave function, but I do think that a wave function can be a characteristic (or explanation) of nonlocality- superposition can also be a way of explaining nonlocality- that is, what we see locally (in timespace) isn't 'really' there- it's out of 'timespace'- we just see a sort of 'reflection' of it in timespace.
I know, not that easy to explain or conceptualize, but Bohm said it much better than I possibly can, and so far I like his explanation better than almost anyone else-for now.
ps. BTW, I don't know that dreamtime may be nonlocality- but at times it seems that it is possible that what we get info from nonlocal states and describe this info in our dreams or projections. It just seems right, at least sometimes.

I like that, ALL of it. Who's this Bohm you refer to?

I'm saving the rest of your reply for further thought, but thanks for your input CF! :)

CFTraveler
26th April 2011, 08:45 PM
This dude.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-bohm/

I hope I didn't delete too much.