Are space and time separate issues that can be treated in a parallel way.
in [Math]
|
Prev: Proof of the Infinitude of Twin Primes and all even numbered pairs of primes
Next: calling on Bill Dubuque, please Re: Proof of the Infinitude of Twin Primes and all even numbered pairs of primes
From: Immortalist on 11 Jul 2010 23:07 If there is a arrow of time is there a arrow of space? If there is a "temporal becoming" is there a "spacial becoming"? Time has only one dimension while space has three, and that physical events presuppose both space and time while mental events presuppose, directly at any rate, only time. There are, however, other differences between the two. It has generally seemed natural to people to speak of a passage of time; nothing similar seems appropriate to space. To speak of the passage of time in that way is of course to invoke a metaphor, and one that becomes even more explicit when reference is made to the river of time or time's arrow. Whatever may be the case with the metaphor of the river, time's arrow can be conceived as moving in alternate directions according to whether we think of ourselves or possibly events as moving from the past, through the present, into the future or of events as coming towards us from the future and receding behind us into the past. Another way of regarding the matter is to think of events as progressively coming into being, and this has become known as 'temporal becoming'. There has been much dispute whether the phenomenon is objective or subjective in the sense that it is a feature of the mind's view of events rather than of events themselves. While the metaphors that I have noted presuppose, through the idea of movement, a reference to space, it has sometimes been suggested that the view of time that they convey should be distinguished from that presupposed by physics, where there is a more direct analogy with space. Thus Henri Bergson claimed that the time of physics (le temps) involves a direct spatialization of time, in that physics is content to view events simply as related to each other in terms of the relations of before and after. The notions of before and after are not spatial ones in themselves. We can think of things as being spatially before and after others, but there is also a temporal sense of these words, as well as the sense presupposed in a logical ordering; in the series of natural numbers we speak of one number as coming before or after another. But, as Bergson pointed out, the measurement of time is normally carried out via the distance covered by a body moving at constant velocity, relative to the units provided by a constant periodic movement such as the swing of a pendulum or the rotation of the hands of a clock over its dial. Bergson therefore concluded that physics tends to think of time in terms of movement along a line (Newton, it will be remembered, spoke of time as flowing equably). By contrast, the time of consciousness (la duree) involves no such constancy, no repetition of events, but a kind of development, an unfolding of events into the future, which Bergson tried to explain by reference to the notion of an elan vital. Metaphysics - by D. W. Hamlyn http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0521286905/
From: Michael Gordge on 11 Jul 2010 23:45 On Jul 12, 12:07 pm, Immortalist <reanimater_2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Are space and time separate issues Yes > that can be treated in a parallel way. No MG
From: THE BORG on 12 Jul 2010 00:14 "Immortalist" <reanimater_2000(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:8823bde8-cb6a-4dac-8307-eb31d6276c09(a)l25g2000prn.googlegroups.com... > If there is a arrow of time is there a arrow of space? > > If there is a "temporal becoming" is there a "spacial > becoming"? > > Time has only one dimension while space has three, and > that physical > events presuppose both space and time while mental events > presuppose, > directly at any rate, only time. > You should look at space as SIX dimensions. Up, down, right, left, forward back. If you only look at with THREE dimensions, space itself becomes stagnant as space is infinite and must have the commencement point to the rate of SIX. Time is linear and modular, and you must remember this, as we will talk later of the connection between linear and also lateral with regard to the lateral and conceptual intelligence of the male. With being able to control time, then in a time warp, time can expand in all directions and in essence time can become space. The lineal warp that the stoppage of time produces is one where total protection occurs to all inside, as no one can access the places where time has ceased. A neat maneuver for creating heavens and paradises that you want to protect from undesirables.
From: spudnik on 12 Jul 2010 14:30 usually, it's considered to be perpendicular to all of the three spatial directions; at least, in some abstract sense. anyway, I invented the terminology; so ,there. here:http://www.relativitybook.com/resources/Einstein_space.html here:http://www.ctr4process.org/publications/Articles/LSI05/Cahill- FinalPa... --BP's cap™ call the association of brokers group! http://tarpley.net
From: Immortalist on 12 Jul 2010 19:15
On Jul 11, 8:58 pm, Sir Frederick Martin <mmcne...(a)fuzzysys.com> wrote: > Consider that at least 99% of 'matter' at your > density is 'empty' space. Isn't that like an old heliocentric view where antiquated scientists thought that particle were like points or planets revolving around stars? Actually a more current view is one which explains that space as not being empty but of a "distributed field" called a particle, filling up its level. Most of matter is theoretically filled with energy. > Then what does it mean that string theory implies > 8 or 9 spatial dimensions. Even so, in string theory 3 of those dimensions are the same as the ones I am talking about; height, width and length. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory > Then what does it mean that 'time' is being recognized as a > quale, a brain based representation, no more 'real' than 'red'. > This is where the philosophy part comes in, how do we separate the conception of time from scientific theories of time? > Very mysterious place. Mysteries are a crutch for the religious rejects. |