# How is time defined in newtonian physics?

## Recommended Posts

ok so i have a square defined as a(11)b(21)c(12)d(22) i euclidean space

in a five dimentional space i would define it as (1111)

You have lost information by doing that: the Euclidean coordinates give both eh position and the size of the square. Your "coordinates" (they aren't coordinates) simply describe its size, not its position.

• Replies 94
• Created

#### Popular Days

i didnt come here to argue but to develope my ideas on a 5 dimentional space to compress info or uncompress it

basically i claim that a four side polygone i can express it with 7 coordenates fully in a 5D space and not in 8 as a 4D space does

those coordenates would be the size of each sphere that is in each corner

and then i should account for a global inflation just in a single direction like you grow on the x axe but not in the y axe as when it appears you just move on the x axe

to acount for the direction i use two more coordenates and another coordenate for this offset global inflation

so translatimg from 4d to 5d i go from 8 coordenates to 7 the magic number

Edited by farolero
##### Share on other sites

How does 4 independant variables A,B,C,D

equal a 5 dimensional space? where is your 5th independant variable?

Do you understand how a dimension is defined in geometry?

i didnt come here to argue but to develope my ideas on a 5 dimentional space to compress info or uncompress it

Too bad, if your going to model develop you should expect critisism when you make blatant errors.

Edited by Mordred
##### Share on other sites

i didnt come here to argue but to develope my ideas on a 5 dimentional space to compress info or uncompress it

Well, ignoring all questions and comments is one way of "developing" your idea. Probably not the most productive though.

those coordenates would be the size of each sphere that is in each corner

What sphere? You didn't mention a sphere. How does the size of a sphere define the position of the square?

Three pages on and you still haven't provided any mathematics, or even a diagram, to explain your idea.

7 the magic number

Please try and keep this sort of idiotic comment out of the thread, if you want to be taken seriously.

##### Share on other sites

strange studiot morder i think its better if i start defining a segment:

a segment in this 5 dimentional space is defined as :

the global size of two spheres defined by a single coordenate

and its global rotation defined by two coordenates

so where an euclidean space i need 4 coordenates in a five dimetional space i just need 3

so thats why god put negative people in the world, so they can boost the good people, interesting

##### Share on other sites

Ok lets properly define the difference between size and dimension. We have two objects with dimensions x,y,z. Object A has dimensions 1 metre^3. Object B has dimensions 2 metres^3. Both are 3d objects.

so if we devide object a into object b we get a dimensionless number lets call it a scale factor.

2 m^3/1 m^3 = 2 with no dimensional units.

The dimensional units equals zero=dimensionless variable or parameter. In this case the size difference ratio.

##### Share on other sites

Why are you defining "segment" when you have not used the term before?

And it doesn't help much to try and define something in terms of several other undefined things.

strange studiot morder i think its better if i start defining a segment:

a segment in this 5 dimentional space is defined as :

the global size of two spheres defined by a single coordenate

What is "global size"?

What does "global size of two spheres" mean?

How are " two spheres defined by a single coordinate"?

How does the "global size of two spheres" relate to the "global size" of each spheres?

How about some maths to explain this?

and its global rotation defined by two coordenates

What is "it" in this sentence?

What is "global rotation"?

How is "global rotation" defined by two coordinates?

How about some maths to explain this?

so thats why god put negative people in the world, so they can boost the good people, interesting

And I thought he put idiots on the Earth to frustrate the more thoughtful people.

Edited by Strange
##### Share on other sites

Ok lets properly define the difference between size and dimension. We have two objects with dimensions x,y,z. Object A has dimensions 1 metre^3. Object B has dimensions 2 metres^3. Both are 3d objects.

so if we devide object a into object b we get a dimensionless number lets call it a scale factor.

2 m^3/1 m^3 = 2 with no dimensional units.

The dimensional units equals zero=dimensionless variable or parameter. In this case the size difference ratio.

so thats why god put negative people in the world, so they can boost the good people, interesting

God knows better

##### Share on other sites

strange studiot morder i think its better if i start defining a segment:

a segment in this 5 dimentional space is defined as :

the global size of two spheres defined by a single coordenate

and its global rotation defined by two coordenates

so where an euclidean space i need 4 coordenates in a five dimetional space i just need 3

so thats why god put negative people in the world, so they can boost the good people, interesting

Sorry this doesn't make any sense.

any line can be described by 2 coordinate points. Segment or otherwise. The number of points isn't a dimension.

A dimension is the number of required coordinates required to describe an object.

The most complex objects in Euclidean space can be fully described by 3 coordinates at each point. Doesn't matter what shape or number of sides that object has.

God knows better

No your wasting our time. As resident experts are on the moderator staff. Though not full moderators. I highly recommend you address the questions and comments made by others. Otherwise this thread will get locked.

##### Share on other sites

that is a five dimentional space dont imply five coordenates your oversimplyfing things

i got it wrong in my previous post:

imagine there are two spheres at (44) and (-44)

i double the size of both so now the apparent coordenates are (22)(-22)

i double the size of one and keep the other so now

(22)(-44)

so just used 2 coordenates for all this i just would need a third to consider the segment moves along the x axe

this is pretty easy to understand i see it peerfectly and im not intelligent just creative

but of course you didnt come here in a positive constructive way you just come here for arguments

well have one

if i was a mod i would lock this for people just come here to argue not to be any constructive ill just go to another place with less negative people

Edited by farolero
##### Share on other sites

No I am correcting your definitions of a dimension. You can confirm that definition by picking up a basic geometry book.

##### Share on other sites

this is a new geometry not used before based on motion as illusory

##### Share on other sites

Then at least follow math rules in terms of units ie metres. You can't redefine geometey without following math rules under dimensional analysis.

Did they not teach you in school that you also have to apply the formulas to the measurement units as well as the numeric value?

1 metre/1 metre=1 with no units. It is a 1 to 1 ratio not a dimension.

I know your schooling taught you at least that much. If not retake all your math courses.

Lets go back to grade 1.

1 apple divided by 1 apple equals 1.

Not one apple

Edited by Mordred
##### Share on other sites

this is a new geometry not used before based on motion as illusory

And where is the math?

##### Share on other sites

No your wasting our time. As resident experts are on the moderator staff. Though not full moderators. I highly recommend you address the questions and comments made by others. Otherwise this thread will get locked.

##### Share on other sites

imagine there are two spheres at (44) and (-44)

i double the size of both so now the apparent coordenates are (22)(-22)

i double the size of one and keep the other so now (22)(-44)

so just used 2 coordenates for all this i just would need a third to consider the segment moves along the x axe

this is pretty easy to understand i see it peerfectly and im not intelligent just creative

You may see it perfectly, but without a diagram or some mathematics, I am not seeing it. You seem to have information missing. You have specified the position of two spheres - I assume just on one axis - but not their size:

<------------- o ------------|---------- o --------------->
-44                              44


Then you double their size, and as a result halve the size of the coordinate system:

<------------- O ------------|---------- O --------------->
-22                               22


It still is not clear how you can use this.

if i was a mod i would lock this for people just come here to argue not to be any constructive ill just go to another place with less negative people

You don't appear willing to actually discuss your idea or answer any questions. If it does get locked, I expect it will be because of that.

##### Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

Just so we're clear answering questions and addressing concerns is not optional in speculation threads but required by the special rules. Failure to do so results in thread closures.

Do not reply to this modnote.

##### Share on other sites

If the Op can't listen to basic math rules none.

##### Share on other sites

ok i think i can explain it just acounting for the size dimention:

you define a segement as :

1) its size( which defines as well the y component)

2)the x axe displacement

3) the rotation, (where it cuts the y axe)

wouldnt that fully describe the position of a segment in space?

i didnt come here to argue but for help

1 apple divided by 1 apple equals 1.

Not one apple

maybe i should take prescholar again because i dont know how its applied to the real world dividing one apple bewtween one apple

could you offer me a real world example of this operation?

Edited by farolero
##### Share on other sites

ok i think i can explain it just acounting for the size dimention:

you define a segement as :

1) its size( which defines as well the y component)

2)the x axe displacement

3) the rotation, (where it cuts the y axe)

That sounds something like the line equation: y = mx + c

But that defines an unbounded line. To define a line segment you would need to define its start and end points (or, equivalently, its start point and length).

##### Share on other sites

i still havent figured out but ponder this:

a mathematician looking at a perspective picture could take a segment in 3d space defined with 6 values

and just meauring 4 values of that segment in the perspective picture he can figure out the 6 values

i came here for help to figure out how does he do that

Edited by farolero
##### Share on other sites

i still havent figured out but ponder this:

a mathematician looking at a perspective picture could take a segment in 3d space defined with 6 values

and just meauring 4 values of that segment in the perspective picture he can figure out the 6 values

Because the other information is encoded in the perspective transform. So you use that information to calculate the missing coordinates.

i came here for help to figure out how does he do that

A simple question along those lines might have been more productive.

Edited by Strange
##### Share on other sites

i think im clearing my mind check the diagram i did i explain here how just 3 coordinates might be enough:

Edited by farolero
##### Share on other sites

I can't make much sense of that. You have a line with two end points (1,1) and (4,3)

So you have used exactly the number of coordinates (two pairs) need to describe the start and end of the line in 2D. Where does size come into this? Your comment on the top left, seems to equate the Y coordinate to the size of your balls (if you will excuse the phrase).

Apart from the fact that your X coordinates converge to a point, I don't understand what this is supposed to show. (And can I suggest using a ruler or a graphics program on your PC next time.)

##### Share on other sites

Take those images and don't just apply the numbers. Include a unit of measurement.

example each unit or segmant is 1 metre long.

So we have two segmants of length. Each segmant is 1 metre. 1 metre+1 metre =2 metres. This is still a 1 dimensional object. That dimension is length. (x) or (L) take your pick

Now lets add the dimension of height. length×width. (W) or Y take your pick. We now have an axis of measurement that is (orthogonal) to the x axis (90 degrees)

Length×width @90 degrees to each other.

1 meter ×1 meter= 1 meter^2. = 2 dimensions even though the value is 1. You have 2 variables Length×width.

Volume uses 3 dimensions L×w×height.

Now in regards to those variables if I change any of these mentioned variables (dimensions) I change the size of the object. Yet I can change L or W or Z without changing the other variables.

Ie I can change the length without changing the height or width. Each of these variables are independant of the other. This is the definition of a dimension in geometry.

I cannot change the size of any object without changing either the length, width or height.

Size is the magnitude or dimensions(length,width height) of a thing, or how big something is. Size can be measured as length, width, height, diameter, perimeter, area, volume, or mass.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension

"In physics and mathematics, the dimension of a mathematical space (or object) is informally defined as the minimum number of coordinates needed to specify any point within it.[1][2] Thus a line has a dimension of one because only one coordinate is needed to specify a point on it for example, the point at 5 on a number line. A surface such as a plane or the surface of a cylinder or sphere has a dimension of two because two coordinates are needed to specify a point on it "

So you two axis on those drawings. You have coordinates of x and coordinates of y.

Those are two dimensional drawings. Coordinates x and y. The value of x or y isn't how we define a dimension That is the number of coordinate units. Not the number of coordinates needed to define any single point on those drawings.

Now think about the line example. I have a line 1 meter in length. I can divide that line into an infinite number of segmants. The number of segmants doesn't describe a dimension. Its just the number of units.

Edited by Mordred

## Create an account

Register a new account