KtownChemist Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 So can gravity be explained as movement through the fifth dimension or as a change in the rate of time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bignose Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Probably ought to explain what is meant by "movement through the fifth dimension" because Newton's Law of Gravity seems to work pretty well in 3-D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KtownChemist Posted May 19, 2009 Author Share Posted May 19, 2009 To explain a little bit I was just thinking about how dimensions come in sets of three in order to describe a system at a particular state. The length, width, and height are necessary to locate something in what we define as space. Then there are the 3 time dimensions, much like length, width and height. These three dimensions are necessary to pinpoint a specific moment in time of a particular set of timelines. Just like you cant describe the location of an object without its three coordinates, you cannot describe the time of something without knowing its three coordinates. Imagine an object with constant positional coordinates X,Y, and Z; Their rate of time is linear, the 4th dimension. But if suddenly the object were to be subjected to an enormous gravitational field, the rate of time would increase and the object would no longer be on the same linear timeline from before the gravity field. In fact the object has moved along the 5th dimension. (The Future). only by allowing alternative timelines with their own unique positional coordinates can this be possible. Yet this only address two of the time coordinates, In order to understand why we need three time dimensions to completely identify a specific moment in time, imagine that same object on two seperate timelines. Yet, the two timelines happen to cross at specific moment T. The Object on both timelines maintains the same X,Y, Z and rate of time at T. From here on both timelines could merge into a single line as their futures stay the exact same. so from this moment T onward all X,Y,Z and rate of time stay the exact same in both systems. The only difference in the two timelines is how they arrived at T. (The Past). Does this make sense to anyone? I also have explainations of the 7,8, and 9th dimensions as well. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedAlso the Strong Force can be viewed as changes of 1st dimension since these forces hold quarks together; since quarks can be viewed as the 0 dimension points holding two together would be a change in the first dimension, while the weak force acts in the second dimension and the EM forces work in a three dimensional space. gravity is then the fourth force working in the fourth dimension Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Urmmmm 3 time dimensions? In classical mechanics, and SR/GR, there is only 1. The future is just a higher point along the same dimension as the past... Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedAlso the Strong Force can be viewed as changes of 1st dimension since these forces hold quarks together; since quarks can be viewed as the 0 dimension points holding two together would be a change in the first dimension, while the weak force acts in the second dimension and the EM forces work in a three dimensional space. gravity is then the fourth force working in the fourth dimension Also, electrons are point like, is the electromagnetic force 1D? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KtownChemist Posted May 19, 2009 Author Share Posted May 19, 2009 the future is only on the same line if you believe there is only one unchangeable future, which the Heisenberg principle seems to counter predict. Instead the future is a probability of different possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 No, it's mathematically one dimension. Having it one dimension doesn't require that everything is predetermined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KtownChemist Posted May 19, 2009 Author Share Posted May 19, 2009 well can you explain to me why it is only one dimesional? would like to hear your reasoning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Because that's the way the universe is, we don't know why there are only 3 spacial and 1 temporal dimensions. As for arguments as to why we think it's 1, I'm no expert (Atheist!) well a dimension can be thought of as a direction, you can move backwards or forwards, this is clearly what can be done in time (there are other arguments as to why backwards is not an option for us to move in time, but the concept of a t=t0 - 10 is valid), if you need two numbers to describe your direction you have two dimensions, which you don't with time, you can't go forward and left a bit in time, as you can in space where you can go, forward, left and down a bit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 By your reasoning, shouldn't archeologists be using timecubes instead of timelines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GutZ Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I dont think it requires an extra dimension in order to describe time slowing down... OH are you saying that because of the behavior of time slowing down graphically it would curve downwards. Then time is one axis and gravity is the other? Therefore 2 dimensions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KtownChemist Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 Quantum superposition says that we can never be certain as to which path a discrete particle travels from A to B, instead there is a probability assigned to each path the particle could take in order to get from A to B. We cannot 100% predict which path will be taken by the particle. Another interpretation says that the particle will take all paths possible simultaneously from A to B. The only way this can make sense is to construct a time area consisting of the 4th and 5th dimensions where movement along the x axis (4th dimension) from A to B is linear (y=0); this is what we observe. Yet Quantum superposition demands that there exist curves through x and y axis for all possible paths from A to B. (imagine an electric field in 2 spatial dimensions) The line connecting the positive and negative ends of the field is where the force is the strongest or in our time situation, the most probable path of time; which we observe. as the curve gets farther away from the line the probability of that path through time goes down. Having only one time dimension seems to go against what Quantum physics is all about Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedOH are you saying that because of the behavior of time slowing down graphically it would curve downwards. Then time is one axis and gravity is the other? Therefore 2 dimensions? Thats almost what I am saying; gravity in not a dimension but rather an effect of the fifth dimension. Think of a star so big that on the surface time moves 1/2 as fast as time in the atmosphere. Now someone in the atmosphere would be able to work twice as much as someone on the surface for the same time interval. So someone up in the atmosphere has a higher time potential because of faster time. Since we know that all systems tend toward lower energy states; gravity can be thought of as an object moving from higher potential time to lower potential time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 In some circumstances there are infinite possibilities for the paths taken, does that mean there are infinite time dimensions? I don't see how having indeterminate situations requires more dimensions, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KtownChemist Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 In some circumstances there are infinite possibilities for the paths taken, does that mean there are infinite time dimensions? I don't see how having indeterminate situations requires more dimensions, sorry. No I think you misunderstood what I am saying... On a two dimensional grid point A is (2,0) and point B is (3,0); now a straight line connecting A to B is the least energetic way to travel from A to B and just so happens to be in a single spatial dimension (like our understanding of time), but there also exist countless other possibilities of functions that also pass through A,B which require an extra spatial dimension for them to make sense. Some functions even require a third spatial dimension to make sense, but all spatial functions can be expressed in three spatial dimensions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KtownChemist Posted June 17, 2009 Author Share Posted June 17, 2009 Also, electrons are only point like, is the electromagnetic force 1D? Electron are only point like if you observe them when time is not moving, with any passage of time, Electrons are more accurately described as waves or the wave function of Schroedinger's Equation. (2D) right? The EM force is the same way; at any particular moment in time (change in time is zero) EM force is best represented as a photon, but with the passage of time the EM force is better represented as a wave (2D) connecting two points in time, until you measure it at its final destination where it becomes a photon again. The strong Force is 1 Dimensional because it can only act by binding two quarks together in a straight line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Based on the title, I thought this thread would be about Kaluza-Klein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KtownChemist Posted June 18, 2009 Author Share Posted June 18, 2009 Yeah except Kaluza-Klein must have 5 dimensions to work, I believe there can be any number of dimensions as long as they are multiples of 3. In mainstream physics they believe in 4 dimensions and 4 fundamental forces, But for Kaluza-Klein they are saying there are 4 fundamental forces in 5 dimensions which doesn't make much sense. I think there should be another fundamental forces between gravity and the weak force, Entropy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now