April 16, 2012
"Space is 4D" -- Theory Claims that Time is Not the 4th Dimension
Einstein never interpreted time "t" as a fourth dimension of space. Space is not 3D + T, space is 4D. With clocks we measure numerical order of material change. This numerical order is the only time that exists in a physical world. With this approach all immediate information transfers of quantum physics are explained in a more appropriate way. 4D space is a medium of quantum information transfers.
Scientists at the Scientific Research Centre Bistra in Ptuj, Slovenia, theorize that this Newtonian idea of time as an absolute quantity that flows on its own, along with the idea that time is the fourth dimension of spacetime, are incorrect. They propose to replace these concepts of time with a view that corresponds more accurately to the physical world: time as a measure of the numerical order of change. In April of 2011, in two papers in Physics Essays, Amrit Sorli, Davide Fiscaletti, and Dusan Klinar, begin by explaining how we usually assume that time is an absolute physical quantity that plays the role of the independent variable (time, t, is often the x-axis on graphs that show the evolution of a physical system). But, as they note, we never really measure t. What we do measure is an object’s frequency and speed. But, by itself, t has only a mathematical value, and no primary physical existence.
This view doesn’t mean that time does not exist, but that time has more to do with space than with the idea of an absolute time. So while 4D spacetime is usually considered to consist of three dimensions of space and one dimension of time, the researchers’ view suggests that it’s more correct to imagine spacetime as four dimensions of space. In other words, as they say, the Universe is “timeless.”
“Minkowski space is not 3D + T, it is 4D,” the scientists write in their most recent paper. “The point of view which considers time to be a physical entity in which material changes occur is here replaced with a more convenient view of time being merely the numerical order of material change. This view corresponds better to the physical world and has more explanatory power in describing immediate physical phenomena: gravity, electrostatic interaction, information transfer by EPR experiment are physical phenomena carried directly by the space in which physical phenomena occur.”
“The idea of time being the fourth dimension of space did not bring much progress in physics and is in contradiction with the formalism of special relativity,” he said. “We are now developing a formalism of 3D quantum space based on Planck's work. It seems that the Universe is 3D from the macro to the micro level to the Planck volume, which per formalism is 3D. In this 3D space there is no ‘length contraction,’ there is no ‘time dilation.’ What really exists is that the velocity of material change is ‘relative’ in the Einstein sense.”
The researchers give an example of this concept of time by imagining a photon that is moving between two points in space. The distance between these two points is composed of Planck distances, each of which is the smallest distance that the photon can move. (The fundamental unit of this motion is Planck time.)
When the photon moves a Planck distance, it is moving exclusively in space and not in absolute time, the researchers explain. The photon can be thought of as moving from point 1 to point 2, and its position at point 1 is “before” its position at point 2 in the sense that the number 1 comes before the number 2 in the numerical order. Numerical order is not equivalent to temporal order, i.e., the number 1 does not exist before the number 2 in time, only numerically.
Without using time as the fourth dimension of spacetime, the physical world can be described more accurately. As physicist Enrico Prati noted in a recent study, Hamiltonian dynamics (equations in classical mechanics) is robustly well-defined without the concept of absolute time. Other scientists have pointed out that the mathematical model of spacetime does not correspond to physical reality, and propose that a timeless “state space” provides a more accurate framework. The scientists also investigated the falsifiability of the two notions of time.
The concept of time as the fourth dimension of space -- as a fundamental physical entity in which an experiment occurs -- can be falsified by an experiment in which time does not exist, according to the scientists.
An example of an experiment in which time is not present as a fundamental entity is the Coulomb experiment; mathematically, this experiment takes place only in space. On the other hand, in the concept of time as a numerical order of change taking place in space, space is the fundamental physical entity in which a given experiment occurs. Although this concept could be falsified by an experiment in which time (measured by clocks) is not the numerical order of material change, such an experiment is not yet known.
“Newton theory on absolute time is not falsifiable; you cannot prove it or disprove it -- you have to believe in it,” Sorli said. “The theory of time as the fourth dimension of space is falsifiable and in our last article we prove there are strong indications that it might be wrong. On the basis of experimental data, time is what we measure with clocks: with clocks we measure the numerical order of material change, i.e., motion in space.”
In addition to providing a more accurate description of the nature of physical reality, the concept of time as a numerical order of change can also resolve Zeno’s paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise. In this paradox, the faster Achilles gives the Tortoise a head start in the race. But although Achilles can run 10 times faster than the Tortoise, he can never surpass the Tortoise because, for every distance unit that Achilles runs, the Tortoise also runs 1/10 that distance. So whenever Achilles reaches a point where the Tortoise has been, the Tortoise has also moved slightly ahead. Although the conclusion that Achilles can never surpass the Tortoise is obviously false, there are many different proposed explanations for why the argument is flawed.
The paradox can be resolved by redefining velocity, so that the velocity of both runners is derived from the numerical order of their motion, rather than their displacement and direction in time. From this perspective, Achilles and the Tortoise move through space only, and Achilles can surpass Tortoise in space, though not in absolute time.
Some recent studies have challenged the theory that the brain represents time with an internal “clock” that emits neural ticks (the “pacemaker-accumulator” model) and suggest that the brain represents time in a spatially distributed way, by detecting the activation of different neural populations. Although we perceive events as occurring in the past, present, or future, these concepts may just be part of a psychological frame in which we experience material changes in space.
The Daily Galaxy via physorg.com and physicsessays.org
Image credit: With thanks to androidsoftware.us
View Today's Hot Tech News Video from IDG -Publishers of PC World, MacWorld, and Computerworld--Top Right of Page
To launch the video click on the Start Arrow. Our thanks for your support! It allows us to bring you the news daily about the discoveries, people and events changing our planet and our knowledge of the Universe.
This view doesn’t mean that time does not exist, but that time has more to do with space than with the idea of an absolute time. So while 4D spacetime is usually considered to consist of three dimensions of space and one dimension of time, the researchers’ view suggests that it’s more correct to imagine spacetime as four dimensions of space. In other words, as they say, the Universe is “timeless.”
“Minkowski space is not 3D + T, it is 4D,” the scientists write in their most recent paper. “The point of view which considers time to be a physical entity in which material changes occur is here replaced with a more convenient view of time being merely the numerical order of material change. This view corresponds better to the physical world and has more explanatory power in describing immediate physical phenomena: gravity, electrostatic interaction, information transfer by EPR experiment are physical phenomena carried directly by the space in which physical phenomena occur.”
“The idea of time being the fourth dimension of space did not bring much progress in physics and is in contradiction with the formalism of special relativity,” he said. “We are now developing a formalism of 3D quantum space based on Planck's work. It seems that the Universe is 3D from the macro to the micro level to the Planck volume, which per formalism is 3D. In this 3D space there is no ‘length contraction,’ there is no ‘time dilation.’ What really exists is that the velocity of material change is ‘relative’ in the Einstein sense.”
The researchers give an example of this concept of time by imagining a photon that is moving between two points in space. The distance between these two points is composed of Planck distances, each of which is the smallest distance that the photon can move. (The fundamental unit of this motion is Planck time.)
When the photon moves a Planck distance, it is moving exclusively in space and not in absolute time, the researchers explain. The photon can be thought of as moving from point 1 to point 2, and its position at point 1 is “before” its position at point 2 in the sense that the number 1 comes before the number 2 in the numerical order. Numerical order is not equivalent to temporal order, i.e., the number 1 does not exist before the number 2 in time, only numerically.
Without using time as the fourth dimension of spacetime, the physical world can be described more accurately. As physicist Enrico Prati noted in a recent study, Hamiltonian dynamics (equations in classical mechanics) is robustly well-defined without the concept of absolute time. Other scientists have pointed out that the mathematical model of spacetime does not correspond to physical reality, and propose that a timeless “state space” provides a more accurate framework. The scientists also investigated the falsifiability of the two notions of time.
The concept of time as the fourth dimension of space -- as a fundamental physical entity in which an experiment occurs -- can be falsified by an experiment in which time does not exist, according to the scientists.
An example of an experiment in which time is not present as a fundamental entity is the Coulomb experiment; mathematically, this experiment takes place only in space. On the other hand, in the concept of time as a numerical order of change taking place in space, space is the fundamental physical entity in which a given experiment occurs. Although this concept could be falsified by an experiment in which time (measured by clocks) is not the numerical order of material change, such an experiment is not yet known.
“Newton theory on absolute time is not falsifiable; you cannot prove it or disprove it -- you have to believe in it,” Sorli said. “The theory of time as the fourth dimension of space is falsifiable and in our last article we prove there are strong indications that it might be wrong. On the basis of experimental data, time is what we measure with clocks: with clocks we measure the numerical order of material change, i.e., motion in space.”
In addition to providing a more accurate description of the nature of physical reality, the concept of time as a numerical order of change can also resolve Zeno’s paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise. In this paradox, the faster Achilles gives the Tortoise a head start in the race. But although Achilles can run 10 times faster than the Tortoise, he can never surpass the Tortoise because, for every distance unit that Achilles runs, the Tortoise also runs 1/10 that distance. So whenever Achilles reaches a point where the Tortoise has been, the Tortoise has also moved slightly ahead. Although the conclusion that Achilles can never surpass the Tortoise is obviously false, there are many different proposed explanations for why the argument is flawed.
The paradox can be resolved by redefining velocity, so that the velocity of both runners is derived from the numerical order of their motion, rather than their displacement and direction in time. From this perspective, Achilles and the Tortoise move through space only, and Achilles can surpass Tortoise in space, though not in absolute time.
Some recent studies have challenged the theory that the brain represents time with an internal “clock” that emits neural ticks (the “pacemaker-accumulator” model) and suggest that the brain represents time in a spatially distributed way, by detecting the activation of different neural populations. Although we perceive events as occurring in the past, present, or future, these concepts may just be part of a psychological frame in which we experience material changes in space.
The Daily Galaxy via physorg.com and physicsessays.org
Image credit: With thanks to androidsoftware.us
View Today's Hot Tech News Video from IDG -Publishers of PC World, MacWorld, and Computerworld--Top Right of Page
To launch the video click on the Start Arrow. Our thanks for your support! It allows us to bring you the news daily about the discoveries, people and events changing our planet and our knowledge of the Universe.
Comments
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2012/04/weekend-feature-space-is-4d-theory-claims-that-time-is-not-the-4th-dimension.html#more
Of course, maybe we'll never know, not until we leave the planet...
But I refuse to believe any theory that makes time travel impossible ;)
"When the photon moves a Planck distance, it is moving exclusively in space and not in absolute time,"
I would have to disagree on this one. If it was instant, then photons would be able to cross the cosmos in an instant, jumping from planck distance to planck distance. If not in an instant then its moving in time.
And the turtle race I just must not be smart enough to understand. If given the turtle a 10 yard headstart and Achilles runs 20 yards a second, he will pass him in between 11 and 12 yards if the turtle runs at 1/10th Achilles speed. 1st he will reach where the turtle just was, then is, then has never been. My personal opinion is this is some thing taught in schools to help dumb down people. Make them think there is a problem that just is not there. But like I said, im just not that smart.
Does this imply you don't really die, since you're existing at all points in time at once.
I am curious about your thoughts on fractal geometry describing our Universe as having fractional (fractal) dimensions?
In other words, what we perceive cannot be described in "integer dimensions", but existence in an infinity of dimensions between 3 and 4 dimensions (or some other scale).
For example, a perfect 3d cube or sphere is merely a hypothetical object as a basis to attempt to understand dimensionality, though these objects have no basis in reality.
This is something I am trying to reconcile with myself lately.
Have a good one!
BTW... Trackback : http://www.oigel.com/politics/weekend-feature-space-is-4d-theory-claims-that-time-is-not-the-4th-dimension/
Or else: imagine the beginning or end of so-called time billions and trillions of years before or after, but still the question remains: what was before or will be after that? Saying that time started with big bang and ends with the end of the universe, is partial explanation. Big bang was rather a beginning of a series of processes/motions that would stop one day.
Time is an illusion, but a persistent one for any life form as such having conscious memory.
http://rewiringthebrain.net/
David
In General Relativity, the coefficients of the intervals can vary although they're generally expected to keep the same sign. Variation of the time interval coefficient indicates change in the rate of time flow, so there is no absolute time. (Technically, this is the time-time coefficient; coefficients of products of the time interval with the space intervals can become non-zero.)
The sign change between space and time creates a hyperbolic relationship. Time is separated into two disconnected sheets "past" and "future". If there were two time dimensions these sheets would connect and it would be possible to rotate between the past and the future.
I would have to disagree on this one. If it was instant, then photons would be able to cross the cosmos in an instant, jumping from planck distance to planck distance. If not in an instant then its moving in time.
@smartypants: Here's something to think about. If you were to hitch a ride on a photon from here to the absolute limits of space that we can observe, the trip WOULD BE instantaneous, no matter how far you travel. That's why the concept of "faster than light" travel is superfluous: You cannot get to any point in spacetime faster than instantly. However, by the time you get there (pardon the misleading phrase, since from your POV the trip would take absolutely no time at all), the Earth will no longer exist.
In order for something to go from position 1, to position 2, time must pass.
Unless of course, you say that the object is in position 1, and position 2, and all possible positions/states at once.
But then I (the observer) must be moving my observation point, or gaze, from position 1, to position 2, to perceive change.
And again, movement of reference points, of shifting gaze, implies change, which implies time.
Thought about it and here is what i think.
1 = is another opinion given like its a fact.
2 = its not what we see from our POV we have here so it would be rather hard to prove (or disprove).
3 = if time travel proves possible then it would be possible to arrive before instantly.
4 = the time to type this quite a few instants went by and the Earth is still here.
Its a possibility that time may not be its own dimension, but I am pretty sure its real. Wow, just look at the time now, gotta run. ;)