RE: Extra Dimensions
January 2, 2013 at 10:57 am
(This post was last modified: January 2, 2013 at 10:57 am by Tiberius.)
(January 2, 2013 at 9:11 am)Aractus Wrote: Well yes, they currently teach 4-dimensional space-time (ie general relativity). They also teach Newtonian Mechanics. But this direction that is gaining momentum is abandoning time as a dimension. Three physical dimensions, and time is NOT a dimension. So define "generally accepted" because I don't think it is. It may be "de-facto" accepted by those who study other areas of physics, but the debate and the research is ongoing, and it would only be being researched as widely as it is if it was "not" generally accepted.Right, but I never thought of time as a spacial dimension. I always thought of it as a another type of dimension, unrelated (though linked) to the spacial dimensions. Indeed, in mathematics I've done equations using 24 spacial dimensions, and at no point did we think that mapping points into a 4th dimension meant they were being mapped into "time". It was just another dimension of space, no different to width, height, depth, etc.
In physics, it seems obvious to me that time is a kind of dimension, although it also seems obvious that it is not a spacial one. Objects can move through time, as they can move through space, but unlike moving through space, an object can (seemingly) only move through time in one direction. Spacial dimensions appear to be linked to the time dimension though, as the faster an object travels through space, the slower it travels through time (relative to a stationary observer).
That's all I meant.