What is Time???

[youngvr4]

but whats the point of time, if we can't controll it, whats the point in keeping track of it? besides our everday get up and go to work sun up and sun down. i mean whats the point of time? does anyone understand what i'm tryna say.

[IntegraBoy2003]

who knows what time is, its hard to explain

[2strokebloke]

Originally Posted by youngvr4

but whats the point of time, if we can't controll it, whats the point in keeping track of it? besides our everday get up and go to work sun up and sun down. i mean whats the point of time? does anyone understand what i'm tryna say.

Well what's the point of making maps? We keep track of time so we know what happened where in time, and where we are heading in time.
For instance, we can say for instance that in 1860's the transcontinental railroad was built. And we can say for instance with paying for a house, that it will at it's current rate be completely payed for in 2006.
But I don't think of time like a map exactly, it'd be more of a measurement of length, or volume, as our conventional ways of expressing time were invented thousands and thousands of years ago.
Perhaps the future holds different ways of measuring time, perhaps someday there will be a "time map"

[Joseph1082]

Honestly, collected bits and peices of it... never actually read concrete paper on their existence. Not to say I made it up, it certainly came from somewhere... I know the book "Timeline" was based on the quantum universe thing.

[Nettyesquivel]

time are numbers that keep us going on and on and on

[moslerporschefreak]

Originally Posted by Joseph1082

Honestly, collected bits and peices of it... never actually read concrete paper on their existence. Not to say I made it up, it certainly came from somewhere... I know the book "Timeline" was based on the quantum universe thing.

Yeah that's really the only place that i seen a justification of it. Maybe he has some sort of reference to that "experiment" in the back of his book. Well, I look for it and keep you posted.

Anyways, here a somewhat unrelated but similar idea to this thread. Ok, lets assume that multiverses do exist and that there is such thing as a fourth and fifth dimensions that basically organize these third dimesional "constructs" into certain linear continuums. Then throw in a sixth dimension. This could either simply be another reality dimension like the fifth or something that I haven't yet figured out. What you have now is essentially a three dimensional space consiting of infitessimally small point (geometric points) each of which is an individual three dimensional multiverse. Now take this 4,5,6 dimesnion space and consolidate it to a an infitessimaly small point. Similar in purpose to the 1,2,3 dimesnional points previously mentioned but very different in nature since these dimesnion aren't physical representations per say. So now you have this new set of geometric points with which to create a new three dimensional construct.

Following this pattern you could essentially assume the existence of infinitely many dimesnions. Well, actually with a proper proof by induction prove the existence of infinitely many dimesnions. Note this is different than the idea of our universe being contained within a single atom.

Also, I realize that this idea is not true in all likelyhood considering that I took a lot of logically leaps. In a proof by induction sense, I assumed a corect parameter but made a false pattern to follow. Oh well, it's still fun to think about.

[Joseph1082]

Actually... considering the infinite nature of the universe, I like your theory and think it holods weight! If everythnig, all the dimnetions are infinite, and there are many, Y would that one SINGLE quantity, the number of dimentions, be a finite arbitrary number, isn't it much more likely that this number is infinite just like all the rest. I applaud you!

[moslerporschefreak]

Thanks. I've been looking to pursue this thoery a little more with some more concrete backing. But I think that if I can establish the possibility for a pattern like that, it may hold some weight like you said. Anyways, since your a physics major, you could probably help refine this idea into a more plausible or more acceptable form. Anyways, like I said, it is an interesting idea.

[Boss San]

Whoa.
This place is deep.
I need to stop in here when I'm really baked, then I'm sure it would make perfect sence.
My details of my theories are quite inconciquential.

[Joseph1082]

Well, I think the latest thing they are saying is there are 11 or 12 dimention... part of the super string theory... sorry, i'm a litle rusty. But as far as I'm concerned, we can only rationalize 4... 3 of space and time, aside from the fifth standing for altnerate sililar realities, maybe a sixth... I can't imagine what the rest would be. Come to thing of it, who knows what is true... according to philosophy, the only truth you have is your own mind, so who knows.

[youngvr4]

time is begining and end! i put some hard thought into it and thats what i came up with, no matter how i look at it its begining and end.

[moslerporschefreak]

Well yeah, there are a lot of people would argue that there aren't even three dimesions. Or at least none that we can trully percieve. I've heard that there is an argument for up to 12 dimesions but again, we can hardly understand four. Five is a pure abstraction and six may only make sense the some five people in the world who trully understand string theory.

[loismustdie]

well the way i understood the 11 deminsion deal was read "the universe in a nutshell" by stephen hawking, i love that book, but first you have to imagine that the dimentions are on a quantum level and some of them are spatial like if a train track was tied into a not, and the distance and route the train would trvel would be a deminsion......