by going faster then light we would not change dementions maybe we would relize the exestence of a forth demention. but use this little example. There is this type of animal that lives on the bottom of a fish tank. it cant see anything exsept what is in his light of sight, across one x axis there for y and z are unknows to him. We as humans can watch this little animal move around but to him he is still in 1d even through above him is move and to his right and his left there is more. He is in a 3d world with out knowing it. The same idea could be aplayed to humans we might live in a 4d wourld and not know it. maybe light its self is the 4th demention or maybe not.
Does that mean that Movement is just a theory?.....( chuckles) Actually some philosophers might think this.....movement or the perception of such just being a subjective state....etc etc ...
This statement by itself exhibits on your behalf a complete misunderstanding of all theories in physics. I can have a theory where mass can be a dimension. It is just another degree of freedom. And what may I ask does this exactly mean, I mean can you explain how light could be considered to be an extra dimension.
Mdhislaer: The following is nonsense, indicating a lack of knowledge about the mathematics of relativity. The mathematics of relativity uses (x, y, z, t) as the 4D coordinates of what is called an event, where (x, y, z) are 3D space coordinates and t is the time at which an event occurred. The mathematics is a model which does a very good job of describing the laws of physics. This model treats the laws of physics as describing geometric objects in a 4D space. A moving point-like particle becomes a static curve in a 4D space. Note that two coordinates are required for 2D geometry, three for 3D geometry, and four for 4D geometry. (x, y, z, t) looks like the coordinates of a point in a 4D space. The mathematics of 4D geometry is used as the mathematics of physics. This is a very useful method of dealing with the laws of physics. It is not necessary to think of time as a fourth dimension. It just happens to be a handy way of dealing with the laws of physics.
I must admit When I first came to sciforums I was under the impression that the word dimension meant something other than what physics would define it as. Dimension by philosophical definition or dimension by physics definition are very different. If I am not mistaked in physics the word dimension referes to a "measurement" Where as Dimension in Philosophy can mean ( an alternative reality or universe)
essentially to go faster than the speed of light, you would indeed have to shift into another dimension , if only for a few nanoseconds; and yet you might not even register this shift in your conscious perception. also, there is the factor of this higher dimensions and the effects it has on bodies etc. if you are going to travel a long ways, meaning spend time in that time-independent dimension as you cut thru time; you better be spiritually mature enough, or else you will fall unconscious when you enter this other 'dimension' or 'plane' where time is frozen so to speak. this dimension, like the higher ones above it, are almost invisible to the ones below it. this means there is even less communication between dimensions further apart, such as 3rd and 5th. they do cross sometimes, rarely. some of us can kind of comprehend it, others cannot. its because its another step, another plane of existance that we havent experienced in our lives, we cannot reference to anything similar. we do, however have some exceptions, of course.
unfortunately Zonabi, as I stated earlier the word domension can be used in the manner you refer to......however because this is a Physics Forum it has no real relevance if anything because there is an inability to prove or measure using scientific methods the dimensions you speak of....there for it is more a matter of philosophy or theosophy and maybe better discussed there.....
Theory means prooved, or with enough evidence to be accepted until a better alternative comes along. "innocent till proven guilty" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Dimensions U are all wrong. You cannot superceed the speed of light using classical physics (e.g. general and special relativity.)because to propel any thing with mass to the speed of light you need an infinite amount of energy to do that. And if energy was ifinite then within every particlte in the universe an ifinte amount of energy would be held. The theorys of going faster than light speed are often vague and in the end proved wrong. The dimesion thing quantum physics predicts up to 20 dimension but most are to small to be noticed or even harnessed. The funny thing about these dimensions is that stuff can come out but not go in.
an interesting perspective....maybe..... "The universe is changing at the rate of 'c'. The photon is travelling at the rate of 'c' so how fast if the photon travelling relative to the change occuring around it? the photon is effectively stationary relative to the universe's rate of change (through time) so when we meaure the speed of light what are we measuring?
When you say that "the universe is changing at the rate of c," what exactly do you mean by that? What, specifically, is changing, and how do you obtain the rate of 3 x 10^8 meters/second for it?
Brandon, I have started a new thread titled "'c' - what are we actually measuring?" I hope it answers your questions and I look forward to your response
I think the force for you travel faster than the speed- o- light would be unattainable. But if it was I think time would become nonexistant, frozen. Also to travel the light speed you have to be the light, shape and size. It is a matter of space dynamics. Now if matter could absorb the gravity instead of release it, then time could reverse!
suppose there existed a temporal mass that we are all accelerating towards along the axis of time. not unlike how a stone falls to earth completely incapable of slowing down its fall and preventing its impact.
Could be a confusing issue- if it was possible to travel at v=c. But just for the sake of discussion, special relativity dictates that when we look at a moving frame of reference we see clocks moving with it running slow and yet (because of sync) we are traveling into the future of that frame. That is, we travel into that frame's future faster than those traveling with the frame. So, if we were to attain v=c, we should see all 'stationary' clocks stop and we should see them out of sync more than ever. It seems we should also be traveling into the future of the 'stationary' frame faster than ever, not the past. I could be wrong, but I think most people who state that our time would reverse are not considering the relativity of syncronization. :m:
anything with mass cannot travel at c...what am I missing here... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
