# The fourth dimension is not time, but why?

#### Bishwas Bhandari

Registered Member
Is time the fourth dimension?
Not specifically, ’cause time is not an axis and dimension must consist of the axis. Also, till now we are understanding the second and third dimensions via their axes. The w-axis in the upper equation is the main component of the fourth dimension. (A reference from this article)

Is time the fourth dimension?
Not specifically, ’cause time is not an axis and dimension must consist of the axis.
Try googling "Minkowski diagram". After you've done that, we can have a conversation.

Is time the fourth dimension?
Not specifically, ’cause time is not an axis and dimension must consist of the axis.
As James mentioned, in some cases it starts looking a lot like (and acting a lot like) an axis.

Is time the fourth dimension?
Not specifically, ’cause time is not an axis and dimension must consist of the axis. Also, till now we are understanding the second and third dimensions via their axes. The w-axis in the upper equation is the main component of the fourth dimension. (A reference from this article)
I'm not really sure why you consider an axis to be critical. Axes are a geometric construct we use to measure things. They are abstract; they do not exist in nature.

You can tell time is a dimension with this simple test:

I travel in my spaceship to coordinates x=10, y=10, z=10.
You travel in your spaceship to coordinates x=10, y=10, z=10.
We do not crash into each other.
Why not?
Because I travel there at t=10 and you travel there at t=20.

Our coordinates are not the same. I am at (10,10,10,10) and you are at (10,10,10,20). Those are two distinct locations ("events") in spacetime.

It takes - not three, but four - coordinates to specify a unique event in spacetime.

It takes - not three, but four - coordinates to specify a unique event in spacetime.
.
So because

I travel in my spaceship to coordinates x=10, y=10, z=10.
You travel in your spaceship to coordinates x=10, y=10, z=10.
We do not crash into each other.
Why not?
Because I travel there at t=10 and you travel there at t=20.

you arrive at a different NOW coordinate you are puzzled why you do not crash?

Strange when you post
Axes are a geometric construct we use to measure things. They are abstract; they do not exist in nature.
you then go to list non matching axis, (t) being the mismatch

Very strange. (x) (y) and (z) don't exist but (t) does????

Is time the fourth dimension?
Not specifically, ’cause time is not an axis and dimension must consist of the axis. Also, till now we are understanding the second and third dimensions via their axes. The w-axis in the upper equation is the main component of the fourth dimension. (A reference from this article)

A particular goal of motivated reasoning is unsurprisingly going to selectively forge its own technical standard for why its proposal is the case. But with respect to this, there's an older way to apprehend the situation.

A group of 37 coins is not the abstract entity of "37" itself, either, but the coins nevertheless partake in the idea, they are a perceptual/physical occurrence of it or are receptive to "37" as a set, measurement, count, etc being projected upon them.

Similarly, the fourth dimension is a concept, which -- though more rigorously defined than the malleable social idea of "justice" -- one is still only going to encounter as some potential _X_ (like time or hypercube drawing) instantiating it at best, while not literally being the abstraction.

The situation is complicated with "time" due to the latter itself being a concept modeled as partaking in yet another one. So what you actually encounter are exemplars of time manifested as technical descriptions or graphic representations, also conforming to or expressing the idea of "fourth dimension".

Switching from mathematics or physics to the notion of time in everyday life, you'll of course experience the world incrementally changing along with yourself, and mundane clocks/calendars keeping track of that. From those changes, "time" in an ordinary context is abstracted, and usually aligned with commonsense presentism with respect to what people believe is "going on". Wherein the concept of "fourth dimension" is not applicable in the latter, along with various ontological thought orientations being excluded as well.

.
So because
you arrive at a different NOW coordinate you are puzzled why you do not crash?
Strange when you post
you then go to list non matching axis, (t) being the mismatch
Very strange. (x) (y) and (z) don't exist but (t) does????
I think you are confused. I think you should re-read my post until it makes sense.

I think you are confused. I think you should re-read my post until it makes sense.
I was reviewing the writings of Einstein (originally in German) and I found out something very peculiar. He sometimes refers t as temporay rather than time.

Iber die spezielle and allgemeine Relativitätsthrorie

...it is fixed especially with respect to K by the three perpendicular x, y, z to the coordened planes and temporally by a value t. This same event is fixed space-temporally with respect to K' by corresponding values x', y', z', t'...

I was reviewing the writings of Einstein (originally in German) and I found out something very peculiar. He sometimes refers t as temporay rather than time.

Iber die spezielle and allgemeine Relativitätsthrorie

...it is fixed especially with respect to K by the three perpendicular x, y, z to the coordened planes and temporally by a value t. This same event is fixed space-temporally with respect to K' by corresponding values x', y', z', t'...
It is your grasp of English that is the issue here.

"Temporally" is an adverb meaning pertaining to time - in this context it means "fixed...... with respect to time", or "fixed....... in terms of time".

"Temporarily" is a different adverb, meaning occurring for a finite period, ie. not permanently.

The adjective related to "temporarily" is "temporary". There is no such word as "temporay".

The adjective related to "temporally" is "temporal".

So you have found nothing here of any significance. You have just bamboozled yourself as a result of not having a good enough English vocabulary.

It is your grasp of English that is the issue here.

"Temporally" is an adverb meaning pertaining to time - in this context it means "fixed...... with respect to time", or "fixed....... in terms of time".

"Temporarily" is a different adverb, meaning occurring for a finite period, ie. not permanently.

The adjective related to "temporarily" is "temporary". There is no such word as "temporay".

The adjective related to "temporally" is "temporal".

So you have found nothing here of any significance. You have just bamboozled yourself as a result of not having a good enough English vocabulary.

In my message "temporary" is a typo, don't know how it happened, perhaps when I was erasing some words and changing the structure of the sentence. The word inquestion was first written as "temporally" as it appears later in the quote taken from the book. (I just noticed as well I don't have English corrector when I write messages here, otherwise I should noticed the typo).

And you are correct, if Einstein originanily wrote temporally instead of time, such won't change the fact that the dude became a loony when he invented his theories and that his theories are good for nothing.

Time is not a dimension but a measure which is obtained from motion of things, this include others like energy and more.

To perceive the three dimensions our brains won't need to perceive motion. On the other hand, if no motion is perceived then you just can't obtain the measure of time.

...the dude became a loony when he invented his theories and that his theories are good for nothing.

Time is not a dimension but a measure which is obtained from motion of things, this include others like energy and more.
That loony produced a model of gravity and relative velocity that has been tested and shown to be correct more times than any theory in the history of science - overturning even the great Newton's model. And he laid out the mathematics to back it up. It has never failed. In fact, it has predicted phenomena that we later found to exist - the Gold Standard of a solid theory.

Implausible as it may seem, it turns out that a genius who literally wrote the book on spacetime knows more about it than an ignoramus who makes up his own unfounded ideas without any evidence or mathematics to back them up.

In my message "temporary" is a typo, don't know how it happened, perhaps when I was erasing some words and changing the structure of the sentence. The word inquestion was first written as "temporally" as it appears later in the quote taken from the book. (I just noticed as well I don't have English corrector when I write messages here, otherwise I should noticed the typo).

And you are correct, if Einstein originanily wrote temporally instead of time, such won't change the fact that the dude became a loony when he invented his theories and that his theories are good for nothing.

Time is not a dimension but a measure which is obtained from motion of things, this include others like energy and more.

To perceive the three dimensions our brains won't need to perceive motion. On the other hand, if no motion is perceived then you just can't obtain the measure of time.
You didn't write "temporary", you wrote "temporay".

And I've explained what is meant by "temporally" in the context of the sentence you quoted. It makes perfect sense. He did not write temporally instead of time, he wrote temporally meaning "with respect to time".

And you are correct, if Einstein originanily wrote temporally instead of time, such won't change the fact that the dude became a loony when he invented his theories and that his theories are good for nothing.
Hmm. Believe a physicist whose predictions were experimentally validated, and which led to the creation of both nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons? Or believe a guy on the Internet who can't spell and gets most of his facts wrong? That's a tough call.
Time is not a dimension but a measure which is obtained from motion of things, this include others like energy and more.
At high speeds it begins behaving a lot like a dimension. Hence the term spacetime.
To perceive the three dimensions our brains won't need to perceive motion. On the other hand, if no motion is perceived then you just can't obtain the measure of time.
Of course you can. Even if you are sitting there watching something not move, your heart is beating and you are breathing - both things that proceed with respect to time.

That loony produced a model of gravity and relative velocity that has been tested and shown to be correct more times than any theory in the history of science - overturning even the great Newton's model. And he laid out the mathematics to back it up. It has never failed. In fact, it has predicted phenomena that we later found to exist - the Gold Standard of a solid theory.

Your reply shows signals of delusion. Who has tested that time dilates? If so, who has tested time before dilatation?

Come on, it appears you weren't responding to my message but you just was repeating a prayer someone taught you in school.

Implausible as it may seem, it turns out that a genius who literally wrote the book on spacetime knows more about it than an ignoramus who makes up his own unfounded ideas without any evidence or mathematics to back them up.

He was a loony, his theories are good for nothing. Time is not a dimension, just a measure.

You didn't write "temporary", you wrote "temporay".

And I've explained what is meant by "temporally" in the context of the sentence you quoted. It makes perfect sense. He did not write temporally instead of time, he wrote temporally meaning "with respect to time".
Temporally means lasting only for a period of time.

Hmm. Believe a physicist whose predictions were experimentally validated, and which led to the creation of both nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons? Or believe a guy on the Internet who can't spell and gets most of his facts wrong? That's a tough call.

No one in the Manhattan project used e=mc^2 because that equation is nuts. Such equation is telling you energy equals mass multiplied by 180,000 milespersecond multiolied by 186,000. The theory itself says that nothing can travels, expands, retracts, whatever, faster than 186,000 miles per second rate, and there is no instrument in this world capable to measure speed or expansion at 34,596,000,000 per second. So, forget about it.

At high speeds it begins behaving a lot like a dimension. Hence the term spacetime.

Time at high speeds behaving a lot like a dimension? What are you tsalking about? Pleasepout your thoughts in order next time.

Of course you can. Even if you are sitting there watching something not move, your heart is beating and you are breathing - both things that proceed with respect to time.

And thanks to you we can go even more to clarify the functional work of a clock.

You can use your heart as a clock.

You compare how long it takes your neighbor to go out of his house, reach his car, turn it On and drive away. You compare his motion with the beats of your heart and each beat is a unit of time. 500 beats is the time data obtained by your heart clock from observation.

Now well, you do the same measurement using your heart, but at this time you are jumping a rope in front of your front door. The beats measuring the same neighbor coming out from his house and driving away in his car now are 560 beats, because you were doing exercises and your heart beats faster.

Here two points have been solved:

1-Time is a measure.

2-Clocks can malfuntion or work different when are exposed to a different environment.

The idea of time as a dimension and the theory of Relayivity have been both debunked with this simple example.

I love explaining science with simple words, simple experiments and great results.

Your grasp of physics is too tenuous to make an attempt to correct you. Statements like "that equation is nuts" demonstrate that you haven't even read a book on the subject.

You are standing at the bottom a bucket, looking at smooth curved walls rising above you, and describing what you see as if that's the world. And it is. For you.

You need a basic education, and that is beyond the scope of this thread.

Your grasp of physics is too tenuous to make an attempt to correct you. Statements like "that equation is nuts" demonstrate that you haven't even read a book on the subject.

You are standing at the bottom a bucket, looking at smooth curved walls rising above you, and describing what you see as if that's the world. And it is. For you.

You need a basic education, and that is beyond the scope of this thread.

Basic algebra states an equation is an equality with two terms.

No matter how hard you want to explain e=mc^2 with books written by who knows whom, with this equation basic algebra is telling you its meaning is energy equals mass multiplied by 34,596,000,000 miles per second.

Regardless from where such equation comes from, the final interpretation is what the equation indicates.

As far as it is known in physics, nothing has been measured at a rate of 34,596,000,000 miles per second.

It appears that it's you the one who must review again your learned lessons of basic algebra, because if you don't pass basic arithmetic and basic algebra, how it comes you want to discuss with me the meaning of e=mc^2?

anyone;
This pdf may give you some insight into 'time'.

#### Attachments

• What is time-3.pdf
17.3 KB · Views: 3
anyone;
This pdf may give you some insight into 'time'.

https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/einstein/time

AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY

Part of the Einstein Exhibition.

TIME

In 1900, at age 21, Einstein had his university diploma and was eager to begin his career as a physicist. He struggled to find work, however. After two years of searching, Einstein took a relatively low-level job at the patent office in Bern, Switzerland. Glad for the income and steady work reviewing patent applications--and still able to think about physics after hours—Einstein settled into a comfortable routine. Each day he walked to work through the streets of Bern, a city famous for its medieval architecture and beautiful clock towers.

Einstein passed by the clock towers again on his way home, a route he often took with his closest friend, Michele Besso. The two men regularly discussed science and philosophy—including the nature of time. After one such discussion, Einstein came to a sudden realization: Time is not absolute. In other words, despite our common perception that a second is always a second everywhere in the universe, the rate at which time flows depends upon where you are and how fast you are traveling. Einstein thanked Besso in his first paper on the Special Theory of Relativity.

The American Museum of Natural History is assumed to have the best information available about how Albert Einstein was inspired to create his Relativity theories. He thought time flows.