- 1.0 In relativity, time is a dimension
It must have been a cold and stormy night when the mathematicians converted time into a line. The
waters of the seas must have parted and long dead souls must have risen from their graves:
- “ Each two points of Time, A and B, of which A is the earlier, mark off a length of time…
The length of time which it would then occupy is equal to the distance AB.” (p. 7) [1]
“ Since ‘before’ and ‘after,’ regardless of how far back or how far into the future they
are, are extensions, time is like a line, a one-dimensional object.” [2]
- According to General Relativity, time is a specific type of line known to them as a dimension, or as
Weyl puts it more ‘scientifically,’ “a one-dimensional continuum.” (p. 11) [1] The morons of relativity do
not understand the difference between the dark gap that separates the Earth from the Moon and the
ticks of a clock:
- “ In relativity, there is no real distinction between the space and time coordinates,
just as there is no real difference between any two space coordinates” (p. 24) [3]
“ The concept of spacetime combines space and time within a single coordinate
system, typically with 4 dimensions: length, width, height, and time.” [4]
- Actually, relativists routinely treat time as a physical object. They warp time and stretch time and mold
it to suit their theories. Time is said to be one of the four pillars that comprise the ‘structure’ known as
space-time, the 4-D sphere within which relativists claim to live (Fig. 1). If you wish to challenge any of
these supernatural and irrational claims, you have no choice but to start by getting acquainted with
the words dimension and time.
Watcha doin', Al?
| I'm making time. Pass me one of those boulders behind you Newt, please! I think I'm going to call my masterpiece Stoneclock. |
Time qualifies as neither a dimension nor a coordinate because it meets none of the requirements of
dimensions and coordinates of Physics. Time is conceptually dynamic, lacks direction, and does not
flow perpendicular to anything. Therefore, it is absolutely ludicrous for Feynman to have time running
perpendicular to width on his 'space-time diagrams.'
Conversely, dimensions and coordinates are not dynamic or segmented concepts. Therefore,
dimensions and coordinates have nothing to do with numbers. Dimensions and coordinates also
dispense with observers. A box is 3-D and has width irrespective of time or measurement. Time
absolutely requires a conscious observer. There is no such notion of time without some kind of
animal present to compare before against after. Without memory, every atom in the entire Universe
merely has location:
- “ As three-dimensional beings, we perceive time only as a result of memory…
If we had zero memory, we could not detect time - we would exist only for
the moment.” [5]
- Indeed, the only difference between (quantitative) time and motion is that time requires an observer
(which could very well be the object performing the motion). Move, you move or don’t by definition.
2.0 The scientific definition of the word time
These notions lead me to identify two definitions of the word time, one qualitative (before/after,
early/late, now and then, past/present/future) and the other quantitative (seconds, hours, years,
centuries):
- qualitative time (Physics): A qualitative relation established between two
locations of an object or between the trajectories of two objects
(e.g., before/after, earlier/later, cause/effect).
[Note that without a comparison what remains is motion! (i.e., 30 km for Earth and
either the length of a wave or the trajectory of a particle for the emission of cesium.)
Time absolutely requires an observer.]
quantitative time (Mathematics): A numerical or quantitative relation established
between two motions, one of which is a pre-established standard (e.g., seconds,
months, decades).
[For example, when the hand on your watch moves a second, the Earth moved
approximately 30 km on its orbit and a cesium wave oscillated 9 billion times.
You are comparing the distance traveled by the hand on your watch against a
distance traveled by another object.]
Time requires memory. Time is motion plus memory. Neither qualitative nor quantitative time qualifies
as a dimension. Neither is a physical object that can be warped, molded by gravity, or observed.
3.0 Conclusions
To summarize, a dimension is a concept that relates to an architectural property of a physical object. It
is an indispensable ingredient of the adjective three-dimensional, which we can only use in the
context of architecture. Time has to do with adverbs and not with nouns. Time qualifies how
something moves. It doesn’t qualify the ‘something’ itself. A dimension is to a photograph what time is
to a movie. Hence, by its very nature, time is incompatible with the dimensions of Physics, and it is
incredibly stupid to suggest that time forms a part of a geometrical object as they routinely do in
General Relativity [6] [7] and Philosophy. [8] The notion of time widely used in Mathematics –
quantitative time – is a number line, a direction-less series of numbers. To borrow from the current
jargon of Mathematics so that our mentally disadvantaged scholars may also understand, time is a
scalar. [9] It points to nowhere!
Fig. 1 |
| Pastor Al claims that he lives within a sphere that has four dimensions: length, width, height, and time. The first question a rational person asks is whether time can be said to be a dimension. Specifically, does time have direction? Does time run perpendicular to the other three? Can you point with your right index finger in the direction in which time flows or runs? |
| Nevertheless, there is the more fundamental issue of what contains this unimaginable 4-D sphere. What's the stuff that' gives shape to space-time? |
- ________________________________________________________________________________________
- Last modified 01/24/08
- Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008
- Module home page: A mathematician has no idea what a dimension is
Pages in this module:
2. The only structural concept that is 1-D is an edge
3. A mathematician confuses straight with rectilinear
4. The mathematical definition of dimension is unscientific
5. A mathematician says that a coordinate is a dimension
6. A mathematician says that a vector is a dimension
7. The dimensions, coordinates, and vectors of Mathematics are really number lines
8. This page: Time is a number line, not a dimension
| Time is a number line and not a dimension |
| Adapted for the Internet from: Why God Doesn't Exist |