charleroi66
Jul 8 2002, 10:36 PM
I've been doing a lot of thinking and ive concluded as follows;
" Time is not an object. And objects can be altered(refer to dimensions below). Time is the unremovable measurement of cellular and worldwide existance. Luck is a part of time and is a dimension of it's own.
Objects may reside in the past whilst the others ride the future measurement. To visit the past, everything existing must be retained(However, this may prove a problem). The World may be in financial , moral etc chaos
Minds may have control.
EXISTANCE- 2nd dimension
LOCATION IN EXISTANCE- 3rd and 4th Dimension
WHY(mind) 5th Dimension
Location actually is a mix up as it is positioned and also in a point of existance.
TEXT
Homer
Jul 9 2002, 04:09 AM
That's a very interesting thought process you have there. The quote you have on your profile defines time more accurately.
There is 3 known spacial dimensions and 1 non-spacial dimension. The 3 known are the x, y and z axis where anything within our physical 3 dimensional universe can be charted on a graph. Time is widely believed to be the 4th dimension. Some people don't consider time a dimension because all dimensions have time, but the most accepted view is that time is it's own dimension, and that dimension is apart of all the other dimensions.
Quite literally though time is a non-spatial continuum in which events occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future. So that the x, y and z axis can be used to chart anywhere in the known universe and the time dimension can be used to chart when. Meaning with these 4 dimensions you can chart exactly where in the universe and exactly when in the universe at any point in history or in the future.
Time is nothing more than that, and certainly nothing less
Guest
Jul 13 2002, 12:03 PM
Thanks,Homer! I'm not really a genius but i just keep trying. It seems anything anybody else says is better! :s03
PurpleStuart
Jul 13 2002, 04:02 PM
What really is interesting about time is it's relationship to mass - plainly put, time is different the nearer you are to a large body of mass.
Halo_Jones
Jul 13 2002, 07:41 PM
AHHHHHHH now I understand :s9 :s2
Homer
Jul 14 2002, 01:52 AM
That's right PS, although most people seem to understand that time slows down the closer one approaches the speed of light, few people understand that time slows down as it passes through a strong gravitational field, which is caused by dense matter(mass)
dalia
Jul 16 2002, 07:23 AM
Well, Homer that sure makes time relative. :s6
But is relativity relevant? ???
HOMER IS COOL!
Dalia ;D
Homer
Jul 17 2002, 07:33 AM
Thanks Dalia, you're cool too ;)
But to answer your question about relativity being relevant, I think the question itself is irrelevant ;D
dalia
Jul 21 2002, 07:15 PM
Homer,
I suppose the relevance would depend on what is being considered.
Dalia :s6
Loonboy
Jul 21 2002, 07:41 PM
[blue]So if I'm sitting beside some big fat slob, the impression that it seems like I've been there forever is actually not an impression but reality?
[/blue] :s9
dalia
Jul 21 2002, 08:03 PM
LB,
That would be subjective relativity and therefore quite relevant to you. :s2
Now, substitute the big fat slob with a Jaffa Cake!
Dalia ;)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.