With two dimensions of time, many of the mysteries of today's laws of physics may disappear

I think you have to give these off-the-wall guys the room they need to explore... do you think Einstein got a warm reception at first?

That said, I wouldn't have a lot of patience if I got cornered at a party by someone talking this way... I can only take that kind of mind twist in small doses.

Hi taejonkwando,

Take a look at this month's issue of Discover magazine (special issue) June 2007, pg. 78. Time may not exist after all! It may just be a fig newton.

Regards,

John

Taejonkwando, G.A. Perhaps instead of creating more complexity, the universe and its laws are actually less complex and simply need a different viewpoint. Such as space/time is mutable according to the gravitation field that passes through it. Space/time itself might simply be the framework that the appearance of matter and energy are attached to.

English is not really an efficient language for this sort of discussion. Unfortunately I lack the theoretical mathematical skills to convey my ideas.

Your friend Dragon

Some are looking seriously for proof of a multi universe universe. There are some events and places or non places and things and non things. The hourglass that ran the sands of time was dependent on gravity for any constant of the hourglasses made to the makers choke hole turn standard. A non thing here is a thing somewhere, I guess. 2 is not enough. We do need to know enough to know what is possible. What is possible has been, or will be. It could be possible from what I know that our universe is just one of many. Is gravity constant for all universes, or is the speed of light the same in all?

Time is not a dimension!

There is an argument for time only existing in the physical but, what would happen if time were three dimensional or we could function in three dimensional time?

Some one said (forget who) it is not that it is too difficult to understand;
rather, it is so difficult that we cannot possibly understand. That is, we
not only have to think "out of the box" - more like, out of the country!

Like many, I often wonder about time and conclude it is subjective.
My perception of time is probably totally different to eg. a moth; with
only a few days to live; or say a fish, in a totally different environment.

How these disparate "times" are integrated into a "frame" for each one
to correlate with the other, to me, is especially amazing. God's sudoku?

The mystery of how "He" does it; his "blueprint" of time, is a far more
inspiring frontier to understand than any other; perhaps for Eternal life?
I need another life time to think about it!

jt.

http://www.fastfreeads.com

Time is relative, a division of the cycles of the sun and the moon.

Multi-dimensional is not time, it is a state of being, the soul moving between dimensions or states is the mystery. This already happens, but taking machinery with the soul is the question?

May I suggest to read the paper, Physics of Time as Two Dimensions, which has been submitted for publication. It provides a physicist's (rather than mathematician's) view of time. Link to paper: http://www.marcvandererve.org/images/Physics_of_Time_as_Two_Dimensions.pdf

Abstract:

Based on the book, A New Dimension of Time,[i] this paper introduces the dual nature of time with the objective of inviting the mathematical formulation of its consequences in the different fields, a logic of theory development which itself is discussed in this paper as an integral part of the theory of nature's intrinsic self-referential dynamics. The argument in this paper revolves around the problem of explaining 'auto-emergence' in physics and is developed as follows: limits to the paradigm of description in physics, the emergence of observable spatial features, the behavioral nature of auto-emergence, signature of emergence, the congruent-simultaneity dimension, extending the paradigm of description in physics, conclusion and practical consequences. The by-independent-experimental-evidence-supported conclusion in this paper states that nature is essentially a behavioral phenomenon which produces observable reality as residue. The conclusions in this paper are at the heart of a forthcoming book with the working title: The Realm of Self-Creation.

[i] Marc van der Erve. A New Dimension of Time. LightningSource, 2007.

Hi Marc,

Excellent paper! It was easy to read and easy to follow without getting bogged down in a lot of complicated math.

I enjoyed the analogies very much. Really makes one think.

Thanks for the input.

-John

Clarification of previous post (#11):

The paper was easy to read and follow, however I did not mean to imply that I understood all of it! Having read it through, I'll now go back and study it more and try to make sense of it in my own mind.

Thanks,

-John

Rebuilding from the bottom:

1. You have said that the observable universe is only a small part (or consequence) of "Nature."

2. This "Nature," as a "beharioral phenomenon" caused itself to emerge. (In "auto emergence" auto = self.)

3. That you have shown through independant experiment, evidence to support the behavioral nature of Nature.

4. The paper addresses issues associated with an explanation of "auto emergence" (of the Universe) in physics. In doing this the paper addresses the "dual nature of time."

I hope this is close. Admittedly, it is not complete. I keep finding my eye wandering to the "behavioral phenomenon" and "auto emergence." I suppose many things have behavior; my car sometimes behaves like a beast. Your use of the phrase leaves the impression you intend something more. Auto-emergence seems to imply something more than the "springing forth" of the Big Bang. Are you putting intelligence in the picture? In this theory did the universe come to be because Nature caused it to be?

I suppose I could be way off base. I look forward to the paper and its reading.

Best Regards.

From a metaphysical subjective, not scientific, standpoint: time does not exist. Time is a construct that we as humans have created as part of our observable universe.

To the poster who mentioned death of a relative (sorry if I offend): Having died three times while being reconstructed (military) and remembering being on the "other side", I can assure you we are living an illusion.

I could go any where or any when I chose.

By the way, unless Einstein has returned from the other side and completed his work, Gravity has not been mastered to this day. Science is no closer to explaining the SOURCE of gravity now than at Einstein's death. And until the source is discovered, there cannot be a mastery.

Just my opinion Dragon

Hi Dragon,

You said "By the way, unless Einstein has returned from the other side and completed his work, Gravity has not been mastered to this day. Science is no closer to explaining the SOURCE of gravity now than at Einstein's death."

I believe if anyone could have returned it would have been Houdini, since he was absolutely convinced he could do it.

Far as we know he hasn't. However, I guess it's possible that he may have been reincarnated as someone else. Even if so, he will surely not remember his past identity (but maybe Shirley McLane could better expound on this).

The whole idea of "time" is, at the very least, a genuine profound mystery! JMHO anyway.

As has been previously stated (many times before), we experience time, we cannot do any calculations without it, and we live and die by it. BUT, we cannot explain it except in terms of itself!

-John