32 - Is Time a Direction?

[badbeatbri3]

The theoretical discussions are interesting. Your songs are horrible. But I have to say, the guy you got to sing this song can sing pretty good at least .

[wadlde]

Can it be safe to assume the concept of the plank length (or something similar) be applied to all spatial dimension? If yes, then my real question. The 4thD, a line, along which are points, these points being 3D but experienced as time. Could it be argued that we are not really moving forward through "time" but really every moment is just a still 3D world were our brain has recorded versions of a parallel 3D world that we would consider the past?

[samodupu]

Interesting ,I follow all your videos ^o^

[AdamLore]

Hi Rob!

Great work with all of your videos!

This one, though, I'm not sure I am following.

If time is thought of as the "directions" of PAST and FUTURE, how is it just one direction, and not a whole dimension? I fail to see the room for interpretation...

Does it have to do with the arrow of time? That we can apparently only move forward in time?

If so, aren't we still moving forward along what is essentially a line? Which is 1-dimensional?

What am I missing here?

[10thdim]

Thanks, AdamLore. The difference between "time" and a full dimension is like the difference between "forward" and a full dimension. You have to consider the opposite direction to be thinking about a full spatial dimension. The opposite direction to "time" is "anti-time" just as forward/backward, east/west, ana/kata are all ways of thinking about how two opposing directions give you a way of thinking about a full spatial dimension.

watch?v=UfhOBevrN2U

Thanks for writing,

Rob

[AdamLore]

Thanks for your speedy reply!

I think I may grasp the concept at this point, but please let me know if I am still off track:

"Time" as you are using it here basically means the forward-like direction we are moving through time (almost like "future-ward"), while "anti-time" would be if we could start from the present and move in a backward-like direction through time (or "pastward"), And the whole dimension you call "duration"..correct?

[AdamLore]

(...continued)

Also, ff duration is the fourth spatial dimension, is it the same, then, as "ana/kata" or do these become the fifth dimensional directions?

[faszika]

No limits.

[WistfulGeek]

Time is time!

[laurenthrowdown]

Great videos, all of them. Very informative and interesting.

[gadzometer]

Thanks for this.

Very interesting words in your song Rob. There has been talk about some astronauts hearing the Moon ring like a bell (interesting as I don't think acoustic waves can travel in space without atmosphere.. maybe they were still within the very thin Moon atmosphere).

And a very good description relating spatial dimensions and time. I'm still playing catchup with your older videos but do you talk about Length Contraction and Time Dilation anywhere?

[ketsmash45]

1:20

Sorry, made me laugh.

Anyway, I agree

[Gemquist]

All directions are merely forward.

Above, below, left of, right of, north, south, east, west, are perceptions based of conclusions arrived at by a reference point.

Time is merely a forward direction by our perception, but for all forwards, there is backwards, which is yet another forward... just in a different direction.

[notonewhit]

That's exactly what Freud meant when he claimed that even regression (a drive backwards) has its forward thrust.

[skamaster48]

Im not saying evolution does'nt exist. It does. But it's not the same thing as they teach you in school. There basically saying Theres micro evolution, so that must mean theres macro evolution, in other words a=b, which just doesn't make sense. They are two different concepts and if you were actually a scientists, not one of those who are bought by the government, you would know. One thing they taught us in my school is to open your eyes, and not to get fooled into the mass media

[DaDaWgLLS]

I can tell you've been watching Creationist propaganda. You see, biologists around the world agree the only difference between micro evolution and macro evolution is time. Micro evolution makes little changes, Macro evolution makes big changes. When Micro evolutions add up over time, they make a Macro evolution. Adaptations over time, creates speciation. This has been PROVEN, yet Creationist fools like Kent Hovind and VenomFangX propagate the lies in order to pretend evolution doesn't exist.

[infinity730]

@DaDaWgLLS

/agree

The new VFX is currently getting his ass handed to him by AronRa.

[skamaster48]

if it was PROVEN, then go ahead. prove it to me right now

[infinity730]

"prove it to me right now"

An education isn't given, it is either earned or gained.

Either you want to educate yourself in biology, or you don't. From what I've seen, it looks like you don't. It is not our job to educate you. Google exists for a reason. Try typing "observed instances of speciation" into it and read the page on TalkOrigins.

[skamaster48]

nah, someone challenged me to disprove evolution in a second, and i did my best

but you sir

are a coward

[DaDaWgLLS]

You didn't do anything to disprove evolution aside from claiming that all scientists lie and brainwash people. Oh, to be fair I guess you did blabber on about the whole Micro VS Macro thing, which I refuted quite easily I might add.

If you really could disprove evolution or even come close to it, you would win the Nobel Prize for scientific revolution. Do you really think that every scientist in the world just lies all the time in order to brainwash people into believing certain biology? C'mon.

[CaptainFrantic]

Sorry Rob but I'm still having trouble accepting that our 3D time is a direction in a 4D space. I still maintain that our time is "created" by the very existence and "expansion" of OUR 3D space, built into it it's very fabric and a necessary part of it just as any 2D space would have it's OWN integrated and closed time. To be honest though I still sense that I'm not entirely getting what you're saying but I'll surely keep watching the vids as they are always interesting and thought provoking. =)

[astrotometry]

Key question, Rob. Of course hypertime is my answer.

Excellent per usual.

I'm fav'ing and listing this one. Video response coming too.

[TKGFILMS]

Crap, I accidentally rated it a 1 when I tried to play it after I paused it. Sorry.

[DURound]

Am I dumb?

I do not see how it helps to call the 4th dimension as "Duration" instead of "Time" and in fact, I think it hurts.

Time seems to be limitless or at least larger than Duration, while Duration seems to be something smaller.

In terms of length, width or height, "Duration" seems to me to be roughly equal to "distance" or "span".

I think time is much more descriptive.

As for directions along the axis... doesn't the "arrow of time" have something to do with this?

[SaiseiFatum]

Rob's idea, what I think it is, is not that Duration is the 4th dimension which is indeed Time, but a way to descibe and/or measure Time.

The 3rd dimension Space is described and/or measured by Depth, and that does not mean that it is called Depth.

[DURound]

Well...Doesn't he flat out say he wants to call this dimension "Duration" instead of "Time"?

[CaptainFrantic]

I don't think Rob is saying that time is the 4th dimension. I believe he says that time is merely a binary *direction* WITHIN the 4th dimension. I disagree with him (probably through my own ignorance) but I'm sure that this is his position. (sorry to be speaking for you Rob ... I just couldn't help myself)

[infinity730]

Skamaster48, I was going to reply to you, then I realized you are crazy, so never mind.

[skamaster48]

(evolution of a kind) i.e, black dog produces white dog etc...so evolution was wrong from the beginning, and no, dkamm65, i'm not a christian. Im tierd of all this primitive thinking of our generation. it's sad to see all these intellectuals walking the wrong way. I'm a free thinker.

[FFRPianist]

"However, Charles Darwin didn't realise that this wasn't macroevolution (evolution from species to species) just micro evolution (evolution on a kind"

But doesn't microevolution lead to macroevolution?

[skamaster48]

no theres no proof of that

[Jagdeepkaler]

yes there is, just because u type "theres no proof" doesn't mean there ISN'T. CANCER is a type of evolution, god u don't know anything do u. It might not work. It's the wrong KIND Of change that ends up killign u but it still is a CHANGE (micro change) Evolution works on trial and error, ur gonna get a lot of wrong things before u hit it right and that one survives and reproduces. Micro evolution leads to Macro evolution.

[Jagdeepkaler]

Just like both Diamonds and coal r both made out of Carbon atoms but arranged differently, one looks pitch black the other one is Crystal clear. All change in the UNIVERSE has to start from Micro, u can't just have MACRO evolution without micro, it wouldn't make any sense, small steps lead up to bigger ones. PLEASE EDUCATE URSELF. btw wtf r the scientists gonna get out of lying about evolution :S Only try to discredit a claim if u've read it thoroughly and have good points of it being false.

[skamaster48]

RETARD

"Just like both Diamonds and coal r both made out of Carbon atoms but arranged differently, one looks pitch black the other one is Crystal clear." that has nothing to do with anything. The color black is made up of the colors yellow, cyan and magenta...their just elements in the mixture...

[Jagdeepkaler]

lol shows how immature u r, resorting to name calling instead of having a proper convo like a decent person would. Anyway I was just referring to the CONCEPT, the COLOR is changed because of the ARRANGEMENT of the atoms! NO OTHER PROPERTY is changed. That is how evolution works, honestly READ up on it first. nucleotides and amino acids are the SAME in every living creature, its just the way they r ARRANGED differently that offers the diversity. And the CHanges made in those is evolution

[smariot]

Black just means it absorbs red, green, and blue light, the only colours we're sensitive to.

Garbage bags an coke look black and opaque to us, but are clear when viewed with an infrared camera.

To a life form that evolved under different lighting conditions, coal might appear similar to frosted glass, and our glass windows might be completely opaque and useless to a life form that can only see ultraviolet light.

[skamaster48]

here it goes friennds

[sh0gun98]

Even if you could move at the speed of light, which is theoretically impossible. Time would slow to a stop, never go backward.

[sh0gun98]

Time only goes forward, never back.

[guitardude1230]

Rob you are a fly ass dude. Keep up the great research and insight and keep on rockin!

[QIQrrr]

Time is a conceptualization of relative motion between concretes. As such, time does not exist in itself. This clearification have certain implications. I.e.: The concept "spacetime" is invalid outside its formalistic framework. The notion that time is a dimension is also wrong. Nor is time a direction. If one starts to objectively define concepts one will find there is only three dimensions. Anything beyond this is imagination. That's all.

[skamaster48]

do you know what else doesn't exist? 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th dimension. there all ideas that have been built upon ideas that started from this one idea that can be proved wrong in a second. This is just like the evolution theory

[DaDaWgLLS]

So Skamaster, I'm interested. Please disprove the 1st, 2nd, and 4th dimensions in a second. And while you're at it, why don't you go ahead and disprove Evolution in a second as well?

Or, you could go to school and get a proper education on the theories.

[dkamm65]

LOL I guarantee skamaster48 is christian.

[DaDaWgLLS]

I'm very interested in hearing his response... if he responds.

[skamaster48]

"Go to school and get a proper education on the theories" in about 20 years these theories will change because there will always be "scientists" with "ideas". These "ideas" that these "scientists" will be considered "fact" because of their status in our caste system. People do not realize that we are being brainwashed by the higher caste for the sole purpose of power. I wonder why science is always changing but the theory of monism is still in tact after thousands of years?

[skamaster48]

i recommend all of you look for the truth inside your minds rather then the textbooks. Your fighting for something they want you to fight for. You are fighting for your enemy.

[almaster0]

if evolution doesn't exist.... how do you explain evolution... that has actually happened.... where we saw little changes.... evolution is just adaptation... over thousands of years... and the adaptations brought down to next generations.

and to tell you the truth... this dimension stuff might not actually exist.... we have no proof... but there is proof of adaptation and evolution... so shut up... before you make more of an idiot of yourself

[skamaster48]

"we saw little changes" yes, thats called microevolution. But theres no proof at all that that leads to macro evolution

[infinity730]

Two occurances of microevolution in a single species is macroevoution by definition, then take those little differences and add hundreds of millions of years and you have a very strong case for large changes taking place in a population.

Walking down a hallway is the same kind of walking used to go down a street.

Evolution, whether mico or macro, has been observed, a 3 minute search on google will verify this.

If you dont want to educate yourself in biological sciences, then I cant help you.

[DaDaWgLLS]

Evolution has lasted for over 100 years under constant scrutiny and new evidence/ideas by opponents and proponents alike. You know nothing of the scientific method and how it works.

Science isn't about brainwashing. Science is about finding the truth about reality. Science of COURSE is always changing, because science is ALWAYS about trial and error, and will be forever. Religion, however, makes a claim, and then ignores all contradicting evidence forever, because of "faith."

[skamaster48]

and ye, i do know about the scientific method

"test, repeat and observe" 1. you can't test evolution, 2 you can't repeat 3. you can observe, but not over a period of a million years stupid

[infinity730]

"you can't test evolution"

Then I guess all the people that have to pay child support over a paternity test get all their money back because you say so?

"you can't repeat"

Allelic frequencies change every time a species reproduces, this is testable, you fail, very hard.

"but not over a period of a million years"

One word:

FOSSILS

[bangNL94]

fossils ftw

fossils = an old organisms

multiple fossils that look a bit different = evolution

[notonewhit]

In a strictly technical sense, you can't test any theory directly. What is tested are hypotheses that are spun from Theories. (Perhaps too fine a point here. notonewhit nitpick?)

[DaDaWgLLS]

You can absolutely test evolution, and it has BEEN tested several times. Virus's evolve to combat against our new medicine. Another was an experiment in which they took a large group of the same species of mosquito. They put one group into one environment, and another group into a different environment. After a certain period of time, group A could not mate with group B. That means they have evolved enough to be considered a different species.

[Abengoshis]

You can observe bacteria evolving. Such as the E.Coli that synthesised Citrate.

Adding to Infinity730, you can also test evolution on supercomputer programs.