Download e-book One Dimension Over : Gone

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online One Dimension Over : Gone file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with One Dimension Over : Gone book. Happy reading One Dimension Over : Gone Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF One Dimension Over : Gone at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF One Dimension Over : Gone Pocket Guide.
5th Dimension Lyrics: What's up, what's, down / Ladies and [Verse 1: B.o.B] We hop up on the mother ship an we gone, we slidin'.
Table of contents

Some theories have suggested 5, 10, 26, As such, CTCs offer A new laser-pointing platform developed at MIT may help launch miniature satellites into the high-rate data game. A pair of researchers, one with the Langevin Institute, the other a company called Greenerwave, both in France, has developed a way to use ordinary Wi-Fi signals to perform analog, wave-based computations. Complexity in nature often results from self-assembly, and is considered particularly robust.

Compact clusters of elemental particles can be shown to be of practical relevance, and are found in atomic nuclei, nanoparticles The history of our climate is written in ice. Reading it is a matter of deciphering the complex signals pulled from tens of thousands of years of accumulated isotopes frozen miles below the surface of Antarctica. The development of spintronics depends on materials that guarantee control over the flow of magnetically polarized currents.

However, it is hard to talk about control when the details of heat transport through the interfaces Magnetic field lines tangled like spaghetti in a bowl might be behind the most powerful particle accelerators in the universe. That's the result of a new computational study by researchers from the Department of Energy's Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Physicists investigate lower dimensions of the universe March 18, PhysOrg. Laser-pointing system could help tiny satellites transmit data to Earth December 16, A new laser-pointing platform developed at MIT may help launch miniature satellites into the high-rate data game.

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank. I've known for some years that Time and Distance have no substance. Time and Distance are the same thing from different perspectives, measuring the same thing with different scales.


Finally, that you say that there can be no such thing as Time travel is a phenomenal admission of truth, I applaud it and you. To be able to time travel would require the establishing and choosing of an object with a known and absolute position. This is clearly an impossibility. Whilst I'm not a physicist I do at least know that the Lorentz transformation requires time to be treated differently from the spatial dimensions, ie: In dense aether model of space-time with water surface the space dimension corresponds the direction parallel with water surface, the time dimension corresponds the direction perpendicular to water surface.

It explains, why we can move in space easily, but not in time. And it illustrates too, why time always has an arrow density gradient assigned, whereas the space not.

Scientists suggest spacetime has no time dimension

The removal of time from physics may solve some isolated problems, but it will bring a much more problems in another areas, so it's not advantageous from utilitarian reasons. In AWT the structure of space-time gradient is composed of pair time antiparallel time dimensions. The objects traveling in time into past will collapse, those traveling into future will expand instead bellow 2 cm dimensional scale, above it the time arrow is reversed.

Above 2 cm scale the pressure of radiation is balanced with gravity and the seeming expansion of space-time in visible light is balanced with collapse of space-time in radio waves. You can predict quite wide range of new phenomena with this model, for example we can expect, the radiowaves will exert a negative pressure of radiation. Mathematically it comes across thusly, in energy equations, etcetera In AWT the picture of Universe will change pronouncedly, when you would observe it at different wavelength. In visible light the light of more distant sources will attenuate faster, than it corresponds ISL and it becomes reddish.

In microwaves these phenomena disappear and the Universe would appear as flat, transparent and huge, as possible - no gravitational lens and CMBR shielding and Sunyaev-Zheldovitch effect disappears. The background radio emission, which is the component smoothly distributed across the whole sky, will appear more brighter, than corresponds the distance of source. And the remote galaxies will appear larger, not smaller as the classical model of space-expansion implies.

I pondered that time didn't exist before the big bang because nothing could change. It is only with the expansion associated with the big bang could time exist, because the distance between any components mandated that time was required to move from one to the other. Even if you have empty space and a stationary photon, the space is moving all around it and thus time is necessary.

Regarding the entropic time definition we should realize, it's energy density and distance scale dependent. Above 2 cm scale all density fluctuations of vacuum tend to agglomerate into larger pieces spontaneously because of gravity - this is the domain of relativity theory. Bellow this size the CMBR fluctuations tend to disperse all objects into smaller ones, instead. This is the domain of quantum mechanics theory, which doesn't recognize the gravity and in which the wave packets of all particles expand into infinity.

The definition of time arrow by spontaneous entropy arrow will therefore depend on the dimensional scale used and the entropy of the Universe as a whole will not change - it's observer dependent. A primitive observers will perceive the Universe smaller and primitive too, whereas the more complex observers will perceive it larger and more complex. The intelligent life occupies the 2 cm dimensional scale just because this scale provides the highest stability in CMBR field.

This last post made me laugh, seriously you think intelligence can't occupy a space under 2cm, I bet you a quantum computer could fit on a chip that small and it could contain all the software and components necessary to create an artificial life form. Your words are science babble mashed together hence the 1 ratings you've gotten for this If I wanted bogus theories that are amusing reads I would go to a conspiracy site and find plenty of gems of truth to ignore amongst an infinite pile of crap.

IMO Sorli's definition of time is silly and tautological. You cannot define the time as a numerical order of material change in space, because this order is defined with light or another energy spreading in time. In AWT the existence of time cannot be separated from existence of space. We can imagine it like density fluctuations inside of dense gas. If this gas would be completely homogeneous, then we could see anything from it. But at the moment, when we can observe something, because some density gradients exist in it, then the reality will become oriented: The existence of gradient implies the violation of symmetry of reality and its breaking into time and space dimensions.

The existence of stable quantum computers is dependent on the human care, which will provide the shielding and cooling. The compatibility with wavelength of CMBR is the reason, why the highest number of living species reaches just the size up to 2 cm insect, plankton and why human brains operate just with neurons of the same size.

The coastal shape, the surface of clouds, the shape of trees and leaves etc. The article seems to keep talking about "motion" and "change" without time. The example of the photon moving one Planck length in four dimensional space. So does this bring in the necessity of particles as history lines and require strong determinism? Just when I was getting used to having free will again. If a photon moved a Planck length in 4D between point 1 and 2 and struck something in just the right way, could it reflect back to point?

Frankly I don't understand this stance at all. Amrit Sorli basically does, he's trying to replace the time formulation with his own spatial one - and after then he is saying, the formulation of time as another dimension of space is wrong. Every theory has its weak and stronger parts. For example the concept of extradimensions is the best part of string theory and the four dimensional definition of space-time is the strongest part of relativity theory. It's not surprising, Einstein was so upset, when Minkowski published it in - it actually put the relativity into another level.

  1. Recommended for you.
  2. Money Child: A Romantic Comedy Set in Orange County, CA.;
  3. .
  4. Hypertime -- why we need 2 dimensions of time | EurekAlert! Science News.

So if the Planck length is the minimum distance that a photon can move, and the speed of light is constant, and light cannot escape the gravity well of a black hole, then it must be that gravity is creating units of space in the path of the photon at a rate faster than or at least as fast as the photon can hop to the next unit. The speed of light would still be the speed limit for motion, but space would be created or destroyed spontaneously, like some sor to quantum foam. Would that be what quantum gravity is about? Gravity could also be thought of as dragging space into the black hole, but that would imply motion, which leads back to the speed of light being exceeded.

Dragging is not necessary to get things to fall into the black hole. If gravity creates more units of space on the far side of an object in a gravity well, and destroys them on the near side, then space would act like a conveyor belt toward the center, without necessarily having any true motion of the object. I'm saying, the wavelength of CMBR enabled to evolve human brain neurons of the same size, which makes the Universe symmetric around human observer size. The distance scale of most chaotic portion of Universe the CMBR photons therefore corresponds the distance scale of most complex portion of it it's the human brain.

I'm opened to admit the exception for your brain, though - if you insist on it. I guess "creating" units of space is not right. If units of space are constantly popping into and out of existence on their own, then gravity could be defined as the tendency of units of space to persist. The stronger the gravity i. The farther from a massive object, the more likely that units of space will persist. Maybe that could account for dark energy; all you need is a lot of space between objects, which is what you have in intergalactic space, and even moreso between galaxy clusters.

Seriously things do not pop in and out of existence, that is an illusion caused by having a limited view of what is really happening.

Related Stories

That is what your zero point field is all about. Who knows perhaps neutrino radiation has a huge role to play in the universes accelerated expansion, produced by the nature of fusion and fission reactions. Neutrinos are not inert there is something very important about the fact that they are so ghostly and can transition through matter with only very weak interaction.

I would think that most of what there is to discover in particle physics are more and more such ghostly things but I can tell you that aether, is not one of them and never will be. If you wanna convince me show me one damn innovation this theory has produced? Give me one thing this theory discovers that hasn't been already discovered by some other theory? AWT is general theory and it doesn't predict well the particular phenomena which are maintained well with particular theories.

But the concepts of time and space are explained in it quite well. As an analogy of timeless and space-less universe can serve the underwater for surface ripples. Although such underwater is full of fishes, for surface waves it simply doesn't exist, because they cannot spread through it.

It's too chaotic and disarranged for them. You can model the space-time formation in such environment with condensation of supercritical water vapor, for example. At the certain moment the stringy density fluctuations will emerge, which will enable the propagation of transverse waves at distance. On the picture bellow is an example of such space-time foam formed with condensing supercritical carbon dioxide fluid.

Seriously things do not pop in and out of existence Why not? Are you eternal or what? Actually most of phenomena and objects are temporary only - the only eternal stuff is the Universe itself in aether model. The exclusion of time from reality basically implies the statical Universe. I cannot imagine, how to model dynamical stuffs with statical ones. If you wanna convince me show me one damn innovation this theory has produced Just in this thread the following predictions of AWT are listed: You should consider, Einstein predicted just the gravitational lensing and he become famous immediately.

What should I expect at the case of confirmation of these effects? Seven Nobel prices or what? I'm not saying, I'm genius - but the AWT is not so silly, as you're pretending here all the time. What is being suggested about time must also then hold true for 3D space. Dimensionality is applied incrementalism, regardless of which dimension we speak of. All dimensions are measures of relative motions. This a purely a function of mind in relation to reality. Reality without an observer can only be discussed theoretically, same as Reality with one.

Non-dimensional Reality with infinite dimensions experienced by mind. All phenomena are "real" experiences of mind using conceptual dimensionality to order experience. A self-sustaining causality loop we cannot escape for the rather obvious reason that we could not experience otherwise. For those who don't understand the necessity of the observer, I ask how there can be relative measures without? With a purely hypothetical referent, imaginary baselines and such, it still requires someone to hypothesize.

With so called "real" or "physical" referents, these have to be selected as the basis for all subsequent applied dimensionality. The time and space concepts are highly symetric. The wide class of animals dolphins, bats, insects are using longitudinal waves of sound instead of transverse waves of light and they're navigating through space-time with time intervals instead of space intervals. And their brains are quite comfortable with it. Even some blind people can navigate through space-time via time intervals. The space-time symmetric world is therefore not so distant from our reality, as many people believe.

For observations to proceed, we will have to examine the observer. Of course, that's what we've been doing all along, just unawares The helium atoms in vacuum are doing eternal motion in the same way, like the pollen grain in water by Brownian motion as the result, the cooled helium never freeze at room pressure - it's macroscopic effect independent to observer. Many other phenomena Casimir force, for example have their exact counterparts in material environments.

So I don't think, such phenomena can be explained just with our limited view. The conclusion is, the vacuum around us is physically moving and we are swimming in it like fishes in water or better to say, like the quantum vortices inside of superfluid - just its incredible density disallows us to observe it directly. Your whole "theory" is meaningless. You've never explained how to use it to derive anything. It's quite apparent you simply CLAIM everything is a result of the aether only after the facts are established, otherwise , without bothering to explain why and how your "theory" supposedly works.

The sad part is the less knowledgeable and less experienced readers fall for your tricks and at least for awhile mistakenly believe you have some expertise, You are a fraud and a con artist, without conscience or shame. Just in this thread the following predictions of AWT are listed: Consider the point 1 for example - this is how the waves are dispersing at the water surface.

The waves of wavelength larger than the capillary waves are dispersing toward longer wavelengths, the waves of shorter wavelengths are shrinking their wavelength even more: When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: Which phenomena violates the dense aether model of vacuum in your opinion? You are such a moron. In the case of discrete sources, this sort of effect can result in magnification, but it's not something that will induce anisotropies in a uniform background.

What you said up until time travel sounded good. Stick around for fifty years and you will be proven wrong about time traveling into the past. So shift to ultraviolet part of spectrum is the shift toward lower frequencies? OK, where's the boundary of the "red-shift" concept, after then? Where is the wavelength of the "red"? If infrared waves are shifted into the ultraviolet part of the spectrum, can we still say, that the light is redshifted?

What's this got to do with your "prediction? In regards to entanglement, would it be one photon occupying two locations on the same time point or would two photons sharing the same time point disassociated with position This article doesn't do much to express non-Newtonian physics as I see. The speed in which things change does slow down if we change faster. I don't buy it. I'm sorry, but you haven't mathematically defined your aether wave theory, so who knows what violates it?

That's like asking what observation violates string theory Impossible to answer because string theory is not rigorously defined. Mathematic is based on formal logics. If you have theory defined logically, their logical deductions cannot violate it or any math, which is built on this logical framework later. For example, the order of Venus phases in heliocentric model is difficult to formulate mathematically, nevertheless it still provides the clear prediction and the way, how to falsify the geocentric model.

For example, string theory is using Lorentz symmetry postulate of relativity and the existence of extradimensions. Which it the logically flawed combination, because the extradimensions would manifest itself just with Lorentz symmetry violation. So we can say safely, string theory is fringe theory and it cannot lead into distinct solution, because it's based on the logically inconsistent postulate set.

And you needn't to derive any equation for being able to recognize it. All you're saying here is you have nothing to stand on - as there is no math and there certainly isn't any "logic" to your "theory! Wow, this one has certainly stirred the pot! Isn't time what we percieve as the expansion of the universe? If the universe was not expanding, it wouldn't exist. It's an effect caused by motion, not actually a dimension. Article is very interesting!

If the shift toward ultraviolet part of spectrum is still the shift toward longer wavelength as your source implies - then yes, I've to admit, you proved I'm moron in logical way. Unfortunately the time is not what we are perceive as the expansion of the Universe. Which corresponds the notion of infinitely dense aether, which is so stochastic, no wave can spread through it in the same way, like the surface waves cannot spread in underwater.

Such aether is experimentally undetectable, after then - although it could be still full of fishes and dolphins or whatever else Such insight still doesn't differ from dispersive perspective at the water surface: I wonder what Dr. Who would say about this From the "Blink" episode.

My favorite sci-fi episode of all sci-fi shows. If we would prove, the Universe is collapsing instead in the long-wavelength spectrum, will it prove, we don't exist? In AWT the expansion of Universe is dispersive effect of vacuum fluctuations. If these fluctuations would disappear, we wouldn't observe anything, not just time. Apparently the existence of CMBR noise is more fundamental, then the existence of entropic time in the same way, like the existence of water is more fundamental, than the existence of water surface in supercritical water no surface exists.

The dispersion of ripples at the water surface cannot be described with formal math in deterministic way - nevertheless it still has some logics in it. The physicists are ignoring the emergent multiparticle phenomena systematically just because of the absence of reliable models - but it doesn't mean, these phenomena doesn't exist. We exhausted nearly all meaningful ways, how to describe universe in deterministic way, so I'm trying to draw inspiration from these indeterministic ones.

Okay, my first reference had it backwards even though it's from caltech! A blueshift is any decrease in wavelength increase in frequency ; the opposite effect is referred to as redshift. This is totally consistent, as far as I can tell, with the cosmology of Alfred North Whitehead, as explained in his masterwork, Process and Reality. I still think that guy had it figured out, read it if you can. I'm quite sure about red-shift regarding the distributed radiowave background.

  • Les vacances du Petit Nicolas (Le Petit Nicolas) (French Edition)?
  • Sprachverarbeitung und Sprach├╝bertragung (German Edition).
  • Scientists suggest spacetime has no time dimension?
  • Bites: A Collection of Short Stories & Poems.
  • But I'm not so sure regarding the negative refraction of radiowaves with gravitational lens. We should realize, the radiowaves are spreading in inverse space-time, so that their refraction with black holes is negative from perspective of these black holes - but from our perspective it still appears positive.

    Changing Inventor Dimension Styles

    After all, the same effect could explain the positive rest mass of antimatter at the high energy spectrum. At the water surface the celerity curve doesn't go through inversion, just through the infimum. The math will not save you from sign inversion, if you haven't robust logical model on the mind.

    The dispersive model of Universe expansion is quite apparent for distant galaxies in Hubble deep field, which appear much larger, than the galaxies in our proximity. The question only is, why the red shift isn't explained with dispersion in the same way? But recently we are observed many well developed galaxies in the Hubble deep field, which excludes the possibility, such galaxies could evolve during Big Bang. If we have galaxies older than the visible part of Universe and the red shift, then the tired light model is the only feasible explanation.

    The atemporal universe concept of A. Sorli or Whitehead is not new in physics at all. These atemporal ideas we can find in work of J. Lynds, Ron Larther and many others. But I'm still missing the testable predictions with atemporal approach. The explanation of Zenos paradox is not enough, because we have other interpretations, which are explaining it as well and they even lead into testable predictions compare the quantum Zeno's effect http: Therefore in quantum world the atemporal model of universe is of much larger relevance, than in relativity world.

    There's one huge difference between space and time. I cannot change the speed I travel in time, and until someone can, there is no way time can be categorised as spacial. One might gather that they are saying time is a human tool. They gave a solution that reminds me of doing proofs in geometry class, and that is the way real facts work. I cannot change the speed I travel in time Relativity theory says, you can - well, relatively. You just shouldn't be lazy and you should move a bit. If you're lazy, you should visit a deep mine at least. Sorli has been downvoted regularly at PhysOrg forum just with the people, who are visiting PO most often by now.

    Space s suffers with the same problem. We can measure the volume of saucer, yes - but what will remain, if we remove the vessel? I can paraphrase easily, we aren't measuring distances, but the sequence of objects existing in time. If one of objects disappears during measurement, then the whole distance measurement has no meaning and the space remains undefined. Space quantity has its meaning only as a dual quantity of time. Will this take other years discussion? Can someone imagine a clock inside a clock? But they are 2 Clocks and not one Right?

    Space has a lot of clocks. Observers exist in their own Space Dimension with their own clocks but they can sync with other clocks. Let them exist in their own Space Dimension at a given clock frequency and let them travel without Time in Time. How does this Sound? No time - only now. I think the universe can see that we finally get it, that time is just an illusion. I bet the unified theory gets a little easier without the time "wrench-in-the-works". Can we stop talking about time travel now? I've been arguing for years that our universe does not include any time component.

    Instead, we care about ; or the difference between two observed states of the universe. These people are too smart for their own good. So time is fake? This article must sound awfully familiar if you've read my comments on time in other threads. I also got low marks from all you physics types. You don't need to be a physicist to have insight into the truth, in fact it might even prevent you from seeing some truths.

    All I can say is I told you so. Here is what I said in another thread: Time travel is impossible. Physics understanding of time leaves much to be desired and is probably wrong. Now is simultaneous everywhere, and there is only now. The passage of time is purely perceptual and relative, measured by benchmarks. Ours are the speed of chemical reactions and any changes we perceive in the passage of time anywhere is just a change in the speed of our benchmarks, not a change in time. This article shows that physics is starting to learn a bit about time. More on beelize54's stupidity: Are you suggesting time moves backwards for radio waves?

    How could we detect them then? The SZ effect is all about microwaves. Maybe you think you can put one in your pocket? Are you suggesting radio waves are negative energy now? So much for you predictions You will continue to write mindless drivel about aether. Let's see who is right. Congratulations on the article, Amrit. I'll have to add my two cents though: Humanity treats time as a linear progression from past to future because it is foundational to the narrative function that is the basis of serial cause and effect rationality.

    The problem is physically modeling it as such. It is not that the present moves from past to future, but that the changing configuration of what exists, turns the future into the past. We don't travel the fourth dimension from yesterday to tomorrow. Tomorrow becomes yesterday because the earth rotates. The present is the constant and it is the events which come and go. Physically, past and future do not exist, because the same energy is just changing configurations. As an effect of motion, time, rate of change, is similar to temperature, level of activity. Quantum mechanics uses an external, absolute clock because it admits simultaneity and so the process goes from past simultaneous configurations to future ones.

    Relativity models time as part of the four dimensional geometry, in which points in space and time exist relative to one another and there is no absolute time. If we were to eliminate the external clock from QM and just consider time as the dynamic, it is the collapsing of future probabilities which leads to current actualities. While all input into any event exists prior to its occurrence, the lightcone of this input only comes together at the point of occurrence.

    So while all physical laws deciding the outcome are deterministic, the total input cannot be known prior to the occurrence, so it is still probabilistic. Even if there were a method of faster than light communication to gather knowledge of all input prior to an occurrence, then the same faster than light potential could exist for information affecting that outcome and so the problem would be repeated.

    Ah come on guys. If some scientist wants to stack events and not measure the time between them, that's fine with me. However, I need 8 hours of rest every night.. I cannot change the speed I travel in time, and until someone can, You can. Go really really really fast.

    Then you travel slower in time than those you left behind. Changing the direction you travel in time is another and if you had said that I would have rated you five instead of a one.

    1. Hypertime -- why we need 2 dimensions of time!
    2. Are we missing a dimension of time? - Telegraph.
    3. His Keeper.
    4. Changing Inventor Dimension Styles - KETIV!

    I was thinking the same thing -- all the useful results from Minkowski space come from treating the time and space coordinates differently. I agree Lorentzian contraction isn't "real" because even approaching C the object doesn't locally perceive any change in time or physical contraction. From our low velocity inertial frame we perceive contraction and spatial deceleration because like 2D stick figures that can not perceive 3d displacement, we can not perceive 4d displacement. The biggest consequence may not be at the astronomical scale and increased energy density for acceleration or equivalently gravity wells but at the ano scale where Casimir supression causes lower energy density.

    Here we can find an explanation for condensed gas like deuterium ice or fractional hydrogen because now we are loading gas into larger "volumes" of space than should exist given exterior dimensions - paralell parking gas on the time axis. An intuitive understanding of reality necessarily implies that is has been conformed within this conceptual structure.

    This may be an issue wrt intuitive understanding, because unconceprualized reality noumenal reality , Enter Bohr, who in effect rediscovered Kant as the essential point of the Copenhagen interpretation. To me, what we are used to calling "time" is a ratio comparing two instances of change. In an example, one of them is the rotation of a second or minute hand on an analog clock, and the other is the movement of a runner along a track.

    Where is the time? It's not being measured - just two measurements of spatial dimensions only. For more of my thoughts on this: Anybody else picture Christopher Reeve going back to save Lois Lane when they read this comment?

    Create and Edit

    What about Godel's CTLs? Although I guess you aren't really changing direction as much as pushing forward back. Hmmm, I'm going hungry. They're spreading like the tachyons Are you kidding me? Tachyons are highly hypothetical FTL particles which generally mean there's an instability in your theory.

    The CMBR consists of ordinary thermal radiation like the hot air in your brain. Electromagnetic waves move at one speed relative to any observer the speed of light. This means that very distant galaxies look much larger than you would normally expect as if they were only about 2 or 3 billion light years from us" http: Photons generally don't interact, except at very high energies gamma-gamma physics. These pairs are fermions Idiot. The CMBR is thermal radiation photons. The GZK effect is responsible for it Idiot. It's not only about Sunyaev Zel'dovich effect, but about integrated SachsWolf effect Now you're just covering up your SZ blunder, but it's nice to see you did a little actual research.

    Now, read them and let me know if you see anything about your tachyons in the papers you referenced Your water spider is not in situ with the waves, but is above the waves. Therefore, your analogy fails. Isn't this equivalent to assuming hidden variables in - for instance - radioactive decay? I wonder whether the the conceptual problem isn't non-linear, chaotic systems. There is the same statistical behavior, based on a lack of clear reductionistic linear cause and effect, but change in scalar input, such as energy, complexity, instability, etc.

    Is time the basis of motion, or motion the basis of time? If you want to derive time from motion, all you really need is change of configuration, but how do you derive motion from time? Time is deduced from measurements of motion. What exactly is time? We perceive the present as moving from past events to future ones, but we also perceive the sun as traveling across the sky. It took awhile to understand how this process worked. It should be noted that epicycles were extremely mathematically precise.

    The problem was conceiving a physical explanation for why they were so effective. So all I'm saying is that the present doesn't move, the events do. And all I am saying is that Superman went back in time man!!! But to your point, huh? Relativity wreaked havoc on time.

    Godel created a consistent solution within the EFE where CTL's could exist, and further, that one could travel one of these loops with the proper technology. Unfortunately Zephir can't be so easily dismissed. On the fermion point, I believe he is calling the particle-antiparticle pairs fermions not the CMBR photons. But he talks in circles so who knows. I am anxious to see his replies. I tried to add my work here which indicates that Time is a dimensional thing necessary for the mind to evolve functionsofnature. Time t is only a component of X4 that we obtain with clocks. With clocks we measure numerical order of change in space: Yours Amrit What is Space-time?

    Relativity wreaked havoc on time The math describing relativity is accurate. In the quest for that all embracing theory, scientists have been adding extra dimensions of space to their equations for decades. As early as the s, mathematicians found that moving up to four dimensions of space, instead of the three we experience, helped in their quest to reconcile theories of electromagnetism and gravity. Today, theoreticians are studying a theory of everything called M-theory that adds yet another dimension, taking the total to Until now, they have been reluctant to meddle with time because it can lead to unexpected consequences, such as time travel.

    Changing our picture of time from a line to a plane one to two dimensions means that the path between the past and future could loop back on itself, allowing you to travel back and forwards in time and allowing the famous grandfather paradox, where you could go back and kill your grandfather before your mother was born, thereby preventing your own birth. Bars first found hints of an extra time dimension in M-theory in and, when he looked into it, discovered the grandfather paradox and other fears could be overcome by using a new kind of symmetry - a mathematical property to work out the relationship between the quantities of position and momentum.

    It is this symmetry that might help reconcile the two mighty pillars of 20th-century physics, quantum mechanics and relativity.

    Simply adding an extra dimension of time doesn't solve everything, however. To produce equations that work with the new symmetry that describe the world accurately, an additional dimension of space is needed as well, giving a total of four space dimensions, he explained in the journal Physical Review D. According to Bars, the familiar four dimensional world we see around us is merely a "shadow" of the six-dimensional reality, just as a hand makes many different shadows on a wall when lit from different angles.

    Haven't seen this before - one of the users put down an ordinate dimension something we do a lot , and the datum symbol is oval instead of round. For now he has hidden the symbol and placed a user-defined symbol in it's place, but this is non-associative and a rather nasty work-around. That's what we've used as the work-around. Our default user-defined datum symbol has matching length and height settings and an aspect ratio of 1 if you select the alternative method of defining the symbol size.

    Obviously, if it used to work as expected, and now it doesn't, something has changed on the machine. Have you tried resetting the dialogs? As there are a couple of dialogs that are used to get the datum symbol to be used for the ordinate dimension, I would suggest resetting the Ordinate Dimension dialog and the Text dialog where the DATUM User Defined Symbol is inserted. To reset a dialog, select the curly arrow icon on the top right of the dialog.