There are three spacial dimentions we know about, and 6 or 7 more "hidden" spacial dimentions acccording to string/M theory.
So, why are we limited to only one time dimention? Could there be more than one time dimention?
2007-03-17 05:45:02 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
I asked the same question at a lecture/conference about string theories (I'm a non-expert) and all the PhD's in the room stopped talking and wondered why they hadn't thought of that before. For a second I felt like the guy who tried tungsten for a filament in the first successful light bulb because he didn't know it couldn't possibly work.
Since then nothing has come of it, so they either figured out why there's only one time dimension, or that no one is smart enough to deal with it.
2007-03-17 07:11:28 · answer #1 · answered by hznfrst 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ignoring the unproven mathematical speculations of string theory, the three spatial dimensions are each combined with time to form spacetime. Prior to the big bang there were three infinite spatial dimensions and no time. Remember that old joke about time being Nature's way of keeping everything from happening simultaneously? The big bang marked the beginning of time in our universe. A spherical wavefront, marking the boundary between space and spacetime, has been expanding into the spatial universe at the speed of light, ever since. Inside this eternally expanding sphere is our familiar universe of spacetime. Here, three spatial dimensions must be used to define any physical location. However, time moves only from the past toward the future because, within the expanding spherical temporal boundry, time can only move away from its point of origin. I often imagine time diverges, analogous to an electrostatic field. Time is an essential component of all forms of energy and energy is the ultimate origin of all matter in the universe. (E = mc^2) The spherical expansion of the temporal wavefront could posssibly be imagined in three temporal dimensions, but ONLY if ALL of physical space amounted to a single dimension. Not very useful..............
2007-03-17 13:24:58 · answer #2 · answered by Diogenes 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We are already familiar with the idea of one spatial dimension perpendicular to another. The coordinates along one dimension are completely independent of the coordinates along the other. We can picture time as another 'perpendicular' dimension. It's not perpendicular in the same way, but it is independent. The time dimension is qualitatively different from the three spatial dimensions we know and understand, so in a way it is misleading to call it a fourth dimension.
I don't know why string theory hasn't chosen to do so, but to me it seems no more a stretch of the imagination to speak of, and do math with, additional temporal dimensions along with (or instead of) additional spatial dimensions. I hope those theorists actually thought about this when presented with the concept. Perhaps you provided a key to a conceptual breakthrough in string theory.
2007-03-18 02:03:20 · answer #3 · answered by Frank N 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The notion of multiple time dimensions is quite reasonable, but difficult to fathom. The reason that all of the extra dimensions postulated by string theory are spatial and not temporal has nothing to do with their "really" being spatial and not temporal, but has only to do with the fact that spatial dimensions are easier to conceptualize than temporal dimensions, and so they are assumed to be spatial. Time is conceptualized as a single, unified dimension. There is no reason to believe that it absolutely must be so.
2007-03-18 00:37:45 · answer #4 · answered by Fred 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The answer is found in the physics trilogy: E = mc2, m = E/c2, and c2 = E/m. The last is that of a field of physical time, or that of a field of gravity. Notice that this value is able to exist alone, and it is the only one that does not change of the three. It is this value that all forms of energy and matter is composed of. It is what our composition is made up of
2007-03-17 13:45:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If there were more than one 'timelike' dimension, then it'd be pretty difficult to see how 'causality' might work. Is it possible for A to cause B along one timeline, and yet B to cause A along another?
HTH âº
Doug
2007-03-17 12:51:54 · answer #6 · answered by doug_donaghue 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
only if you were closer or further from the sun. time is a part of gravity, you know...
2007-03-17 12:49:51 · answer #7 · answered by dr.macgruder 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋