Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Time as the 4th Dimension (As Explained by Fitz)


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#21 Cybersnark

Cybersnark

    NERV wants YOU!

  • Islander
  • 2,558 posts

Posted 21 April 2016 - 11:18 AM

View PostRJDiogenes, on 20 April 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

View PostOrpheus, on 19 April 2016 - 09:37 PM, said:

In fact, I've long had a theory [coming up on 30 years, this summer] that what we call "time" is not one single "thing", but rather two or more "things" that are so well-correlated (but still completely independent, in their essence) that we think all the effects come from one thing. This might explain why we have such difficulty working out its essential nature: we can't tell that "partly it's the dog, and partly it's the fleas". The history of science is full of examples of that.  
That reminds  me of something else I meant to put in my last post:  Why three dimensions of space and only one of time?  For the sake of symmetry, shouldn't there be three (or whatever) of each?  Maybe each dimension of space has a corresponding dimension of time, like each particle has an anti-particle (or possibly sparticle).

I tend to think of time having both chronal (time-as-we-perceive-it, "moving" forward) and quantum (potential timelines coexisting and unmoving) dimensions. Possibly even "antichronal" (with the directionality reversed, so effects can precede causes).

Someone like Trance Gemini perceives (and can possibly move through) time on a quantum level, allowing her to pick and choose which timeline she inhabits (to people without her perception, it only looks as though she's "seeing the future"). Perhaps that's how prophecy works; some people (like the mythological "backwards-aging" Merlin) might have antichronal sensitivity, and can "remember" things that are still chronally "ahead" of them. The event might be set, but the chronal "path" that leads to it can still be shifted, like switching train tracks.

Even more mundane, this could be the root of the "bad feelings" we all get just before something goes horribly wrong --a reverse memory of pain. There's a whole host of seemingly-universal experiences that we consider utterly normal (and thus have never really investigated) that could be signs of non-chronal temporal perception.
"Hilarity ensues." --Seamus Harper

#22 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,299 posts

Posted 21 April 2016 - 03:58 PM

View PostOrpheus, on 18 April 2016 - 11:13 PM, said:


I'll assume Fitz was just drawing an analogy. He MUST know about 22-dimension theories, superstrings, etc. (He --and the aliens he's dealt with-- have used higher dimensions many times.) I'll assume he knows all about Schroedinger waves and probabilities. He knows that there is a remote but real possibility that Coulson will turn into a giant toad [Oddly, in the Marvel Universe, that'd actually be more likely than in our own, especially if Colson were an Inhuman]. I also assume that he takes the strength of Daisy's experience fairly seriously, so he believes that the infinite overlapping probabilities must overlap pretty strongly in that particular direction (vs. Coulson turning into a giant toad that eventually eats Grant Ward) He's saying "if we believe this 'vision' at all, we have to accept that it will happen, or else it'll be a false vision -- the universe will collapse into a different probability, and she will have seen... nothing real."

In other words: he's not trying to explain the structure of the SpaceTime of the universe as a whole. He's saying "If we assign any validity to Daisy's experience, it can only apply if we come darn close to the conditions she experienced, amid a universe of weaker alternatives." He's just summarizing it without all the math.

I didn't understand most of your post (sorry!) but this part I have a tiny grasp of so....

YES - my understanding of Fitz's explanation was - once the future is seen, all other possibilities collapse. So - quantum, I guess.  By virtue of observation - some things are now fixed.  But the interesting part of Fitz's theory (to me) was the visual representation of us moving through time.

Perhaps most interesting (and to your point about the flimsiness of the static cube idea) is that to communicate motion required manipulating the dimension of height, and bending the paper.  SO his example was in fact, not static.   Don't know if that lends anything useful to the discussion, but it struck me as significant - and an obvious self-negating piece of the theory.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#23 RJDiogenes

RJDiogenes

    Idealistic Cynic

  • Demigod
  • 12,914 posts

Posted 21 April 2016 - 06:02 PM

View PostCybersnark, on 21 April 2016 - 11:18 AM, said:

View PostRJDiogenes, on 20 April 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

View PostOrpheus, on 19 April 2016 - 09:37 PM, said:

In fact, I've long had a theory [coming up on 30 years, this summer] that what we call "time" is not one single "thing", but rather two or more "things" that are so well-correlated (but still completely independent, in their essence) that we think all the effects come from one thing. This might explain why we have such difficulty working out its essential nature: we can't tell that "partly it's the dog, and partly it's the fleas". The history of science is full of examples of that.  
That reminds  me of something else I meant to put in my last post:  Why three dimensions of space and only one of time?  For the sake of symmetry, shouldn't there be three (or whatever) of each?  Maybe each dimension of space has a corresponding dimension of time, like each particle has an anti-particle (or possibly sparticle).

I tend to think of time having both chronal (time-as-we-perceive-it, "moving" forward) and quantum (potential timelines coexisting and unmoving) dimensions. Possibly even "antichronal" (with the directionality reversed, so effects can precede causes).

Someone like Trance Gemini perceives (and can possibly move through) time on a quantum level, allowing her to pick and choose which timeline she inhabits (to people without her perception, it only looks as though she's "seeing the future"). Perhaps that's how prophecy works; some people (like the mythological "backwards-aging" Merlin) might have antichronal sensitivity, and can "remember" things that are still chronally "ahead" of them. The event might be set, but the chronal "path" that leads to it can still be shifted, like switching train tracks.

Even more mundane, this could be the root of the "bad feelings" we all get just before something goes horribly wrong --a reverse memory of pain. There's a whole host of seemingly-universal experiences that we consider utterly normal (and thus have never really investigated) that could be signs of non-chronal temporal perception.  
Given the reality of "spooky action at a distance" and the fact that causality must really just be a local phenomenon, I don't think any of this is impossible.  Existence is fundamentally fuzzy.

View PostQueenTiye, on 21 April 2016 - 03:58 PM, said:

View PostOrpheus, on 18 April 2016 - 11:13 PM, said:

I'll assume Fitz was just drawing an analogy. He MUST know about 22-dimension theories, superstrings, etc. (He --and the aliens he's dealt with-- have used higher dimensions many times.) I'll assume he knows all about Schroedinger waves and probabilities. He knows that there is a remote but real possibility that Coulson will turn into a giant toad [Oddly, in the Marvel Universe, that'd actually be more likely than in our own, especially if Colson were an Inhuman]. I also assume that he takes the strength of Daisy's experience fairly seriously, so he believes that the infinite overlapping probabilities must overlap pretty strongly in that particular direction (vs. Coulson turning into a giant toad that eventually eats Grant Ward) He's saying "if we believe this 'vision' at all, we have to accept that it will happen, or else it'll be a false vision -- the universe will collapse into a different probability, and she will have seen... nothing real."

In other words: he's not trying to explain the structure of the SpaceTime of the universe as a whole. He's saying "If we assign any validity to Daisy's experience, it can only apply if we come darn close to the conditions she experienced, amid a universe of weaker alternatives." He's just summarizing it without all the math.

I didn't understand most of your post (sorry!) but this part I have a tiny grasp of so....

YES - my understanding of Fitz's explanation was - once the future is seen, all other possibilities collapse. So - quantum, I guess.  By virtue of observation - some things are now fixed.  But the interesting part of Fitz's theory (to me) was the visual representation of us moving through time.

Perhaps most interesting (and to your point about the flimsiness of the static cube idea) is that to communicate motion required manipulating the dimension of height, and bending the paper.  SO his example was in fact, not static.   Don't know if that lends anything useful to the discussion, but it struck me as significant - and an obvious self-negating piece of the theory.

QT
True. Even as described, the universe would not be static-- he's just describing the method of its dynamics.
Please visit The RJDiogenes Store. Posted Image   And my Gallery. Posted Image And my YouTube Page. Posted Image And read Trunkards. Posted Image  And then there's my Heroes Essays.  Posted Image


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users