The dimension of time

[tflofasho]

Im sure we have Philosophers and academics of all trades here who are already cognizant of what's out there in terms of the nature of science and the nature of the world outside of us and the in observed world.

My mind just woke up to the idea that time is a dimension, defined as movement, and that a dimension is a unit of measurement, via measurement theory. Represented by number theory and category theory.

Basically, what we know of the world around us is still assumed to be hypothetical and theoretical but also completely still questioned and unobserved. In other words, we still don't know anything.

So my question here is, now that we are cognizantly aware that time is indeed a unit of measurement to represent a location in space, how can we come and say that time is able to be completely traveled where we can be at one event compared to another from the present?

In other words, if one wants to "time travel" one must be able to come and look at events like pictures in a film for a movie as events. So the question is, what do we call "that?" What do we call different events of locations of past and future without language and measurement constructs to come and make sense of how to get to those places in time to come and create means to interact and get into those events in time to come and potentially interact and change events in the constructed and proposed idea of linear time? Does anyone have any ideas for this concept or is that it? Are these our limits we can only be able to come to at this point in time?

What do we call "that?" And how can we get there?

 

[Martian]

Are you sure time is a dimension, or is that an assumption?

 

[tflofasho]

No. Time IS a dimension, a unit of measurement.

When people think of dimension, they think it's a completely different location or place in space.

Just look up the definition in the English langsuge and compare it to other languages.

 

[Martian]

But couldn't the same thing be said about mass? It's a unit of measure.

 

[tflofasho]

You're right, you do have a point. But don't forget, it's a construct.

The phenomena and noumena are still there and so is the object.

But let's even define what mass means.

And even so, an atom is a unit of measurement as well as a categorical paradigm of "what's there" and is it there?

The object is there and so is the amount of potential force they do carry with them. We assume and keep making sense of its force potency becsuse of the mathematical language we use and construct to measure it:

But even so, the ironic language construct is still there trying to logically keep explaining it too, which is cool and comical.

I think he real question here is, is there space or matter? And what's the space in between? The dividing line? What is the line? People need to keep studying that instead of what's outside of it.

 

[tflofasho]

You're right, you do have a point. But don't forget, it's a construct.

The phenomena and noumena are still there and so is the object.

But let's even define what mass means.

And even so, an atom is a unit of measurement as well as a categorical paradigm of "what's there" and is it there?

The object is there and so is the amount of potential force they do carry with them. We assume and keep making sense of its force potency becsuse of the mathematical language we use and construct to measure it:

But even so, the ironic language construct is still there trying to logically keep explaining it too, which is cool and comical.

I think he real question here is, is there space or matter? And what's the space in between? The dividing line? What is the line? People need to keep studying that instead of what's outside of it.

 

[Martian]

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say...

 

[Harte]

But couldn't the same thing be said about mass? It's a unit of measure.

Mass doesn't have direction or length. Time does.

Time has been recognized as a dimension in the physical sense for a century or so. Mathematically speaking, a "dimension" is just a variable. In that sense, mass (when variable) is a dimension too.

Harte

 

[Martian]

But couldn't the same thing be said about mass? It's a unit of measure.

Mass doesn't have direction or length. Time does.

Time has been recognized as a dimension in the physical sense for a century or so. Mathematically speaking, a "dimension" is just a variable. In that sense, mass (when variable) is a dimension too.

Harte

Shhh... I was wanting to hear new ideas on the nature of time. I know the relativistic view of it.

 

[Harte]

Happy fishing.

Harte