Newsflash: physicists consider 2-D "time"

[bperet]

RMohan wrote:

A scientist, Itzhak Bars, is moving toward Reciprocal thinking -- he's suggesting

that there might be two dimensions to time.

What I find funny is that they will make a published comment like this: "In this view, the Big Bang that started the baby universe growing 14 billion years ago blew up only three of space’s dimensions, leaving the rest tiny. Many theorists today believe that 6 or 7 such unseen dimensions await discovery", which is totally acceptable, yet they scoff at Larson's concepts.

Did you see this followup? Seems he is close to Larson...

Quote:

On 15-May-2007 by IAMoraes

Close but no cigar: time is 3d when matter is 3d, for a total of 2 complete dimensions of 3 subdimensions each. If he wants an extra spacial dimension too, then he is dealing with 4d time and 4d space. And the time dimensions are asymmetric.

If mr. Bars wants to model both momentum and position simultaneously tell him to come to me. It's conceivable that he will get there, perfectly, but not without my input.

Eventually, conventional science will have to concede that time is coordinate, just like space, and comprises the realm of "anti-matter." I also noticed in the article some of the "projection" concepts we use in RS2, where they are finally starting to realize that "what you see isn't what you get"--physics is still measuring the shadows on the wall.

But it is nice to see things finally heading in the right direction.

[RMohan]

I am just slogging through "New Light.." and was very happy

to discover the presentation of "space progressing" presented

as an analogy to our 'innate/obvious' sense that "time progresses".

I know it's "Larson 101", but i love the symmetry and simplicity of it!

It takes me forever to read this stuff. I love his prose. I find he has

a great, clear, and elegant mind. Sometimes I stop just to appreciate

the writing. More often, I stop to try to get a new idea into my head.

I am eager to get to the point where I can think independently in

these ideas, and begin to consider EM theory, and "atom to atom" interactions.

bperet (email removed) wrote:

Quote:

RMohan wrote: A scientist, Itzhak Bars, is moving toward Reciprocal thinking -- he's suggesting

that there might be two dimensions to time.

What I find funny is that they will make a published comment like this: "In this view, the Big Bang that started the baby universe growing 14 billion years ago blew up only three of space’s dimensions, leaving the rest tiny. Many theorists today believe that 6 or 7 such unseen dimensions await discovery", which is totally acceptable, yet they scoff at Larson's concepts.

Did you see this followup? Seems he is close to Larson...
Quote: On 15-May-2007 by IAMoraes

Close but no cigar: time is 3d when matter is 3d, for a total of 2 complete dimensions of 3 subdimensions each. If he wants an extra spacial dimension too, then he is dealing with 4d time and 4d space. And the time dimensions are asymmetric.

If mr. Bars wants to model both momentum and position simultaneously tell him to come to me. It's conceivable that he will get there, perfectly, but not without my input.

Eventually, conventional science will have to concede that time is coordinate, just like space, and comprises the realm of "anti-matter." I also noticed in the article some of the "projection" concepts we use in RS2, where they are finally starting to realize that "what you see isn't what you get"--physics is still measuring the shadows on the wall.

But it is nice to see things finally heading in the right direction.

[MWells]

RMohan wrote:

A scientist, Itzhak Bars, is moving toward Reciprocal thinking -- he's suggesting

that there might be two dimensions to time.

Added Two-Time Physics to the list.

[RMohan]

MWells, are you "ZenMaster" on PhysOrg?

In any case, that's a GREAT list. I wish you'd put it somewhere else, too, easier

to find. Can you point me to a URL if such exists?

Thanks for doing the research and digging....

MWells (email removed) wrote:

Quote:

RMohan wrote: A scientist, Itzhak Bars, is moving toward Reciprocal thinking -- he's suggesting

that there might be two dimensions to time.Added Two-Time Physics to the list.

[davelook]

Don't forget this one...

http://www.physorg.com/news96027669.html

"In a recent study, mathematician George Sparling of the University of Pittsburgh examines a fundamental question pondered since the time of Pythagoras, and still vexing scientists today: what is the nature of space and time? After analyzing different perspectives, Sparling offers an alternative idea: space-time may have six dimensions, with the extra two being time-like."

[RMohan]

I like Metod Saniga better:

http://www.ta3.sk/~msaniga/pub/ftp/ZiF_05_san.pdf

(much less hardcore math, much more 'what is time?' )

davelook (email removed) wrote:

Quote:

Don't forget this one...

http://www.physorg.com/news96027669.html

"In a recent study, mathematician George Sparling of the University of Pittsburgh examines a fundamental question pondered since the time of Pythagoras, and still vexing scientists today: what is the nature of space and time? After analyzing different perspectives, Sparling offers an alternative idea: space-time may have six dimensions, with the extra two being time-like."

[MWells]

RMohan wrote:

In any case, that's a GREAT list.

Thanks. Just dug up from Google searches.
RMohan wrote:

I wish you'd put it somewhere else, too, easier to find. Can you point me to a URL if such exists?

I'm not sure how much relevance those (interesting) lines of research have to the Reciprocal System. So it might be confusing to have such a list on these forums.

I think the main value of the those articles is in understanding the thought processes involved. That is, how is "time" conceptualized and how is "time" treated in its application to solving physics problems. It could be useful to compile a more formal survey of those systems and Larson's.

Quote:

MWells (email removed) wrote:
Quote:

RMohan wrote: A scientist, Itzhak Bars, is moving toward Reciprocal thinking -- he's suggesting

that there might be two dimensions to time.Added Two-Time Physics to the list.

I thought I remembered reading about "two-time" physics. Here's a post.

[RMohan]

On RS-related research: Looks to me like Larson is WAY

out in front on this one. Deserves the credit, to the extent

that matters.

On "thought processes involved" in multi-dimensional time

thinking: I am finding the writing of Metod Saniga very illuminating!

Also...many (most?) of these "3d time" guys are using

guess-which-kind-of-geometry to describe it? Projective!

I know this isn't news to most on this list, but I found it

extremely encouraging!

MWells (email removed) wrote:

Quote:

RMohan wrote: In any case, that's a GREAT list. Thanks. Just dug up from Google searches.
RMohan wrote: I wish you'd put it somewhere else, too, easier to find. Can you point me to a URL if such exists? I'm not sure how much relevance those (interesting) lines of research have to the Reciprocal System. So it might be confusing to have such a list on these forums.

I think the main value of the those articles is in understanding the thought processes involved. That is, how is "time" conceptualized and how is "time" treated in its application to solving physics problems. It could be useful to compile a more formal survey of those systems and Larson's.

Quote: MWells (email removed) wrote:
Quote: RMohan wrote: A scientist, Itzhak Bars, is moving toward Reciprocal thinking -- he's suggesting

that there might be two dimensions to time.Added Two-Time Physics to the list.

I thought I remembered reading about "two-time" physics. Here's a post.

[RMohan]

Folks,

I *just* ran into this...VERY exciting.

A scientist, Itzhak Bars, is moving toward Reciprocal thinking -- he's suggesting

that there might be two dimensions to time.

I haven't done any reading on it, just found out now and wanted to pass to group!

- Ross

http://www.physorg.com/news98468776.html