Ok before i even start with my theory, I'm sorry for my spelling skills in advance.
My idea goes something like this, There are 3 types of time, Real, Plane, and Motion. These all come together to form a 3D image of time. The first dimension of time, Real Time, is the one we are all use to. It is a line that has no beggining and no end, infinit. We could call it a "Time Line" for everything. At some point on this line we find the present, the point where future turns to past. But let me make a note by stating that there is no present. What i mean is, that no matter how much you break down time, you will never find the exact amount of time the present lasts, it happens so fast that in all reality its not there. The second dimension, Plane Time, is the lining up of many real timelines together. Think of this, if each point int eh universe were to share the same timeline then every point would experiance the same thing no matter what. So to fix this each point in the universe must have its own line, being points are infinit then there are infinit timelines. All of these lines are lined up with each other (no pun intended) like below.
-------|---------
2AM
-------|---------
2AM
And as you see the points of time correspond to each other at all times. So in theory, if i wanted to know what was going on anywhere at 2AM then i would just have to veiw the top of this plane. The last type of time is the hardest to explain, so bear with me. I couldnt think of a batter name for this type of time so i called it motion time. (being it involves motion) As we know from realativity (general), as we accelerate, time slows down. And as we slow back down the time meets back up. When this happens, we are warping the real time in a upwards direction. This si because when time slows more real time is needed to make it through this area of time. So i must note that real time always moves at the same rate. So now what we have is a "bumpy" plane. This adds the 3rd dimension to it to finish up my theory. I do also think that there is one time dimension for each space dimension. (so according to string theory that would make for 10 time dimensions)
Hope you enjoyed.

I was wondering... dose anyone like my theory or want to debate it? I know its hard to follow but im willing to explain it to anyone...

You made me think of a slide rule for time. Why don't you build one that has real, universal, GR, SR, and possibly string time? I'd love to see such an instrument.

Putting a timeline at every point in space gives us spacetime, 3 space dimensions and a time dimension. It is not multiple dimensions of time.

Please tell me how you know this to be fact.

__________________

Even if this were true, there must be a second time dimension to account for the slowing of time. When time slows it warps, for somthing to warp it must have at least 2 dimensions.

How does this idea of yours ssdd conflict with the theory of General Relativity? (a belated welcome to BAUT, by the way)!

Is there anything you could do, even in principle, in a lab or with a telescope (or in a million labs and with a million telescopes) that could show your idea is how the universe 'works'?

We usually say our space had 3D and the universe has 4D (3D+Time)
In my opinion, time can not be named as a dimension, or we can say this time dimension is already included in the 3D . Time is the reflection of motion. We use the formula t=s/v. So what is time? Time has to be defined by space and motion. Time itself is null.

Well i wasnt "trying" to make a conflict with GR, but more or less trying to incorporate it into my idea... I think if other theorys are able to blend with an idea it makes a much better case for it. Being GR allows for the slowing of time it is necisary for my idea to work, or else the 3rd dimension would be lost.

I thought about that idea too, i never really developed it much further than that. But that is why i mentioned that there could be a time dimension for every space dimension. It could be that in some way they are interlinked. The equation also presents a cool point, being E=mc2 interelates energy and mass, why couldt there be a equation that dose the same thing for time.

So your idea goes beyond GR? There is nothing in GR that is not also in your idea?

In what way does your idea conflict with quantum theory, specifically the Standard Model?

Oh, and you didn't answer this question:

Is there anything you could do, even in principle, in a lab or with a telescope (or in a million labs and with a million telescopes) that could show your idea is how the universe 'works'?

Well there have been many projects to try and prove that time dose slow down, they have proved on one project that it dose. The project involved launching a rocket with a clock or timer on board, they would then register the time to see if it differed from earth time as it left our gravitational feild. (The diffrence was very small but there was one.) What i do net understand about this experiment is how they could record the diffrence in time, being by the time the radio waves reached earth the times would be correct. (This is from what i have read and understood on the subject) So if somone could explain how they did it i would be glad to know. But being there is a shift in time, it has been proven that it can warp, therefore there has to be at least a second dimension to time.

You seem to be referring to a test of General Relativity (GR).

There is just one dimension of time in GR (and GR has passed all the tests its been subject to to date, with flying colours).

Any other answers?

I was infact pointing to a test of general relativity, for as long as general realativity works out my theory can work as well. (I think) What i was trying to prove was that time can warp, and for anything to warp there must be at least 2 dimensions for it to warp in. I have not heard of single dimension warps. (If there is such a thing please let me know so i can revise some of my veiws on space-time. ) Thanks for the link Ill look more through it and try to figure out how GR uses a single time dimenson. Though, could the equations only work because we are not use to having a higher dimension? Meaning perhaps the equations were built for a 4D universe, so they would work for a 4D universe. Where maby if we tryed calculationg somthing for a higher dimension the equations would fail. (Ill keep looking into it)

To ssdd Welcome to the kitchen. Wherever the observer is, time is constant. Relativity attempts to explain, among other things, the wacky phenomenon of how light bends due to gravity. Einstein at least formulated a mathematical explanation of this phenomenon while we still struggle to understand what gravity is and what light is. Hopefully his brilliance can be added to by young scientists like yourself willing to take as much heat as Albert had to to get us this far. If you can't get past Nereid, at least thank him for applying intellectual heat- the most compassionate type of heat, as BAUT is truly a user-friendly "kitchen."

That's quite a claim (potentially - I note your qualification!

What work have you done to convince at least yourself that any overlap between your idea and GR is free of inconsistencies?Well, as Fr. Wayne has already noted, GR does not require that time 'can warp'. But perhaps it's a matter of definition - can you show, mathematically, that 'warping time' (defined mathematically) is either inconsistent with GR, or requires a second dimension of time (or both)?There are many counter-intuitive things that follow from the GR equations; 'a 4D universe' is indeed the home which GR presumes, but many are the traps for the unwary (or ill-informed) concerning what this means, in 'reality'.Go for it!

im sitting here with my calculator and a page of math from all kinds of theorys open, but i have no idea of how to calculate the math for another time dimension... its really frustrating being im still in high school and dont have the math skills i would like to have... ill keep working on it, but if anyone can offer some help i would greatly appreciate it.

go through BAUT archives and look under a lot of different words, one at a time, then scroll down to where the math wizards put their formulas. See if you can duplicate results. Then once you do, you can take off on your own.

SSDD, your creativity is just what's needed by the Space-time, the more puzzles ... the more Clues.... that's our toys

As of those Math, one at a time, concentrate on the meaning, look at them forward and .... backward, interpet them, re-interpet them, understand them, till you have doubt in them .... that's the fun part of it.

High school is the right time to start Space-Time, how about Special Relativity ? soak up with it until it ooze out of your ears.... is it too simple for you ? think again !

How about the starting point of "Eqv princple of Gravitation and acceleration" , which was beginning of the GR .... what are the implication(s) ?

You want to make some new theories ? Read up those Wacky ideas posting around this ATM, steal a few good tricks ... while find and avoid their pitfall .... you are on your way !

Again, my hearty welcome to science, turn on your neural computer.

Thanks for the suppoort and hint as to where to start, Ive started looking at the equations harder. I also started teaching myself some more advanced math. (Dug up those dusty math books) Ill keep updates as to my progress.

Ive been looking and started thinking something as basic as a quantum equation could be used to calculate the dimensions and distrotions the 3rd time dimension would place on the other dimensions. it seems simple enough to do, once i have the numbers for distortion i can incorporate them into other things... and hopefully find some way to test this. Let me know if this is a good idea or if im going the wrong way.

No No No .... 3rd time dimension ? go check up other wackier ideas.
Read this first:
http://www.draaisma.net/rudi/science...onal_time.html
That Wacky idea seems useful.

How much math do you have ? maybe I can give you something as basic as "Grand Unification of Forces" to work on .... which is of course have to do with warped Time-space....

If so, please start with the Hamitonian, and Lagrangian., and Entropy... forget about stanard model ... hmm , once the forces are unified, we can go back to it.

Tell you what, forces look like they are phenotype of something very basic hidden
Your very sincerely
---------------------------------------
Declaimer: ne stultior ab hac disciplinâ discedat, quam accesserit.

This recent thread references, in the OP, a paper by George F.R. Ellis.

In a very few pages, Ellis summarises the current status of modern cosmology, with an emphasis on GR. Many of the key equations are there, as well as succinct summaries of what they represent. There are extensive references too.

This may be a good place for you to start (you probably don't need to go much beyond the first dozen pages, initially, for your purposes).

Well actually a few ideas... The first is that we do not have a realistic veiw on time, not because we dont understand it. But rather we may not know the true speed of time, in GR time slows with speed right? Well then we must realize how fast we are moving at any given moment. We must be moving unimaginably fast, The speed of earths rotataion, earth orbiting the sun, suns wobble, sun moving withing galaxy, movment of galaxy, etc. This being said may mean that our measurments for much of the physics are wrong. The only reason they may work is because they are being measured aganst a fast moving world. But if we were to run a similar equation in the middle of the universe, stationary (Ignoring the acceleration of the universe) the equations should not work at all.
Second i have a idea that i would like to add to my theory. This is to explain why one can not travle at the speed of light. Now being most forces are composed of some sort of partical (I guess i could say string to be safe) so i assume time is as well. So if as can not travle at the speed of light. Now being most forces are composed of some sort of partical (I guess i could say string to be safe) so i assume time is as well. So if as we accelerate time dose warp folding up the 3rd time dimension, then at some point (near the speed of light) the two slopes of the 3rd dim will try to touch. But it will be imposible. This is becase the time "strings" would start bouncing so violently between the two "walls" that it would take a infinite amount of force to get it to the speed of light.we accelerate time dose warp folding up the 3rd time dimension, then at some point (near the speed of light) the two slopes of the 3rd dim will try to touch. But it will be imposible. This is becase the time "strings" would start bouncing so violently between the two "walls" that it would take a infinite amount of force to get it to the speed of light.
Also Nereid, thanks for the refrence.

As a responsible science worker, you asked ....
Look, ss, both of what you said are right .. your creativity is way too much, I was about to ask your help on this basic research : UFOs ( Unify Forces, Oh, ssdd ) .... however, you deserve something more basic than that.

The first thing needed by a scientist is an open mind with a pair of Openned Ears, there's quite a number of eye openers arround, ATMer Mr. Chineson's "Theory on the new Universe ."

A new theory on the origin of our solar system
is highly recommendable, read every articles in it ..... prove yourself by reading it CAREFULLY.

Sincerely yours
JT
---------------------------------------
Declaimer: ne stultior ab hac disciplinâ discedat, quam accesserit.

just to keep up to date, Nereid, im downloading the pdf of that paper now... (Big file on dialup )

johntsang, I can see what you mean... But renember creativity is what keeps new ideas coming up and creativity finds ways for them to work. I started reading that post you linked for me. Ill get more into it soon, (recompiling my Linux Kernel to the latest one, takes a bit of time)

But just to let everyone know im not ignoring posts made to me.

Basics: Time is a human concept of real motions perceived by our senses and confirmed by our intellects as something 1.continuous (divisible), 2. successive ( irreversible), and 3. (based on the foundation of science: cause always precedes effect) immutable. Any phenomenon which "seemingly" breaks any of these three properties are to be considered exceeding the natural universe, and therefore outside the bounds of mathematics and science. As tyrannical as this sounds, it is a basic protection for the advancement of science. Without a definition of time based on objective reality, no science could be developed. So good hunting and please avoid the crazies. (Yes, just my stupid opinion/ No, I don't want to debate the issue.)

I seem to be stuck... out of ways to show any proof for my theory... the equations are there... (i found the GR ones that i would need) But i have no idea now what i need to do with them. Well, i know what i need to do but just dont know how... Perhapes ill just stick with the 3-1 universe... Ill keep trying but i dont think ill get far...

ive started learning more math, but still cant think of any way to work out/make the equations for this theory . if anyone at all can help please let me know.
aside from the lack of math dose anyone like the theory?