1

TIME AS A GHER DIMENSION.

From my book the theory of relativity in high school(in Greek)

www.mpantes.gr

Absolute, true, and mathematical time, of itself and from its own nature, flows
equably without relation to anything external. Newton

The geometry of motion is based and formed on a simple and

important observation: no movement occurs in space only, but in space and
time. "If that was not the case, the moving particle should be at the same
time at all points on its track. But that would ruin the image of movement. "

This explains the phenomena of everyday life that seemed self-

evident: what would happen if our foot was simultaneously in every position
during the walk? What if you move your hand and your hand was at each of
its positions at once? What if in walking the "old" foot get in the way of the
new foot does not block the way to the next step? Why a body that is
oscillating is not hampered by its previous positions?

material point A then performs two movements, one visible in

space and one invisible in time. If movement in space is considered to be
true because it is certified by sight, the movement in time is equally real and
is certified with another sensation: the sense of the flow of time that exists
within us and works inexplicably as we will see. We will call it a sense of
time.

Is then time the fourth dimension? Not necessarily, you could still
four dimensions say three to live in and one to curve space in the direction
of and then through the time as the fifth dimension It is possible and useful
 2

to view time as a higher dimension, but we should not to the conclusion that
whatever we talk about a higher dimension we are referring to time.

What causes the sense of the passage of the time? Is this an illusion?
Various people have attacked the question. One of the best attempts is David
Parks article the myth of Passage the time(Springer Link)

This lecture is intended not to answer, but to show what is involved

in answering one of these questions: Why is it that though we can voyage
pretty freely in space and return to our starting point, we seem to be much
less free to explore time? Something about time makes us use such phrases
as "not yet" and "too late" which have no counterparts in the description of
our experience of space. Time passes, but space does not. (The first of my
quotations shows that even this common experience can be expressed in
more than one way.) It is curious that although the brain is a physical
organism, physics does not contain this special property of time. There are
then two possibilities:

1) Physics is wrong as applied to mental processes. This is quite

possible, since quite apart from the rudimentary state of our knowledge of
the physical mechanism underlying our response to perceptual stimuli, there
is the far more disturbing question to which I have alluded above, whether
there is any hope at all of explaining our conscious experience in terms of
models involving physical structures isolated, or partly isolated, from an
outside world.

2) The passage of time does not need to be explained by physics.

I maintain that the latter is the case. I have called the passage of
time a myth rather than an illusion, say, because it involves no deception of
the senses - we shall see that one cannot perform any experiment to tell
unambiguously whether time passes or not. There are no sensory data in the
ordinary meaning of the term. I use the word myth because this picture of a
 3

time that passes us, or through which we pass, is the dominating source of
the private as well as the literary language through which we seek to
express our experience of time.

Parks idea is that we are in fact at each instant of our lives. Every
moment of past and future history exists permanently in the frame work of
4-D space time. The illusion of the passage of time is a consequence of the
structure of the universe (R. Rucker). In particular, it is a consequence of the
fact that the memory traces of an event are always located in space-time
points whose time coordinates have greater values the time coordinats of
the event . This fact cannot be explained; it is simply an observable property
of the universe. That is, you are going to have memories of thoughts or
events only at times later than the times at which these thoughts or
events occur. There is not paradox in the claim that my earlier self who
wrote the previous sentence still exists. I will always be drawing that
picture, typing this sentence, drawing this picture and meeting my death.
Every instance of your life exist always.Rucker pag.60)

Time does not pass. if we entered back into our body and mind of
five minutes ago, we would have no memory of having been in the future.
The consciousness of five minutes ago is unalterable.

The objective world simply is, it does not happen. Only to the gaze of my
consciousness, crawling upward along the life-line of my body, does a
section of the world come to life as a fleeting image in space which
continually changes in time. Weyl

This is precisely the concept of static time. Time exists as a locality

and we cross it as we cross a road. Weyl writes:
 4

It is not the time that flows independently and outside of us, but our
consciousness that penetrates and crosses it just as our body crosses a
spatial distance.

We finally hold that as we are moving through the space with our
footsteps, we are going through time with our consciousness, we do feel that
time is passing.

A simple space- time diagram

Consequently, the execution of these two real movements gives the

resultant movement in space-time. Thus the space-time diagram is born,
where time has its own axis Ot next to the axes of space.

Considering a single spatial dimension, I have for the geometric

representation of motion x = t the straight (e) called the world line of the

body, where tan= .

Any line which joins different events associated with a given object
will be called a world-line.The moving particle of the three-dimensional
space is transformed into a trajectory for the four-dimensional space-time,
motion becomes a line.
Developing this transformation
we have that the old points of
space become events in space-
 5

time - 4 dimensions- the material bodies become lines, the world lines,
tracing the history of its location in space at each instant in time, straight
lines for the smooth movement, and curves for the changing, and eventually
the three-dimensional animated evolution becomes a four immobile petrified
image. (in the figures we use only one spatial dimension that represents
space and responds to our intuition.) The physical space of our experience is
a three-dimensional section of space-time that we imagine to move in the
direction of the 4th dimension, that is, time. The 3-D world we live in at any
moment, is but a cross section of 4-D space time. In 1908 H. Minkowski, a
young Russian mathematician presented a paper in which he interpreted
Special Relativity as a theory about the geometry of space-time, where he
introduces a type of picture called a Minkowskis diagram that is based in
the premises of the above space time diagram.

Given the way that things are in our world, what can we infer about
the structure of space time? What is the geometry of space time? What type
of metric does it have? In Euclidean 3-D space we have the Euclidean
geometry and the Pythagorean theorem respectively. These two cornerstones
of physical space (that is only one) were based on physical measurements
with rigid bodies, here in new space-time we will find new experiences to
install the corresponding entities: this is the world of the relativity theory.

Summing up so far we could say:

The emergence of time in fourth dimension in the four-dimensional

space-time is the common denominator of any geometry of motion. This
static perception of time simulates it with the other dimensions (of space)
without, however, making it identical to them. The space-time is not
assimilated with a four-dimensional space. Let's imagine a fun example:
Moving into a four-dimensional space, we could get out of a locked room
without the keys, as now one comes out of a circle engraved on the floor.
 6

But we cannot take a feed from the stomach of a man with a single time
backwards, without disturbing him!

Time keeps its identity, but we must emphasize once again that the
use of space-time diagram and later the geometry of space-time means one
thing: static perception of time. Is there any other type of consciousness
available to us than the various points along our life-worm? Is there any way
to be conscious in static space-time instead of moving space? Such
conscious is the goal of the mystics quest. Practitioners of Yoga speak of
immortality and freedom, consciousness of the Eternal Now, and the
transcendence of time. R. Rucker. With their deep meditation intervene
into consciousness and it seems to be in fact possible to escape the feeling of
time passing, a timeless feeling.

But the question remains: why all this? why this reference to the four-
dimensional state, space-time, static time? The spatio-temporal diagrams
have been known since ancient times, why now we insist on the geometric
description of motion by removing our own intuition?

To answer, we will remember Galileo and his belief that mathematics

is not about "saving phenomena" but about interpreting them. Let us
remember what Copernicus wrote about the movement of the earth round
the sun under the pressure of the Catholic Church:

".. it is funny to believe that heavy land could be in motion. But

supposing that is what happens then calculations become easier and the
world much more understandable ... "

Ultimately, however, the mathematical description led to a physical

verification of the movement of the earth.
 7

First of all I will show that we can change, through a pure

mathematical path, our perceptions of space and time starting from today's
accepted principles of mechanics ... .Minkowski.

George Mpantes

Serres 18/9/2017

Sources

R.Rucker: Geometry relativity and the fourth dimension Dover

1977

David Parks article: the myth of Passage the time(Springer Link)

Minkowski : space and time Dover

Albert Shadowitz: Special relativity Dover1988