Im in high school and we are learning about time space and eistein

distance is equivalent to time multiplied by speeed

>>8329537
Time is not another dimension in the traditional sense.

Lets say that you are a 3D observer in a 4D space and you are in some 3D space inside that 4D space.

Now imagine you hop to another 3D space (in 4D there are infinitely many 3D spaces), what you will see there is a completely different 'world'. Nothing you saw has any parallel with this other 3D space.

If you want to think it in geometry, no point you saw in your original space is or has any relation to the points in this other space.

But time is not like that. When a second passes you don't travel to another 3D space where you see new points. You simply see the same points arranged differently.

For example, at one moment your dick may be soft but a couple of minutes later it could be hard so when you move from the time when it was soft to the time it was hard you simply see a different arrangement of the same points in the same space.

Also, physicists are dumb.

>>8329537
Modeled spacetime is 4-dimensional in the sense that it unifies three spatial dimensions and one temporal dimension. Don't think of time as a 4th spatial dimension and you'll be just fine

>>8329550
so what youre saying is that time is not the only 4th dimension and that there are more ways of perceiving a 4th dimension other than time?

>>8329557
you can take any variable you like and call it a dimension. if it varies it can be defined as a dimension

>>8329557
No, I'm saying that time is not a spatial dimension but a continuous list of different configurations of our 3D space.

The problem is that physicists don't know math.

>>8329559
but i suppose its only valid in certain mathematical scenarios and in this reality the only 4th dimension is time or am i wrong?

>>8329563
and so time is nothing alike the spatial dimensions?

>>8329567
no, we call the three spatial and one temporal dimensions "the four dimensions" because they are most relevant dimensions to study when you physics

I always just imagined the universe in a snapshot and that the dimension of time would simply contain every snapshot of every moment in a continuous line. I think of it as no different than imagining all the points in space on a given axis of a dimension.

This is just my autism though, take it for what it is.

>>8329537
People always rant about the 4th dimension when they don't have any fucking idea what they're talking about.

It's just another variable in the fabric of reality. Say we have some function f(x), it tells you the relationship between f(x) and x which can be basically anything: movement per unit time, a mapping of some physical 2D object, how often cats eat their owners, etc.

Make it f(x,y), we now can have a relationship of two variables and a function. If we say the function is our z axis it lets us map 3 space, but it doesn't mean that's all it can do.

All we're dealing with is another variable, so rather than f(x,y) =z or f(x,y,z)= g we're going f(x,y,z,time) and dealing with relationships between time and space which can be graphed as 4 dimensions; but so could x,y,z and temperature, or chairs, or whatever.

Hope my moderately incoherent rambling helps.

File: n+55.jpg (31KB, 224x340px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 224x340px

>>8329537
try reading this
"The universe in a nutshell" might help as well

>>8329669
>People always rant about the 4th dimension when they don't have any fucking idea what they're talking about.
>proceed to rant about the 4th dimension like you have any idea what the fuck you're talking about
WEW
LAD

Time is a spatial dimension. You can't move anywhere in x/y/z without moving through t as well. xyz are as intangiable as t.

>>8329640
Well this will fuck your brain then:

https://youtu.be/kGsbBw1I0Rg?t=3m25s

>>8329537
>i cant comprehend how you can consider time a dimension

That's because it isn't a dimension, it's a scalar.

I tell you to meet me in a few hours for lunch on the third floor of a building (height), on the south side (length), in the west corner (width).

The question you would want to ask is what time, because if you show up an hour after I leave, yes, we were spatially in the same place, but not in regards to time. So two objects, us, being in the same place but not at the same time is in a way just as bad as not being in the same place, cause we still missed each other, get it?

>>8329537
underage b&

Everyone shouldn't pick the wrong religon at homeschools that offer World Religons 1.

>trying to teach relativity before they've even done vectors
>what the fuck