RosaMagika said:
Wes,
I checked out your graph when you first posted it in the other thread. But I still don't know what to think of it.
then I'm glad you're asking questions.
I don't know much about string theory, so I really cannot make any comments as it seems to be necessary to know string theory to understand your graph.
no not really, my understanding of it is quite rudimentary. I only really understand the very basics and that's barely, but I have heard reference to predictions regarding the number of spatial dimensions of the universe resulting from varieties of string theory.
This link covers more than I can remember at a given time, but I halfway understand the gist of it.
I am wondering though:
Do you see time as something that also exists per se, sort of "outside" of an individual person?
Yes, but as depicted it's part of a larger phenomenon. What we 'see' or 'feel' as time, is time, but time is just how we see part of the connection between all spatial dimensions, the common element to all. So we exist in 4 dimensions, so we see the connection between all dimensions the only way we can, from 4 dimensions. We call it time, but it's really much more than time outside of our limited dimensionality.
Is time something that is a matter of the human mind or something that is outside of the human mind -- or both?
Both if you see what I mean from above. It is not generated from mind, no. It is part of the universe.. however, observation is the only thing that carves time from the tao such that is has
meaning, which is in fact, an aspect of "the inner dimension" or a compactificated dimension that the brain utilizes to allow meaning itself. Meaning is abstract, where does the abstract
fit in classical space-time? You can put it in a brain, or in a shoebox but what does it
mean? Without someplace for abstracts to interact (which again, can be in a brain, but the
meaning can't be in the brain, because the brain is just there, like looking at thousands and thousands of lines of computer code, or a computer emulating human behavior... there are patterns, but with no one to
reflect on them, they remain part of the tao. Bah, I can't make my point clearly! Ack), pure abstracts then meaning cannot be. Anyway, it's far too late and I shoudn't be typing but I'll finish up.
Why is the graph a circle?
It might be linear, I'm not sure. It depends. I think of it that way as if you took a line and curved it back to where it started. Dimensions stack up almost exactly per extrusion. Nothing becomes a point. A point extruded to a line, a line extruded to a plane, a plane extruded to a cube, a cube extruded to a hypercube, etc. Maybe if you keep going far enough you get back to where you started from, at least abstractly. I mean that in the sense that in a weird way, infinity and zero can be considered two aspects of the same thing. That's why the circle.. though I was considereing redrawing it as a line.
Well, technically dimensions sort of "stack" I think, so I used a gradient to try to halfassed account for it.
If it is a circle, then it suggests that when you add to than N + X, you eventually come around to the point of N. Hmmm?
Do you see what I mean now?
How eaxctly is the time (in blue) different from the imaginary time?
I think the biggest difference is that imaginary time isn't tied to a direction.
What is the relation between the blue circle in the middle and the greenish circle around it?
Only to color code for the labels really.
