I Can Spacetime Be Visualized in a 2D Universe Like Flatland?

Gabriele99
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I started this post on physics.stackexchange but it's too vague for that site, so here I am! :)

I'm trying to really get the intuition of spacetime.

This video explains how Minkoswki was the first to think that maybe our universe does not consist of a 3d space which evolves in time, but rather a 4d non-euclidean mathematical space, Minkowski spacetime.

Not even to say this made no sense for me.
Head hurts when I think of non-euclidean spaces and 4,or more, dimensions.

So, I made some more caotic researches, watched other videos and I bumped into this explanationwhich resulted more intuitive and understandable.

This video, showed how spacetime whould have looked for a 2d event, as time passes. It blew my mind.

As soon as I finished this video I remembered about this book I read "FlatLand", which is about some 2d creatures who live in a 2d world, and so, I started wondering what would have spacetime looked like for this 2d space world, hoping it would help to clarify the concept, or to make it more "accesible".

In any way, I've just a small background in special relativity and some videos, and some spare readings behind my back, so I don't know if I can really dig into this with my current knowledge.

In the end, I'm just curious if anyone else have used this kind of help to initially understand this concept and if it can be a good way to start.

Can spacetime be thought for a flat world? How much would resemble the idea behind our 4d spacetime? What would light look like there? and, Could I ideally graph spacetime from a 2d big-bang to a certain time?
I don't expect these questions to be answered, I'm just asking if is lecit and useful to discuss about something like that and maybe to open a discussion.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Gabriele99 said:
In the end, I'm just curious if anyone else have used this kind of help to initially understand this concept and if it can be a good way to start.
Yes, most spacetime diagrams are drawn with 1 dimension of space and 1 dimension of time. However diagrams with 2 dimensions of space and 1 dimension of time are also common. It is a very good approach to start!
 
since we are using "flatland" as the reference point you might want to explicitly restrict interactions to only the 2D. since in the book a 3D object was allowed to interact. if that is possible then the gravity of an object outside the the 2D land could change the physics of the world
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top