- #1

- 399

- 1

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- #1

- 399

- 1

- #2

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 43,008

- 974

- #3

- 399

- 1

- #4

- 314

- 0

Thousands of years ago you couldn't measure anything smaller then what you could see, therefore those smaller distances at that time were abstracts?

- #5

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 43,008

- 974

??What kind of question is this? "Dimensionless points" are a mathematical abstraction because they have no physical existence. It makes no sense to talk of dimensionless points as either "negative" or "so small".How could the dimensionless points between dimensions not, expand, contract, divide, or combine as long as the dimensional particles are moving? Are you saying “dimensionless points” are a mathematical abstract because they are negative, or because they are so small?

I'm afraid you will have to define "potential movement" for me.Either way that is why I describe them as “potential movement” or a negative number.

What? The fact that it has not (yet) been measured doesn't make it a mathematical abstraction. Planck's time is defined as being the smallest interval of time that CAN (theoretically) be measured. If it CAN be measured then it is not a "mathematical abstraction".I’ve read that the smallest unit of time that has been measured is about 10^26 Planck’s times, so even one Planck’s time is a mathematical abstract.

Since, theoretically, "half a Planck unit" cannot be measured, such a thing would be a mathematical abstraction. I wouldn't think of it as a point, that's a different abstraction.What about cutting one Planck’s time into two could this be considered a dimensionless point what about cutting a Planck’s time into 120^26 pieces would these be dimensionless points?.

No, "dimensions" do not expand. Yes, you can measure very small or very large time intervals but that doesn't mean that the unit of measure is "expanding" in any sense.Time is always expanding and if you think of time as a real dimension then expanding from a negative to a positive would be a natural progression.

t= 0 is purely arbitrary- it is only intervals of time that are measured. And, again, measuring a very small time interval has nothing at all to do with time itself "contracting".Of course all measurements are relative I don’t really think that t=0 is ever reached; it is just a direction for time if it were contracting.

Share:

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 565

- Replies
- 33

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 774

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 637

- Replies
- 12

- Views
- 697

- Replies
- 24

- Views
- 821

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 674

- Replies
- 19

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 613

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 946