Rates of Change and Multiple Dimensions

  • B
  • Thread starter paulo84
  • Start date
  • #36
paulo84
112
7
A string transports a wave. It can act as a medium.

Thank you, I'm already more clear.
 
  • #37
paulo84
112
7
Another question - is there a part in physics which deals with strings carrying beta waves? Hope I don't get eaten!
 
  • #38
33,648
11,206
is there a part in physics which deals with strings carrying beta waves?
What is a beta wave?
 
  • #40
paulo84
112
7
What is a beta wave?

Sorry I meant beta ray. I could have sworn they were called 'beta waves' in school. Woops.
 
  • #41
paulo84
112
7
I withdraw my last question.
 
  • #42
paulo84
112
7
I'm starting to think Sophie is right.
 
  • #44
paulo84
112
7
Yes, @sophiecentaur usually is right!

That somehow doesn't surprise me. :) One final thought (for now) - lekh2003's answer gave me a very basic understanding of one aspect of string theory. A wikipedia article would have been far, far harder to decipher.
 
  • #45
36,652
8,651
OK, so time is change of displacement. Speed is change of change of displacement.
It has already been discussed, but IMO bears repeating. Time is NOT change of displacement. If s represents the displacement of some object, then a change in displacement is usually represented as ##\Delta s##. Velocity is the instantaneous rate of change of displacement, and can be written either as s' or s'(t) or ##\frac {ds}{dt}##. This last notation is the derivative of s with respect to t. "Change of change of <whatever>" is not good terminology. We always talk about the "rate of change" of some variable with respect to some other variable. In this context, the "other variable" is time.

Without getting too deep into the weeds of calculus (which is what we're really talking about when we are discussing derivatives), ##\frac {ds}{dt}## is defined in terms of a limit. IOW, ##\frac{ds}{dt} = \lim_{\Delta t \to 0}\frac{\Delta s}{\Delta t} = \lim_{h \to 0}\frac{s(t_0 + h) - s(t_0)}{h}##. Suffice it to say, that we can approximate the velocity by taking smaller and smaller time increments in doing the calculation.

Speed and velocity are different. Velocity is usually taken as a vector quantity, as it indicates a rate of motion in some direction. Speed, on the other hand, is a scalar quantity, with speed = |velocity|. A car's speedometer records the magnitude of the car's velocity, but doesn't indicate the direction.

Acceleration is change of change of change of displacement (or of distance, sorry I'm not sure whether acceleration is a vector or a scalar).
No, accleleration the rate of change of the velocity with respect to time. Again, if s is displacement, then s'(t) is velocity, and s''(t) or ##\frac {d^2s}{dt^2}##, also a vector quantity, as direction is significant.

It seems to me, with each new layer of change you're adding a new dimension.
No. Dimension has nothing to do with any of this.

Therefore there must be an infinite number of dimensions of space. Or am I getting space mixed up with motion?
Yes.
 
  • #46
paulo84
112
7
I agree with most of your post, but I don't understand how that proves that time is not change of displacement. But as has been noted, I'm not a physicist, I really don't know what I'm talking about.
 
  • #47
paulo84
112
7
I'm sorry. I just don't understand the difference between time and space. As far as I can fathom, they're the same thing.
 
  • #48
jbriggs444
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
11,569
6,215
I'm sorry. I just don't understand the difference between time and space. As far as I can fathom, they're the same thing.
Duration is what clocks measure, distance is what rulers measure. Clocks and rulers are different. If you are getting so far out in the weeds that the distinction escapes you, it's time to come back to the house.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
  • #49
paulo84
112
7
Duration is what clocks measure, distance is what rulers measure. Clocks and rulers are different. If you are getting so far out in the weeds that the distinction escapes you, it's time to come back to the house.

Thanks, I am able to distinguish between space and time for the practical purposes of everyday living. I stand by my point.
 
  • #50
33,648
11,206
I am able to distinguish between space and time for the practical purposes of everyday living. I stand by my point.
This is logically inconsistent. If they were the same thing then you could not distinguish between them.
 
  • #51
paulo84
112
7
Which one of us is making a circular argument?
 
  • #53
paulo84
112
7
OK. So should I give up?
 
  • #54
paulo84
112
7
I retract my previous statement. I am not able to distinguish between space and time. I just think I can due to an illusion caused by consciousness.
 
  • #55
33,648
11,206
There is not much we can do to help you then. If you can’t even distinguish between a clock and a ruler then you will have a very hard time with physics.

I think it is time to close this thread. If you wish to learn physics then please open a new thread with a substantive question
 
  • Like
Likes lekh2003, jbriggs444 and Vanadium 50

Suggested for: Rates of Change and Multiple Dimensions

  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
563
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
19K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
739
Replies
0
Views
77
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
10K
Top