Why is additional complexity necessary for understanding 3D space?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mdl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    3d Complexity Space
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the necessity of incorporating complexity into the understanding of 3D space, particularly in relation to the time dimension. Participants explore how space alone cannot convey velocity information, as it lacks the temporal context needed to understand motion. The conversation references the ancient Greeks' 'arrow paradox' and highlights the interplay between spatial dimensions and time, especially in the context of special relativity. Ultimately, the dialogue concludes that time is essential for distinguishing events and understanding the dynamics of physical systems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of spatial dimensions and their properties
  • Familiarity with the concept of time as a dimension
  • Knowledge of special relativity and its implications on spacetime
  • Basic grasp of the 'arrow paradox' and its significance in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the 'arrow paradox' in modern physics
  • Study the principles of special relativity and spacetime
  • Explore the concept of information storage in physical systems
  • Investigate how different coordinate systems affect the perception of events in spacetime
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, researchers in theoretical science, and anyone interested in the philosophical implications of time and space in understanding the universe.

mdl
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
hi,
why do we need to have additional complexity to 3D space?

we know that space holds information.
but I'm not aware of any information in the universe which is held by "time dimension"..

isn't there only changing space and our brain does the "time job" with memorizing and sorting states of space?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mdl said:
we know that space holds information.
but I'm not aware of any information in the universe which is held by "time dimension"..
The ancient greeks devised the 'arrow paradox,' in which: if an arrow frozen in time is stationary, at any given time; how does it get between stationary points?

How does space-alone contain velocity information? I.e. by only knowing where something is, how can you tell how fast it is moving.

The are lots of examples like this; certain things are innately tied to the temporal dimension---energy is another example, it only has meaning with respect to time.

There are other, more complex, situations in which the spatial dimensions and time become 'mixed together,' leading to the notion of space-time.
 
zhermes said:
The ancient greeks devised the 'arrow paradox,' in which: if an arrow frozen in time is stationary, at any given time; how does it get between stationary points?

How does space-alone contain velocity information? I.e. by only knowing where something is, how can you tell how fast it is moving.

thank you for your reply,

but does the time dimension really solve any of these problems?

if space dimensions can't store information about where a particle/wave/whatever will be in next iteration (future), then the time dimension can't store that kind of information about *now*. so you can't tell whether *now* is moving forward or back or if it's moving at all.

or is time only for historical data? if so, it's not a dimension as most people believe, but only several states which generate future states.
 
Without the "time dimension", how would we assign coordinates to events? The event where I clicked the "new reply" button happened at spatial coordinates (0,0,0) (in a coordinate system that measures position relative to me), but the event where I clicked the "preview post" button the first time has the same spatial coordinates. We need a fourth coordinate just to distinguish between these two events. This doesn't even have anything to do with relativity.

However, it's in special relativity that spacetime gets really interesting, because the invariance of the speed of light implies that the coordinate systems that are the most natural to associate with the motion of an inertial observer "slice" spacetime into 3-dimensional hypersurfaces that we can think of as space at different times, in very different ways. So two events that you consider separated only in space, will be separated both in space and time by anyone who's moving relative to you (in a direction that's not perpendicular to the line connecting those events).

I don't know what you're talking about when you're talking about "storing information". Information is stored by physical systems, not by "dimensions", and the word "store" doesn't make sense if there's no time.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
6K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 95 ·
4
Replies
95
Views
7K