Why Is Time Considered the 4th Dimension in Einstein's Theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xeinstein
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nature Time
Xeinstein
Messages
90
Reaction score
0
Why should time be considered as a 4th dimension?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Look at [post=1602401]this thread[/post]. It's simply done for convenience of mathematical analysis. You could just as easily have temperature or magnetic field strength for a 4th dimension.
 
It's true that any variable can be treated as a dimension, but the reason it's so popular to think of spacetime in geometric terms in relativity goes beyond that. It also has to do with the fact that, although different frames can disagree on the spatial distance or the temporal separation between events, they will all agree the invariant "spacetime interval" between them, so this can be thought of as a kind of "distance" in 4D spacetime. In 3D space the spatial distance between points is given by the Pythagorean theorem d = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2 + z^2} (which should give the same answer regardless of how you orient your x-y-z axes, since all cartesian coordinate systems in Euclidean space agree on the distance between points), and the formula for the spacetime interval is similar, \sqrt{c^2 * t^2 - x^2 - y^2 - z^2} (which gives the same answer regardless of which frame's x,y,z,t coordinates you're using). Along the same lines, there is the fact that the "geodesics" in the curved spacetime of GR are the ones that locally have extremal values (usually minimal values) of proper time (which is what the spacetime interval is giving you in flat spacetime), they don't have extremal values of spatial distance.

And one other reason for thinking of spacetime in geometric terms is the relativity of simultaneity, which tells you that there is no physically preferred way to divide up 4D spacetime into a stack of 3D "instants" showing how the configuration of matter in space evolves over time.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to point out that it's possible to extend Euclidean geometry to five dimensions, keep almost all of S.R., and maintain the Pythagorean theorem as-is, as discussed in this fascinating paper posted in Independent Research:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=103977

That's an even more persuasive reason, IMO, to treat observer time as a 4th dimension.
 
Xeinstein said:
Why should time be considered as a 4th dimension?

It's the fact that the speed of light is an invariant, a truly fundamental quantity. because of this, if you take any two events and you assign them coordinates (as measured in some specific frames), the quantity c^2 (\Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 - (\delta y)^2 - (\Delta z)^2 gives a number that will be the same as measured by any other observer (using the intervales measured in their own frames). This is what unifies time and space into a four-dimensional manifold.
 
In Einstein's original papers, doesn't he say:

x4 = ict ?

It seems then that the fourth dimension is ict as x4 = ict.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
39
Views
6K
Replies
48
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
2K
Back
Top