Infinite space and time

Infinite space and time
Paul
PF Addict
Avatar

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Mar 10, 2002

Total Topics: 510
Total Posts: 16239
#1 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 5:57 PM:

If space is infinite, does that in itself neccessarily make time infinite? (And if time were infinite, would that mean space must be infinite?) It seems natural to me that if one is infinite the other must be, but I'm not sure I have any defense for that assumption. Would it be logically coherent to have a finite time with infinite space, while still accepting relativity... or does Minkowski space-time forbid them from such differing status?
manifold14
Unmoderated Member

Usergroup: Unmoderated Member
Joined: Feb 10, 2004
Location: Heaven....I'm at Peace!!!

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 0
#2 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 7:09 PM:

Paul wrote:
If space is infinite, does that in itself neccessarily make time infinite? (And if time were infinite, would that mean space must be infinite?) It seems natural to me that if one is infinite the other must be, but I'm not sure I have any defense for that assumption. Would it be logically coherent to have a finite time with infinite space, while still accepting relativity... or does Minkowski space-time forbid them from such differing status?


I am space and time are two different things, despite the name of space-time.

This is just an abstract name given to an abstract concept.

Space and time, separately, are quantifiable on their own.

It has been proven that space has been expanding. Therefore it must not be infinite.

Time although, I believe as an avid believer in God, must continue on for eternity as we live as fully bodyless, yet Conscious beings.
wuliheron
Resident
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Location: Chesapeake, VA

Total Topics: 49
Total Posts: 466
#3 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 9:36 PM:

manifold14 wrote:
I am space and time are two different things, despite the name of space-time.

This is just an abstract name given to an abstract concept.

Space and time, separately, are quantifiable on their own.

It has been proven that space has been expanding. Therefore it must not be infinite.

Time although, I believe as an avid believer in God, must continue on for eternity as we live as fully bodyless, yet Conscious beings.


I don't know what universe you are from, but this one is currently believed to follow Einstein's theory of Relativity. Note, this is not the pseudo-science and nonsense section.
DarkCloud
Resident

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 12, 2002

Total Topics: 156
Total Posts: 181
#4 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 10:20 PM:

Well, you could always perhaps think of space and time as being inevitablly tied to each other like a moebius strip... assuming that both space and time are intersecting branes.

Therefore, if they are tied and one brane is infinite, then so that the two are not electromagnetically drawn into each other and crash into each other, then both would have to be infinite and have realtively equal masses, correct?

At least that is my knowledge of the situation! wink
Paul
PF Addict
Avatar

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Mar 10, 2002

Total Topics: 510
Total Posts: 16239
#5 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 10:33 PM:

Visualizing a moebius strip really doesn't clarify the situation to me any, DarkCloud. confused

The issue I think is if the way the here-now point splits up space and time could do it in a way that one is infinite while the other is not. Certainly it doesn't split up space and time in exactly equal ways -- consider that time has two directions (one dimension) while space has six (three dimensions), and perhaps this could play a role in how one could be infinite without the other. I don't really see how though.

Haven't people suggested finite space with infinite time -- at least infinite in the future direction? As a related issue, if time were only infinite in one direction would that make space only infinite in one direction? Perhaps a one-direction infinity just isn't a coherent concept to begin with.

Yet more related issues: could space and time both be finite yet space-time infinite, or space-time finite yet space and time infinite? It would assume those scenarios should both be impossible.
DarkCloud
Resident

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 12, 2002

Total Topics: 156
Total Posts: 181
#6 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 11:04 PM:

Yet more related issues: could space and time both be finite yet space-time infinite, or space-time finite yet space and time infinite? It would assume those scenarios should both be impossible.


Well... if space was finite and time was finite, I see no problem with space time being infinite due to the warpting of time-space... as two seemingly opposing forces of 'matter and being' come into contact with each other, then 'weird' interactions should occur. (I believe that mathematics might very well predict these 'weird' interactions... if not now, then it will when we have more raw data on the exact effects of molecular decay on elements over the passage of time and the effects of this decay upon the quantum foam and the very make up of the universe itself)

As for space-time being finite when space and time would be infinite, I believe that is much less likely, if only because, how can one imagine, even mathematically, something finite arising from something infinite? Even with warping?
----

As for infinite time in a future direction, I don't really believe that, namely because I don't believe that time works exactly as society has bounded it. Time is mainly a construct, an invention to measure things. A way to measure material decay.

What I would posit for time as a sort of dimensional capacity would be this:

"Time" (T) would necessarily act upon Matter (M) which has at least 3 Dimensions [Note: I am neglecting M-Theory here as well as superstrings]

Now Time's suggested 2 Dimensions (T1) and (T2) would interweave with matter's Three... Therefore giving rise to the possibility of a THIRD time dimension (T3)

The way that these would interact would be in:

positive decay (T1) Whereby the material denegrated due to the "electromagnetic-like" brane interactions of T1 upon M1,2,3... as the branes collide, the atoms are rubbed off and decay (and perhaps the quantum foam becomes stretched and perverted into something that transits beyond the M1-3 classifications and enters into T1 and increases its avaliable power, thereby making it more powerful to rub off still more matter and decay still more in a faster manner.

Okay, now back to Time's second dimension... now I'm going out on a limb here, but then again even the physicists don't know for certain what these strange dimensions mean, so my extrapoliations are probably as correct as the next persons.

T2- (negative decay) would perhaps be the dual 'wobble' of time that interacts upon the second dimension of an object... 'distorting' it and making its quantum foam slightly displace... For example: did you know that theoretically, due to quantum foam, it IS possible for a person to be able to put his hand through a glass wall?

Well, I posit that this is due to T2 (negative decay)

As for T3 It probably does not exist, but if it did, it would be highly theoretical. The matematics, I believe, do not agree with the current universal model.

However, to give T3 a whirl, I would suggest a slight axial tilt in the brane as being the effective mechanism for the apparent T3 "spin"... T3 would "spin" the time membrane and give it substance... sort of like M3 gives Matter a third dimension. This 'substance' of time would bind the other two together and cuase interactions between them, creating a sort of matter/antimatter interaction of time/antitime that progressively wears away at and decays the brane converting the time into energy that then fluctuates with M1 and 2 and distorts it and allows there to be a M3.
transio
Newbie

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 01, 2003
Location: Miami, FL, USA

Total Topics: 13
Total Posts: 0
#7 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 11:11 PM:

I don't think that one being infinite necessarily means the other must be infinite. Just a gut feeling.

Questions:[list=1]
  • What defines the extents of space, besides the extents of matter? Isn't it feasible that space extends beyond observable matter?
  • Is it possible that space is infinte in one dimension and not another?[/list]
  • ScaryClown
    Newbie

    Usergroup: Members
    Joined: Jan 14, 2003

    Total Topics: 2
    Total Posts: 0
    #8 - Quote - Permalink
    Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 11:22 PM:

    It does seem more natural for the universe to either be infinite or finite in both time and space. It seems odd that the universe could be infinite in volume yet have a finite starting point at the big bang. But this just an abritrary preference. Mother Nature is a mean bitch who doesn't care about human intuition. There is nothing in relativity that prevents a universe of infinite volume but finite duration.

    You can't locate something in the universe without 4 coordinates, but this doesn't mean space and time must both have the same properties, which in this case is volume/time. Other examples exist. Spacetime can be curved while space is flat, space is expanding while spacetime is not, etc.
    DarkCloud
    Resident

    Usergroup: Members
    Joined: Apr 12, 2002

    Total Topics: 156
    Total Posts: 181
    #9 - Quote - Permalink
    Posted Feb 12, 2004 - 11:28 PM:

    volume yet have a finite starting point at the big bang

    You could argue that the Time brane clashes with the matter brane and creates new matter all the time (little big bangs) or as I stated above, quantum foam might seep between the two wink
    Curt Monash
    Newbie

    Usergroup: Members
    Joined: Dec 11, 2003
    Location: Boston area

    Total Topics: 15
    Total Posts: 1
    #10 - Quote - Permalink
    Posted Feb 13, 2004 - 1:10 AM:

    There can easily be infinite time and finite space. Just pick a version of cosmology (whether or not current experimental evidence argues against us) in which the universe expands from a point, stops, contracts back to the initial point, and keeps cycling.

    Finite time and infinite space is a combination harder to visualize right now. If time and space have a common starting point, it is tough for the universe to become infinite in a finite period of time. And a universe that has been infinite from the beginning of time would be pretty far from current cosmologies.

    Although here's one way -- an infinite number of universes, each of them individually finite. That could work.
    locked
    Download thread as
    • 0/5
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5



    This thread is closed, so you cannot post a reply.