It is created from nothing. It disapears into non-existance. It can not be defined without going into 3rd dimensional events. So, how can it actually exist in a "4th dimension" if it can not exist without a 3rd dimension to give it form?

Stand up, and drop a pen or something (younger brother?) onto the floor, and you can define a moment in time as "when the object made contact with the floor". Easy enough? Thought so. Now, without 3rd dimensional referances, explain that instant to me.

So, does time really exist? Is it beyond our comprehension? If it is, how can it effect us? Step outside fo your curent paradigm please, just open yourself up to a new (probably false!) idea.

You didn't refer to the third dimension at all. You referred to the fourth when you said "when".

The second dimension refers to orientation along the axis: up, down, left, right. The third dimension refers to height, width, and depth. Time is the movement of objects. It is a way of showing change. If there was no time then everything would happen at the same moment. Time isn't created or destroyed, because it isn't an object. It's more of an idea.

fourth dimension
n : the fourth coordinate that is required (along with three spatial dimensions) to specify a physical event [syn: time]

How can something with no physical form exist. Or is this just a 3-D perspective?
Also, if something existed and interacted with 4 dimensions could it therefore travel in time? Somewhat like the Tralfamadorians in Slaughter-House Five.
By the way, I highly suggest Slaughter, I think Vonnegut writes exceptionally well and uniquely.

Wow, re-reading that one, not only is it vague, but it is horribly phrased. Feh.

Lokis, you want to know how something with no energy and has no matter can exist? It can't. Everything has energy. Or are you defining physical form as something else?

And doesn't everything interact with 4 dimensions?

Time and space are the same surely? Im sure Stephen Hawkings agrees with me on that one.

Dear lord.

I have a question. Instead of trying to work out answer with stuff you learned of the TV, why not actually do some research

"Surely Steven Hawking agrees with me"

Well, he might if your talking about considering time and space for doing maths in, because they can be considered the same for relatavistic calculations, but not for the example above, becuase it's a classical question.

If you want an explanation of what time is , then look into Super symetry and super string theory. It's not a theory about time, but it resolves all the main questions in the working. But, as the man himself said
"If you can walk away and say you've understood it, then you haven't understood it"

RipSlider

Hmmmm... Yes.
Hawking would kick your ass for saying something like that, if he could
Time and space are in no way the same except in that we can use both as dimensions or variables in calculations...
Just like in a simplified model length and width can be switched to produce exactly the
same results, from the mathematicians perspective...
But as far as I have read his works, he is mainly on about the Time/Space, which is like what Einstein referred to as the space-time continuum (and Trekkies of course ).
In fact, talking about things without taking into account the T/S is like talking about a
flat object as if it has only 2 dimensions, which everybody knows is silly. Even the thinnest piece of paper has a thickness, and
so every object has a time in which it exists. Seperating the two is where the trouble starts: thinking about time without space and vice versa.

In fact, this is a highly intriguing subject and much has been speculated on it...
If one tends to believe the only reality one can know is the one he lives himself, then Kant is right and we cannot say anthing about time nor causality with certainty, because we cannot observe them directly.
I am sure some of you know the Flatland
concept? Well, like that. 2D people could
never understand what the 3rd dimension is,
so neither can we the 4th.
Some more pretentious theories assume there
are definately such things as dimensions in which we exist, and there are many variations of that... Some do acknowledge relativity as a fundamental principle, but that appears to weaken their arguement that some sort of absolute dimensions exist.
Others propose we actually can see in time since we can conceptualise 'before' and 'after' and even relatively long and short periods, and therefore we are allready 4D beings, only a bit shortsighted in the 4th dimension because we have not evolved for that...
There are even some texts out there, most about interdimensional technology, the Philadelphia-experiment and related sci,
and simply "delta T devices" that claim time-influencing technology and some even mention Tesla and his "time wave" apparatus. All very
doublfull stuff, but interesting still

I myself am still not sure what time really is, and if it does really exist...

This concept is very intriguing to me but which I have very little knowledge. I took a Cosmology course which was basic but the concepts blew my mind. I have been seriously thinking about changing my major from Molecular Biology so I can learn more about cosmology.

Elemental, where did you learn all of that you just posted?

Let us start with the equation for the location of a physical object in Einsteinian space-time: W2= X2 + y2 + Z2 - C2T2, where X, Y, Z, are space coordinates, C is the velocity of light and T is the time coordinate (the 2's indicate squaring). Analysis of this equation provides us with the proportion that time is to space as "i" (the square root of -1) is to 1. Now "i" multiplied by itself is -1, so that in a metaphoric sense we can say that the time dimension is "half" a space dimension. Curiously one finds this out intuitively. We have full intuition of the three spatial dimensions, but we cannot intuit the fourth dimension, so we experience it as "time." Furthermore this experience is not full; it is partial, for we are on a one way street indicated by "time's arrow" which allows us always to experience duration as getting later and later, but never the opposite."

This was taken from the unified field theory and should explain your question.

Here's what I see time as. In one dimensional space a line is the infinite extension of a point. Infinitly extending a line gives a plane or two dimensions. Infinitly extending a plane is 3 dimensional space. Time (for us) is the infinite extension of three dimensional space which takes place in the form of instants. An instant would appear as everything frozen in its current position in the universe. So as multiple instants pass so does something move and so does time thusly infinitly extending three dimensional space.

God (if he exists) I think would be 9-dimensional, since a 9th dimension event would be something such as the big bang, I think the works out quite well.
--------------------------------
Repost of the dimensions as are known to me:
Dimensions As we know them:
0: nothing, yet everything
1: a line (length)
2: a circle (length, width)
3: a sphere (length, width, depth)
4: umm....a Clock! (length, width, depth, time)
5: errrr sort of a black hole or gravity well (length, width, depth, time, the folding of space)
6: ? dont know
7: ? dont know
8: ? dont know
9: The highest dimension, the object? The big bang. (Best 3rd dimensional discription? Creation, plus all former dimensions)

As far as I can tell, 5 dimensional space includes multiple dimensions (realities). That was one of those conclusions that seem simple in retrospect, but took weeks to figure out.

0: a point in space (a location, contains nothing)
1: a line (contains infinate points within it)
2: a plane (contains infinate lines within it)
3: space (contains infinate planes within it)
4: time (contains infinate series of probibilities in space within it)
5: ??? (contains infinate times within it [an infinate number of series of infinate probibilities])

Dear God. Speaking of Steven Hawking, go to www.mchawking.com But yeah, beyond the 3rd/4th dimension, we have no concept, and thus are blind to them. Someone, please drop a paradigm on my ass.