On 26 January 2014 09:55, Stephen Paul King <[email protected]>wrote:
> > Strictly speaking, no, time is not a dimension. We define sequences of > associated events to be so in our mathematical representations. > This is true of all physics. It's all mathematical representation (I hope Brent will back me up on this...) Picking on time and saying "it's just a mathematical representation" doesn't get us anywhere. It's our best available mathematical representation - the one that has the most explanatory power. Unless you can get to a more powerful explanation by removing this assumption, I can't see why you would do it. (Please note that a more powerful explanations would have to solve problems that exist, not ones that are covered perfectly well by the existing explanation, like "becoming"). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
