3 ms·
I didn't read the paper yet, but the title reminds me of Robert Bartini who had a theory of time being 3-dimensional as well as space is.
by qwerty456127 3y ago
I didn't read the paper yet, but the title reminds me of Robert Bartini who had a theory of time being 3-dimensional as well as space is.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- djmips 3y agoTegmark's paper does seem related in that it is arguing that proposals like Bartini's might produce a universe that is 'dead'. It seems that Tegmark's paper is suggesting that only 4 dimensional (3+1) universe produces a world with 'observers'. The math is beyond my ken. This appears to be the Bartini paper (1965) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26408302_Relations_Between_Physical_Constants https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26408302_Relations_...
- Theizestooke 3y agoBartini the aircraft designer? I'd like to read more about that, but most of the Bartini-related stuff is about airplanes.
- qwerty456127 3y agoAFAIK he was also a mystic of a kind and what we would call a "fringe scienctist" in today language. Which makes a curious case when such a character actually builds serious sophisticated working products like cutting-edge airplane designs. The latter leading to a clue that his theories may be worth exploring (they still can be wrong, but there is a chance of finding some interesting food for thought there). Another example of an inventor of similar kind coming into my mind obviously is Nikola Tesla.
- pizzafeelsright 3y agoTime has at least three dimensions. I consider at least six but possibly twelve. A future imperfect that has yet to be experienced would be three relative time of origin, thus six, relative to the observer, allowing for an additional six and total of twelve.