# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: ant theory  (Read 3168 times)

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 10
##### ant theory
« on: 09/09/2005 21:19:51 »
This is Clearly hypotetical question.
Imagine one dimensional world. Just line, pure length. And imagine an ant living in such a world. It is happily crawling in its world. But then a bad man comes and closes the line so tightly, so that the ant cannot crawl any more.
The ant gets angry and makes second dimension, width, and gets easily over the obstacle. So now, we have a paper, with an ant on it. But again, the bad man probably likes to torture small animals, and closes the ant into circle.
The ant makes third dimension, depth and again overcomes the obstacle. The man closes it into a sphere. The ant makes forth dimension, time and gets back in time, when there was no sphere and go other way...

As I said, this question is purely hypotetical, we made it up with mmy classmates few years ago as a theoretical proof as time being the fourth dimension, but when i found this forum, I would like your opinion on this little story.
Thank You

#### ukmicky

• Moderator
• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3011
##### Re: ant theory
« Reply #1 on: 09/09/2005 21:57:55 »
Outwitted by an ant. If I was the bad man I would of stepped on it in the third.
« Last Edit: 09/09/2005 22:02:54 by ukmicky »

#### David Sparkman

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 234
##### Re: ant theory
« Reply #2 on: 09/09/2005 23:28:45 »
Unlike the first three dimensions, the fourth dimension is not really a dimension in the same sense. You cannot move forward and backward in that dimension. It is useful and resembles a dimension in that locating an event requires a time description as well as x,y and z positions. But calling it a dimension, though often done by scientists, is really not scientific as it is unlike the first three dimensions.

When scientists try to simplify things, and create these simplified explanations, we get such things as reverse time travel that puts all that we know about causality in danger (going back in time an changing the future, infinite futures, etc.) These may be fun thought games, but are actually scientific nonsense. When scientists spend too much time trying to justify and tie up loose ends to nonsensical theories, we end up with these convoluted theories that just get in the way of new thinking.

JUst remember time is not anything like distance, length or width, it is very very different.

David
« Last Edit: 09/09/2005 23:29:32 by David Sparkman »

#### gsmollin

• Hero Member
• Posts: 749
##### Re: ant theory
« Reply #3 on: 10/09/2005 03:48:39 »
Going back in time would require you to be able to travel faster than light. You can't do that, so you can't go back in time.

"F = ma, E = mc^2, and you can't push a string."

#### Simmer

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 229
##### Re: ant theory
« Reply #4 on: 10/09/2005 10:28:31 »
I didn't think you physicists had much to say about the direction of time, it's only entropy that keeps things in order. Thank God for chemists!

#### David Sparkman

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 234
##### Re: ant theory
« Reply #5 on: 10/09/2005 14:55:05 »
You are very right. But the physicists and even some astromators do have a problem remembering entropy is important, and time is not reversable.

David

#### Dr. Praetoria

• Guest
##### Re: ant theory
« Reply #6 on: 10/09/2005 17:09:15 »
I was interested in this idea because of something I read dealing with time becoming "space-like" with distortion of space-time--"the web site (http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/wormholes/default.htm) states, about Mallett’s theoretical time machine, “…Eventually, space and time would become so distorted by the circling light that time would become a dimension similar to space - a dimension that you could move along!”. Can warping time into a space-like dimension with gravitational distortion be regarded as identical as worm holing of time rather than space.
If so the physics, dynamics and mathematics for worm holing and time travel should be very similar.".  Does this seem a bit too scifi for now?
Doc

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### Re: ant theory
« Reply #6 on: 10/09/2005 17:09:15 »