time= decay?

This is a hard question for everyone I think. Does time change at a different rate in the higher dimension example: 4D, 5D, 6D, 7D etc with respect the 3D. And what does string theory have to say about this.

The reason I ask this is in near death experience they can spend a long time up there and come back down here with nothing happening thus time elapsed is shorter. Note this is also true with people having ET experiences.
 
Designer,

Here's an abstract of an article just publlished in Nuclear Physics B (October, 2007) relative to time in string theory.

Arrow of time in string theory

Brett McInnesa,
aNational University of Singapore, Singapore
Received 24 November 2006; revised 24 April 2007; accepted 7 May 2007. Available online 16 May 2007.



Abstract
Inflation allows the problem of the arrow of time to be understood as a question about the structure of spacetime: why was the intrinsic curvature of the earliest spatial sections so much better behaved than it might have been? This is really just the complement of a more familiar problem: what mechanism prevents the extrinsic curvature of the earliest spatial sections from diverging, as classical general relativity suggests? We argue that the stringy version of “creation from nothing”, sketched by Ooguri, Vafa, and Verlinde, solves both of these problems at once. The argument, while very simple, hinges on some of the deepest theorems in global differential geometry. These results imply that when a spatially toral spacetime is created from nothing, the earliest spatial sections are forced to be [quasi-classically] exactly locally isotropic. This local isotropy, in turn, forces the inflaton into its minimal-entropy state. The theory explains why the arrow does not reverse in black holes or in a cosmic contraction, if any.


Nuclear Physics B
Volume 782, Issues 1-2, 15 October 2007, Pages 1-25
Click to expand...

You'd have to buy the article to read it (for now at least) and as you can see from the abstract its going to be stated in the form of differential geometry.


How daunting is differential geometry? While Einstein was working out General Relativity he had to go back to school and do post doc work - he had to learn differential geometry.

So I think that your question is very appropriate - but it's a subject that is complex, deeply rooted in higher maths and geometries that are still being explored by the pros. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif As you can see in the top of the abstract, the paper was initially submitted in November 2006 and went through peer review & revision for just short of a year before it was ready for publication.

(Pretty sneeky way of saying "I don't have a clue", ain't it?)
 
LOL it's obvious relevant posts can be deleted from here sorry Rain Man "Simply a jab". Just because you don't believe it does not make a statement false. And if out of the clear blue you did not do it why was my commentary stricken from the record ....... I'm only gone a minute and poof do explain,.
 
What, precisely, are you referring to? I have deleted nor edited NOTHING from this thread. Moreover, I have an agreement with Raul that I will not do such things, and the only editing is to remove offensive material or that material that does not obey the TOS rules.

Perhaps you are confusing with anothe thread? I assure you I have touched NONE of your posts, JSG.

RMT
 
x {[m/(1-(v^2/c^2))^1/2]-m}a
y {[m/(1-(v^2/c^2))^1/2]-m}a
z {[m/(1-(v^2/c^2))^1/2]-m}a

frame 1

vs.

x {[m/(1-(v^2/c^2))^1/2]-m}a
y {[m/(1-(v^2/c^2))^1/2]-m}a
z {[m/(1-(v^2/c^2))^1/2]-m}a

frame 2
 
Back
Top