Two dimensional time 5.2.3

The first time direction is uncontrollable; the second is controlled by making choices, traveling through different realities. Future is a set of parallel universes.

— Me@2017-12-15 10:59:49 AM

.

The first time direction, which is along the timeline, is uncontrollable, because one can only travel from the past to the future, not the opposite.

The second direction, which is across different timelines, is controlled by making choices, forming different realities.

— Me@2019-12-21 11:03:23 PM

.

.

2019.12.22 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Two dimensional time 5.2.2

time direction ~ direction of change

multiple time directions ~ multiple directions of change

— Me@2019-12-22 04:38:47 PM

.

the first dimension of time ~ direction of change

the second dimension of time ~ direction of change of changes

— Me@2019-12-22 04:46:47 PM

.

.

2019.12.22 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Visualizing higher dimensions

The trick of visualizing higher dimension is: not to visualize it.

— Wikipedia

— Me@2011.08.19

.

Besides trying to visualize, there are other methods to understand higher dimensions.

— Me@2018-10-28 04:28:01 PM

.

.

What is the meaning of visualization?

— Me@2018-09-02 4:35 pm

.

feel ~ receive all the data at once

(This definition is not totally correct, but is useful in the meantime.)

visual ~ feel at once through eyes

.

you can visualize a 3D object ~ you can see all of a 3D object at once

you cannot visualize a 4D object ~ you cannot see all of a 4D object at once

.

Actually, you can only visualize a 2D object, such as a square.

You cannot visualize a 3D object, such as a cube.

That’s why the screen of any computer monitor is 2 dimensional, not 3.

— Me@2018-10-28 04:32:41 PM

.

.

2018.10.28 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Juan Maldacena 2

What is the difference between 10 and 11?

The simplest string theory is ten dimensional. Strings can interact with each other. If the interaction among strings is large, the theory is hard to describe. It turns out that when strings interact very, very strongly, something surprising happens. A new dimension opens up and we have a theory in eleven dimensions, the ten we started with plus an extra circle. In eleven dimensions we do not have strings, we have membranes. Membranes wrapped along the 11th dimension give rise to strings.

— Who’s Counting? Is it 10 or 11? (dimensions, that is — M Theory is making me Manic!)

— Prof. Juan Maldacena

— Institute for Advanced Study

2013.09.01 Sunday ACHK

Juan Maldacena

We do not know yet whether a description in terms of 10 or 11 dimensions is more appropriate for the universe where we live in. But these two possibilities are continuously connected. They are simply different possibilities for the internal geometry. Since the geometry of the internal space is quantum mechanical, asking what its dimension is might not be the right question.

In summary, in a quantum spacetime the dimension might not be a well defined notion. When the space in question is small, it can interpolate continuously between different dimensions.

— Who’s Counting? Is it 10 or 11? (dimensions, that is — M Theory is making me Manic!)

— Prof. Juan Maldacena

— Institute for Advanced Study

2013.08.29 Thursday ACHK

Looper, 5.4

Paradox 5.5 | Meta-time 4.5 | Cumulative concept of time, 13.5 | Two dimensional time 4.4 | 二次元時間 4.4

To be logically consistent WITHIN the movie’s story, Young Joe (in the year 2044) should not be able to influence Old Joe, who had time-travelled to the year 2044 from the year 2074,because that Old Joe is from another timeline. The proof is that Young Joe’s experience in the year 2044 is different from Old Joe’s experience in the year 2044 when he was young.

They are not the same person, nor the same person at different ages within the same timeline. At most, they are different versions of the “same” person from two different timelines (aka “parallel universes” or “histories”).

Young Joe’s changes should affect the same-timeline-Old-Joe, but not any Old Joe’s from any other timelines. So the Old Joe within the movie should not have been affected when Young Joe hurt himself.

Also, the changes of the same-timeline-Old-Joe due to the actions of Young Joe should be seen only by the author (meta-time), but not by Young Joe until he has become that Old Joe 30 years later. 

The author unintentionally, or intentionally, has confused two story timelines. Moreover, the author unintentionally, or intentionally, has confused the story-time and its meta-time.

— Me@2013-07-05 10:32 PM

2013.07.11 Thursday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Looper, 5.3

Paradox 5.4 | Meta-time 4.4 | Cumulative concept of time, 13.4 | Two dimensional time 4.3 | 二次元時間 4.3

In a single-mutable-timeline time travel story, the two dimensional time is not due to the internal causal structure of the story. Instead, it is due to the author’s timeline (aka meta-time). The author’s timeline is the second time dimension (aka independent direction).

The single-mutable-timeline model of time travel is not logically consistent within the story. If it is “mutable”, it is not “single”.

The single-mutable-timeline model of time travel is logically consistent only outside the story, from the perspective of the story’s author.

— Me@2013-07-02 3:47 PM 

2013.07.09 Tuesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Looper, 5.2

Paradox 5.3 | Meta-time 4.3 | Cumulative concept of time, 13.3 | Two dimensional time 4.2 | 二次元時間 4.2

In the movie Looper, Young Joe (in the year 2044) influences Old Joe (in the year 2074) in the sense that Young Joe’s every action affects the state of Old Joe, because Old Joe is Young Joe’s future self.

For example, after Young Joe had hurt his own arm, the corresponding wound also appeared on Old Joe’s arm, even though Old Joe had already time-travelled back to the year 2044. 

All of Young Joe’s actions are the causes of Old Joe’s state. Young Joe is in the past of Old Joe.

Old Joe (2074-Joe) = [ …, Young Joe (2044-Joe), … ]

B = [ …, A, … ]

However, Old Joe (2074-Joe) had time-travelled back to the year 2044, meeting the Young Joe.

So, some of Old Joe’s actions would affect Young Joe’s decisions on his own actions. In this sense, Old Joe also influences Young Joe indirectly. Some of Old Joe’s actions are the causes of Young Joe’s state. Part of Old Joe is also in the past of Young Joe.

Young Joe (2044-Joe) = [ …, Old Joe (2074-Joe), … ]

A = [ …, B, … ]

However, it is logically impossible to have both

B is in the past of A 

and

A is in the past of B

just as it is logically almost impossible to have both

D is a part of C

and

C is a part of D

If you insist that it is the case, the only possibility is that

C = D

In this analogy, neither C nor D is really a “part” of another. In the time travel case, neither A nor B is really in the past of another. In other words, A (Young Joe) and B (Old Joe) have no time relationship. Neither’s actions are the causes of the state of another.

The real causes of Young Joe or Old Joe’s states are actually not within the movie story’s timeline. The real causes are the decisions of the author of the story.

— Me@2013-07-03 6:19 PM

2013.07.08 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Looper, 5

Paradox 5.2 | Meta-time 4.2 | Cumulative concept of time, 13.2 | Two dimensional time 4.1 | 二次元時間 4.1

In a “if and only if” case, there is no time. 

If A is a necessary condition of B, we say “A is a cause of B“. In other words, A is in the past of B.

However, in some time travel story, it is “possible” to have both

A is a cause of B

(A is a necessary condition of B)

(B -> A)

and

B is a cause of A

(B is also a necessary condition of A)

(A -> B)

In this case, A and B are just equivalent.

(A B)

Neither is in the past of another. A and B have no causal relationship. In this sense, there is no time.

— Me@2013-07-03 6:19 PM

2013.07.05 Friday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Factors

因子

factors = independent causes

因素 = 原因元素 = 原因粒子

product = the results of factors multiplying together

產品 = 積 = 因素成果

multiply

乘 = 騎 = 順勢 = 利用

— Me@2013-02-28 8:16 pm

2013.02.28 Thursday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Over

over ~ finished ~ transcended

— Me@2013-02-01 01:54:02 PM

Finishing is one of the two methods of transcending. For example, once you have earned enough money, you would never have to worry about money anymore.

Finishing is more time-consuming and should be avoided if possible. But sometimes, it is necessary.

— Me@2013-02-03 02:02:07 PM

2013.02.04 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

因果網絡

多重小宇宙 1.2 | 二次元時間 2.6 | Dimension 1.3.6 | Two dimensional time 2.6 |  A little bit of yourself, 2 | 心靈互聯網 2 | Mind Internet 2

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 3 日的對話。

但是,記住,那只能作比喻,而並不是實情,因為所有的「主觀時間線」,都會同時影響和受制於同一條「客觀時間線」。任何兩個人,即使從不相遇,兩條「主觀時間線」永不相交,他們的人生歷程,也不可能百分百互不相干。任何一條「主觀時間線」,都不如我所講的「平行宇宙」一般,有機會獨立存在。

不過,你這個講法雖然不是鉅細無遺,但是極度有用,因為它帶出了一個超級重點。現實世界的時間,雖然只有一個次元,但那一個次元,就已經足夠難明了。

剛才我把「一次元時間」講成一條「時間線」或者「因果鏈」,只是為了方便簡化。實情是,「時間」是一個「因果網絡」。意思是,「因」和「果」並不是一一對應。一個「因」,可以引發多個「果」;而一個「果」,又可以來自多個「因」。比喻說,一個學生,會有很多老師;而一個老師,又會有很多學生。「一因多果」和「一果多因」,可以統稱為「多重對應」。

你「現實版二次元主觀時間」的講法,雖然不是分毫不差,但是可信可用,因為,現實世界的「因」和「果」,是「多重對應」的。

— Me@2013.01.21

時間者

因果網絡也

— Me@2007.09.17

2013.01.21 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

多重小宇宙

二次元時間 2.5 | Dimension 1.3.5 | Two dimensional time 2.5 | 孖生宇宙 2.5

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 3 日的對話。

(安:你剛才提到:

所以,我剛才視「多重宇宙標籤」為「第二個時間」次元,是建基於「平行宇宙機」的假設。那個科幻故事的主角,發明了「平行宇宙機」,令到自己可以,由原本的宇宙(甲),走到另一個宇宙(乙)行事。那樣,「宇宙甲」的歷史,就可以透過主角,影響到「宇宙乙」的演化,反之亦然。

依你這個講法,除了在科幻小說外,日常現實生活中 —— 如果用比喻 —— 都會有「二次元時間」的現象。)

什麼意思?

(安:那是我將今天討論過的句子,重新組合後的化學作用,奇幻想法:

1. 一個宇宙,有一個「時間次元」,即是有一條「時間線」。「時間線」又可以稱為「因果鏈」。

2. 宇宙的次元數目是「三加一」,即是「『三次元空間』加『一次元時間』」。

3. 我剛才視「多重宇宙標籤」為「第二個時間」次元,是建基於「平行宇宙機」的假設。那個科幻故事的主角,發明了「平行宇宙機」,令到自己可以,由原本的宇宙(甲),走到另一個宇宙(乙)行事。那樣,「宇宙甲」的歷史,就可以透過主角,影響到「宇宙乙」的演化,反之亦然。

雖然,這個宇宙,客觀的時間次元只有一個,即是「客觀時間線」只有一條;但是,這個宇宙中的每一個人,其實各自都有一條「主觀時間線」,因為每人都有自己的歷史發展進程。例如,如果甲乙二人,老死不相往來,他們的「主觀時間線」就永不相交。他們各自的「因果鏈」,就可以視為兩個互不相干的微型「宇宙」,簡稱「平行小宇宙」。

但是,如果甲乙相遇,而相處起來,他們每人的說話和行動,就會影響到對方未來的人生演化。「因」和「果」,未必再局限於同一個人,同一條「主觀時間線」上出現。原本的「平行小宇宙」,不再完全「平行」。所以,要改稱為「多重小宇宙」。

那樣,要指清一件事件時,除了要指出它發生的時間 —— 例如「2013 年 1 月 14 日 5 時 20 分」—— 外 ,還要講清楚,它發生在哪一個「小宇宙」的「2013 年 1 月 14 日 5 時 20 分」。換句話說,你要講清楚,哪個人做了哪件事(因),而導致另一個人去做哪件事(果)。原本的時間標籤 —— 哪時 —— 是「第一個時間次元」;而多重宇宙的標籤 —— 哪人 —— 則可以視為「第二個時間次元」。

例如,醫生甲在 2013 年 1 月 14 日,開了藥給病人乙。病人乙於一星期後,2013 年 1 月 21 日痊癒:

… –> (2013 年 1 月 14 日,醫生甲)開藥 –> (導致)(2013 年 1 月 21 日,病人乙)痊癒 –> …

可以這樣說。但是,記住,那只能作比喻,而並不是實情,因為所有的「主觀時間線」,都會同時影響和受制於同一條「客觀時間線」。任何兩個人,即使從不相遇,兩條「主觀時間線」永不相交,他們的人生歷程,也不可能百分百互不相干。任何一條「主觀時間線」,都不如我所講的「平行宇宙」一般,有機會獨立存在。

— Me@2013.01.19

2013.01.19 Saturday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

三次元時間

Looper, 2.2 | 二次元時間 2.4 | Dimension 1.3.4 | Two dimensional time 2.4 | 孖生宇宙 2.4

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 3 日的對話。

而《Looper》作者自己的時間線,則可以視為《Looper》故事本身的「第三個時間次元」。一般而言,由構思故事到完成劇本,通常也不會一筆過,而會反覆修改。換而言之,那是一個演變的過程:

《Looper》故事版本一 –>(影響)《Looper》故事版本二 –>(影響)《Looper》故事版本三 –> … …

製在《Looper》這部電影時,作者很多時會和製作人員討論劇情。指清故事中的事件時,作者就需要講明,他所討論的那個事件,發生在「哪一個版本」中的「哪一個平行宇宙」中的「哪一點時間」,例如:

(故事版本二,宇宙三,2017 年 5 月 10 日)

亦即是話,作者需要有三個時間坐標數字,才可以「設置」,或者「定位」一個事件。

— Me@2013.01.18

2013.01.18 Friday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Looper, 2

二次元時間 2.3 | Dimension 1.3.3 | Two dimensional time 2.3 | 孖生宇宙 2.3

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 3 日的對話。

所以,我剛才視「多重宇宙標籤」為「第二個時間」次元,是建基於「平行宇宙機」的假設。那個科幻故事的主角,發明了「平行宇宙機」,令到自己可以,由原本的宇宙(甲),走到另一個宇宙(乙)行事。那樣,「宇宙甲」的歷史,就可以透過主角,影響到「宇宙乙」的演化,反之亦然。

其中一個有「二次元時間」的科幻小說是,電影《時凶獵殺》(Looper)。故事中只有「時光機」,而沒有「平行宇宙機」,所以,不同「時間線」之間的演化,只能是單向。意思是,「宇宙一」(時間線一)會影響「宇宙二」;「宇宙二」會影響「宇宙三」;如此類推。但是,「宇宙二」不會影響「宇宙一」。

單向的「平行宇宙」演化,比較接近平時意思下的「時間次元」,因為「時間次元」,應該是單向的 —— 由「過去」到「將來」,而不會由「將來」到「過去」。在這個例子中,「宇宙一」就是「宇宙二」的「過去」。而「宇宙三」,就是「宇宙二」的「將來」。

「平行宇宙」中的每一個,內部都會有自己事件演化的「因果鏈」,簡稱「歷史」。所以,每一個宇宙,即為一條「時間線」。那就是「第一個時間次元」。而「平行宇宙」間的演化,即為「第二個時間次元」:

「宇宙一」 –> (影響)「宇宙二」–> (影響)「宇宙三」–> … …

— Me@2013.01.15

2013.01.15 Tuesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK