On 10/06/2010 12:26 AM, Levi Pearson wrote: > Did I say it was a spatial dimension? No. I said it was as real as > the spatial dimensions, which clearly implies that it is not itself a > spatial dimension.
Just as long as no one goes around calling it the "fourth dimension" which it clearly is not. > I did mention that some philosophers have denied the "reality" of > time, but some of them also put distance in the same category of > mental construct as time. Physical quantities like length and mass > are as prone to relativistic effects as time is, so it's hard to > single out time as particularly "unreal" in that respect. Yes you did. But I wanted to point out that Science also questions the "reality" of time. /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
