Why does a sign difference between space and time lead to time that only flows forward?
Ever since special relativity we've had this equation that puts time and space on an equal footing:
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
But they're obviously not equivalent, because there's a sign difference between space and time.
Question: how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time? It sounds like something I should know, yet I don't - the only thing I can see is, $dt$ could be positive or negative (corresponding to forwards and backwards in time), but after being squared that sign difference disappears so nothing changes.
Related questions: What grounds the difference between space and time?, What is time, does it flow, and if so what defines its direction?
However I'm phrasing this question from a relativity viewpoint, not thermodynamics.
special-relativity metric-tensor time arrow-of-time
add a comment |
Ever since special relativity we've had this equation that puts time and space on an equal footing:
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
But they're obviously not equivalent, because there's a sign difference between space and time.
Question: how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time? It sounds like something I should know, yet I don't - the only thing I can see is, $dt$ could be positive or negative (corresponding to forwards and backwards in time), but after being squared that sign difference disappears so nothing changes.
Related questions: What grounds the difference between space and time?, What is time, does it flow, and if so what defines its direction?
However I'm phrasing this question from a relativity viewpoint, not thermodynamics.
special-relativity metric-tensor time arrow-of-time
2
It doesn't, you need more than that.
– ggcg
Jan 3 at 23:37
How would the universe look like if time sometimes flowed backwards? Your brain would also flow backwards, you know.
– Luaan
Jan 5 at 8:43
add a comment |
Ever since special relativity we've had this equation that puts time and space on an equal footing:
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
But they're obviously not equivalent, because there's a sign difference between space and time.
Question: how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time? It sounds like something I should know, yet I don't - the only thing I can see is, $dt$ could be positive or negative (corresponding to forwards and backwards in time), but after being squared that sign difference disappears so nothing changes.
Related questions: What grounds the difference between space and time?, What is time, does it flow, and if so what defines its direction?
However I'm phrasing this question from a relativity viewpoint, not thermodynamics.
special-relativity metric-tensor time arrow-of-time
Ever since special relativity we've had this equation that puts time and space on an equal footing:
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
But they're obviously not equivalent, because there's a sign difference between space and time.
Question: how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time? It sounds like something I should know, yet I don't - the only thing I can see is, $dt$ could be positive or negative (corresponding to forwards and backwards in time), but after being squared that sign difference disappears so nothing changes.
Related questions: What grounds the difference between space and time?, What is time, does it flow, and if so what defines its direction?
However I'm phrasing this question from a relativity viewpoint, not thermodynamics.
special-relativity metric-tensor time arrow-of-time
special-relativity metric-tensor time arrow-of-time
edited Jan 3 at 23:05
Qmechanic♦
102k121831163
102k121831163
asked Jan 3 at 22:44
AllureAllure
1,845620
1,845620
2
It doesn't, you need more than that.
– ggcg
Jan 3 at 23:37
How would the universe look like if time sometimes flowed backwards? Your brain would also flow backwards, you know.
– Luaan
Jan 5 at 8:43
add a comment |
2
It doesn't, you need more than that.
– ggcg
Jan 3 at 23:37
How would the universe look like if time sometimes flowed backwards? Your brain would also flow backwards, you know.
– Luaan
Jan 5 at 8:43
2
2
It doesn't, you need more than that.
– ggcg
Jan 3 at 23:37
It doesn't, you need more than that.
– ggcg
Jan 3 at 23:37
How would the universe look like if time sometimes flowed backwards? Your brain would also flow backwards, you know.
– Luaan
Jan 5 at 8:43
How would the universe look like if time sometimes flowed backwards? Your brain would also flow backwards, you know.
– Luaan
Jan 5 at 8:43
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
As illustrated in the answer by Ben Crowell and acknowledged in other answers, that relative sign doesn't by itself determine which is future and which is past. But as the answer by Dale explains, it does mean that we can't "move back and forth in time," assuming that the spacetime is globally hyperbolic (which excludes examples like the one in Ben Crowell's answer). A spacetime is called globally hyperbolic if it has a spacelike hypersurface through which every timelike curve passes exactly once (a Cauchy surface) [1][2]. This ensures that we can choose which half of every light-cone is "future" and which is "past," in a way that is consistent and smooth throughout the spacetime.
For an explicit proof that "turning around in time" is impossible, in the special case of ordinary flat spacetime, see the appendix of this post: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/442841.
References:
[1] Pages 39, 44, and 48 in Penrose (1972), "Techniques of Differential Topology in Relativity," Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, http://www.kfki.hu/~iracz/sgimp/cikkek/cenzor/Penrose_todtir.pdf
[2] Page 4 in Sanchez (2005), "Causal hierarchy of spacetimes, temporal functions and smoothness of Geroch's splitting. A revision," http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411143v2
add a comment |
The sign that appears in the metric or line element, i.e. in
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
does establish a difference between space and time, but it does not, on its own, contain all of the physics related to time. For one thing, it does not determine which direction is future and which is past. That direction is established by other considerations such as entropy increase. The other main ingredient here is the claim that worldlines are timelike not spacelike. This really amounts to a statement about conservation laws. We identify a sequence of events along a certain line in spacetime as a sequence associated with one particular entity, such as a particle or a body, because there is something in common at the events: a certain amount of electric charge, for example, or energy and momentum. So we say we have a particle (or larger body) and that is its worldline. A sequence of events along a spacelike line, on the other hand, often doesn't show that kind of common property, so we don't find it helpful to suggest that the same entity was present at all the events. As you see, we are getting quite close to metaphysics here.
2
Time but flows onward. It only has a direction once you pick a reference frame ("direction is established by other considerations", +1)
– Mazura
Jan 4 at 2:31
add a comment |
how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
It is not only the sign difference, but also the fact that there is only one dimension of time while there are multiple dimensions of space. Because there is only a single dimension of time a surface of constant proper time forms a hyperboloid of two sheets. One sheet is future times and the other sheet is past times, so there is no way to smoothly transform a future time into a past time. Future and past are geometrically distinct.
In contrast, because there are three spacelike axes a surface of constant proper distance forms a hyperboloid of one sheet. So you can smoothly transform up into down and so forth. Different spacelike directions are not geometrically distinct.
Thanks for answer. Are you saying that if there are two or more dimensions of time (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_time_dimensions) it would be possible to move back and forth in time?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 8:00
Yes. With 2 timelike dimensions you could have closed timelike curves even in flat spacetime.
– Dale
Jan 4 at 11:58
add a comment |
Why does a sign difference between space and time lead to time that only flows forward?
It doesn't. Spacetimes don't even have to be time-orientable. This is similar to the idea that a Mobious strip is not an orientable surface. So you can have a metric with a $-+++$ signature but no direction you could define for time to flow, even if you got to set up the thermodynamics however you liked.
I don't understand your answer I'm afraid. What do you mean by "orientable"?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 1:32
2
@Allure: Imagine a spacetime that was literally shaped like a Möbius strip, with a spacelike dimension (let's stick to only one, to keep things simple and easy to visualize) that goes around the strip and a timelike dimension that goes across the strip from one edge to the other. If you want, you could make an actual Möbius strip with paper and glue and draw some parallel "time arrows" across it. What you'll see is that, as you fill the whole strip with these arrows, when you get back to where you started, the arrows will have flipped around!
– Ilmari Karonen
Jan 4 at 10:51
@IlmariKaronen So in other words, going around the mobius strip space will reverse the flow of time relative to everything at that location, which in turn means that the directionality of time becomes purely relative.
– The Great Duck
Jan 5 at 6:53
add a comment |
The minus sign does not imply that time flows only in one direction. This is seen if we define the forward direction of time to be the direction in which entropy increases.
You cannot derive the $2^{nd}$ law of thermodynamics based on the fact that there is a minus sign on time and not the spatial parts. Indeed, this is a matter of convention as we could have put the minus sign on the spatial parts and a + on the time component.
However: I don't think this is the heart of your question. The minus sign is due to the fact that space and time are not separate entities but are part of one vector space called spacetime or minkowski space. The relative minus sign tells us about how they are connected. Namely, it tells us about the geometry of spacetime.
For a physical argument to why this is the case, I refer you to this answer by @Dvij Mankad.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f451979%2fwhy-does-a-sign-difference-between-space-and-time-lead-to-time-that-only-flows-f%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
As illustrated in the answer by Ben Crowell and acknowledged in other answers, that relative sign doesn't by itself determine which is future and which is past. But as the answer by Dale explains, it does mean that we can't "move back and forth in time," assuming that the spacetime is globally hyperbolic (which excludes examples like the one in Ben Crowell's answer). A spacetime is called globally hyperbolic if it has a spacelike hypersurface through which every timelike curve passes exactly once (a Cauchy surface) [1][2]. This ensures that we can choose which half of every light-cone is "future" and which is "past," in a way that is consistent and smooth throughout the spacetime.
For an explicit proof that "turning around in time" is impossible, in the special case of ordinary flat spacetime, see the appendix of this post: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/442841.
References:
[1] Pages 39, 44, and 48 in Penrose (1972), "Techniques of Differential Topology in Relativity," Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, http://www.kfki.hu/~iracz/sgimp/cikkek/cenzor/Penrose_todtir.pdf
[2] Page 4 in Sanchez (2005), "Causal hierarchy of spacetimes, temporal functions and smoothness of Geroch's splitting. A revision," http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411143v2
add a comment |
We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
As illustrated in the answer by Ben Crowell and acknowledged in other answers, that relative sign doesn't by itself determine which is future and which is past. But as the answer by Dale explains, it does mean that we can't "move back and forth in time," assuming that the spacetime is globally hyperbolic (which excludes examples like the one in Ben Crowell's answer). A spacetime is called globally hyperbolic if it has a spacelike hypersurface through which every timelike curve passes exactly once (a Cauchy surface) [1][2]. This ensures that we can choose which half of every light-cone is "future" and which is "past," in a way that is consistent and smooth throughout the spacetime.
For an explicit proof that "turning around in time" is impossible, in the special case of ordinary flat spacetime, see the appendix of this post: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/442841.
References:
[1] Pages 39, 44, and 48 in Penrose (1972), "Techniques of Differential Topology in Relativity," Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, http://www.kfki.hu/~iracz/sgimp/cikkek/cenzor/Penrose_todtir.pdf
[2] Page 4 in Sanchez (2005), "Causal hierarchy of spacetimes, temporal functions and smoothness of Geroch's splitting. A revision," http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411143v2
add a comment |
We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
As illustrated in the answer by Ben Crowell and acknowledged in other answers, that relative sign doesn't by itself determine which is future and which is past. But as the answer by Dale explains, it does mean that we can't "move back and forth in time," assuming that the spacetime is globally hyperbolic (which excludes examples like the one in Ben Crowell's answer). A spacetime is called globally hyperbolic if it has a spacelike hypersurface through which every timelike curve passes exactly once (a Cauchy surface) [1][2]. This ensures that we can choose which half of every light-cone is "future" and which is "past," in a way that is consistent and smooth throughout the spacetime.
For an explicit proof that "turning around in time" is impossible, in the special case of ordinary flat spacetime, see the appendix of this post: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/442841.
References:
[1] Pages 39, 44, and 48 in Penrose (1972), "Techniques of Differential Topology in Relativity," Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, http://www.kfki.hu/~iracz/sgimp/cikkek/cenzor/Penrose_todtir.pdf
[2] Page 4 in Sanchez (2005), "Causal hierarchy of spacetimes, temporal functions and smoothness of Geroch's splitting. A revision," http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411143v2
We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
As illustrated in the answer by Ben Crowell and acknowledged in other answers, that relative sign doesn't by itself determine which is future and which is past. But as the answer by Dale explains, it does mean that we can't "move back and forth in time," assuming that the spacetime is globally hyperbolic (which excludes examples like the one in Ben Crowell's answer). A spacetime is called globally hyperbolic if it has a spacelike hypersurface through which every timelike curve passes exactly once (a Cauchy surface) [1][2]. This ensures that we can choose which half of every light-cone is "future" and which is "past," in a way that is consistent and smooth throughout the spacetime.
For an explicit proof that "turning around in time" is impossible, in the special case of ordinary flat spacetime, see the appendix of this post: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/442841.
References:
[1] Pages 39, 44, and 48 in Penrose (1972), "Techniques of Differential Topology in Relativity," Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, http://www.kfki.hu/~iracz/sgimp/cikkek/cenzor/Penrose_todtir.pdf
[2] Page 4 in Sanchez (2005), "Causal hierarchy of spacetimes, temporal functions and smoothness of Geroch's splitting. A revision," http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411143v2
edited Jan 4 at 0:57
answered Jan 4 at 0:50
Dan YandDan Yand
8,01211133
8,01211133
add a comment |
add a comment |
The sign that appears in the metric or line element, i.e. in
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
does establish a difference between space and time, but it does not, on its own, contain all of the physics related to time. For one thing, it does not determine which direction is future and which is past. That direction is established by other considerations such as entropy increase. The other main ingredient here is the claim that worldlines are timelike not spacelike. This really amounts to a statement about conservation laws. We identify a sequence of events along a certain line in spacetime as a sequence associated with one particular entity, such as a particle or a body, because there is something in common at the events: a certain amount of electric charge, for example, or energy and momentum. So we say we have a particle (or larger body) and that is its worldline. A sequence of events along a spacelike line, on the other hand, often doesn't show that kind of common property, so we don't find it helpful to suggest that the same entity was present at all the events. As you see, we are getting quite close to metaphysics here.
2
Time but flows onward. It only has a direction once you pick a reference frame ("direction is established by other considerations", +1)
– Mazura
Jan 4 at 2:31
add a comment |
The sign that appears in the metric or line element, i.e. in
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
does establish a difference between space and time, but it does not, on its own, contain all of the physics related to time. For one thing, it does not determine which direction is future and which is past. That direction is established by other considerations such as entropy increase. The other main ingredient here is the claim that worldlines are timelike not spacelike. This really amounts to a statement about conservation laws. We identify a sequence of events along a certain line in spacetime as a sequence associated with one particular entity, such as a particle or a body, because there is something in common at the events: a certain amount of electric charge, for example, or energy and momentum. So we say we have a particle (or larger body) and that is its worldline. A sequence of events along a spacelike line, on the other hand, often doesn't show that kind of common property, so we don't find it helpful to suggest that the same entity was present at all the events. As you see, we are getting quite close to metaphysics here.
2
Time but flows onward. It only has a direction once you pick a reference frame ("direction is established by other considerations", +1)
– Mazura
Jan 4 at 2:31
add a comment |
The sign that appears in the metric or line element, i.e. in
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
does establish a difference between space and time, but it does not, on its own, contain all of the physics related to time. For one thing, it does not determine which direction is future and which is past. That direction is established by other considerations such as entropy increase. The other main ingredient here is the claim that worldlines are timelike not spacelike. This really amounts to a statement about conservation laws. We identify a sequence of events along a certain line in spacetime as a sequence associated with one particular entity, such as a particle or a body, because there is something in common at the events: a certain amount of electric charge, for example, or energy and momentum. So we say we have a particle (or larger body) and that is its worldline. A sequence of events along a spacelike line, on the other hand, often doesn't show that kind of common property, so we don't find it helpful to suggest that the same entity was present at all the events. As you see, we are getting quite close to metaphysics here.
The sign that appears in the metric or line element, i.e. in
$ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2$
does establish a difference between space and time, but it does not, on its own, contain all of the physics related to time. For one thing, it does not determine which direction is future and which is past. That direction is established by other considerations such as entropy increase. The other main ingredient here is the claim that worldlines are timelike not spacelike. This really amounts to a statement about conservation laws. We identify a sequence of events along a certain line in spacetime as a sequence associated with one particular entity, such as a particle or a body, because there is something in common at the events: a certain amount of electric charge, for example, or energy and momentum. So we say we have a particle (or larger body) and that is its worldline. A sequence of events along a spacelike line, on the other hand, often doesn't show that kind of common property, so we don't find it helpful to suggest that the same entity was present at all the events. As you see, we are getting quite close to metaphysics here.
answered Jan 3 at 23:00
Andrew SteaneAndrew Steane
3,971730
3,971730
2
Time but flows onward. It only has a direction once you pick a reference frame ("direction is established by other considerations", +1)
– Mazura
Jan 4 at 2:31
add a comment |
2
Time but flows onward. It only has a direction once you pick a reference frame ("direction is established by other considerations", +1)
– Mazura
Jan 4 at 2:31
2
2
Time but flows onward. It only has a direction once you pick a reference frame ("direction is established by other considerations", +1)
– Mazura
Jan 4 at 2:31
Time but flows onward. It only has a direction once you pick a reference frame ("direction is established by other considerations", +1)
– Mazura
Jan 4 at 2:31
add a comment |
how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
It is not only the sign difference, but also the fact that there is only one dimension of time while there are multiple dimensions of space. Because there is only a single dimension of time a surface of constant proper time forms a hyperboloid of two sheets. One sheet is future times and the other sheet is past times, so there is no way to smoothly transform a future time into a past time. Future and past are geometrically distinct.
In contrast, because there are three spacelike axes a surface of constant proper distance forms a hyperboloid of one sheet. So you can smoothly transform up into down and so forth. Different spacelike directions are not geometrically distinct.
Thanks for answer. Are you saying that if there are two or more dimensions of time (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_time_dimensions) it would be possible to move back and forth in time?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 8:00
Yes. With 2 timelike dimensions you could have closed timelike curves even in flat spacetime.
– Dale
Jan 4 at 11:58
add a comment |
how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
It is not only the sign difference, but also the fact that there is only one dimension of time while there are multiple dimensions of space. Because there is only a single dimension of time a surface of constant proper time forms a hyperboloid of two sheets. One sheet is future times and the other sheet is past times, so there is no way to smoothly transform a future time into a past time. Future and past are geometrically distinct.
In contrast, because there are three spacelike axes a surface of constant proper distance forms a hyperboloid of one sheet. So you can smoothly transform up into down and so forth. Different spacelike directions are not geometrically distinct.
Thanks for answer. Are you saying that if there are two or more dimensions of time (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_time_dimensions) it would be possible to move back and forth in time?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 8:00
Yes. With 2 timelike dimensions you could have closed timelike curves even in flat spacetime.
– Dale
Jan 4 at 11:58
add a comment |
how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
It is not only the sign difference, but also the fact that there is only one dimension of time while there are multiple dimensions of space. Because there is only a single dimension of time a surface of constant proper time forms a hyperboloid of two sheets. One sheet is future times and the other sheet is past times, so there is no way to smoothly transform a future time into a past time. Future and past are geometrically distinct.
In contrast, because there are three spacelike axes a surface of constant proper distance forms a hyperboloid of one sheet. So you can smoothly transform up into down and so forth. Different spacelike directions are not geometrically distinct.
how does a relative sign difference lead to a situation where time only flows forward and never backward? We can move back and forth in space, so why does the negative sign mean we can't move back and forth in time?
It is not only the sign difference, but also the fact that there is only one dimension of time while there are multiple dimensions of space. Because there is only a single dimension of time a surface of constant proper time forms a hyperboloid of two sheets. One sheet is future times and the other sheet is past times, so there is no way to smoothly transform a future time into a past time. Future and past are geometrically distinct.
In contrast, because there are three spacelike axes a surface of constant proper distance forms a hyperboloid of one sheet. So you can smoothly transform up into down and so forth. Different spacelike directions are not geometrically distinct.
answered Jan 3 at 23:21
DaleDale
5,1241826
5,1241826
Thanks for answer. Are you saying that if there are two or more dimensions of time (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_time_dimensions) it would be possible to move back and forth in time?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 8:00
Yes. With 2 timelike dimensions you could have closed timelike curves even in flat spacetime.
– Dale
Jan 4 at 11:58
add a comment |
Thanks for answer. Are you saying that if there are two or more dimensions of time (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_time_dimensions) it would be possible to move back and forth in time?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 8:00
Yes. With 2 timelike dimensions you could have closed timelike curves even in flat spacetime.
– Dale
Jan 4 at 11:58
Thanks for answer. Are you saying that if there are two or more dimensions of time (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_time_dimensions) it would be possible to move back and forth in time?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 8:00
Thanks for answer. Are you saying that if there are two or more dimensions of time (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_time_dimensions) it would be possible to move back and forth in time?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 8:00
Yes. With 2 timelike dimensions you could have closed timelike curves even in flat spacetime.
– Dale
Jan 4 at 11:58
Yes. With 2 timelike dimensions you could have closed timelike curves even in flat spacetime.
– Dale
Jan 4 at 11:58
add a comment |
Why does a sign difference between space and time lead to time that only flows forward?
It doesn't. Spacetimes don't even have to be time-orientable. This is similar to the idea that a Mobious strip is not an orientable surface. So you can have a metric with a $-+++$ signature but no direction you could define for time to flow, even if you got to set up the thermodynamics however you liked.
I don't understand your answer I'm afraid. What do you mean by "orientable"?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 1:32
2
@Allure: Imagine a spacetime that was literally shaped like a Möbius strip, with a spacelike dimension (let's stick to only one, to keep things simple and easy to visualize) that goes around the strip and a timelike dimension that goes across the strip from one edge to the other. If you want, you could make an actual Möbius strip with paper and glue and draw some parallel "time arrows" across it. What you'll see is that, as you fill the whole strip with these arrows, when you get back to where you started, the arrows will have flipped around!
– Ilmari Karonen
Jan 4 at 10:51
@IlmariKaronen So in other words, going around the mobius strip space will reverse the flow of time relative to everything at that location, which in turn means that the directionality of time becomes purely relative.
– The Great Duck
Jan 5 at 6:53
add a comment |
Why does a sign difference between space and time lead to time that only flows forward?
It doesn't. Spacetimes don't even have to be time-orientable. This is similar to the idea that a Mobious strip is not an orientable surface. So you can have a metric with a $-+++$ signature but no direction you could define for time to flow, even if you got to set up the thermodynamics however you liked.
I don't understand your answer I'm afraid. What do you mean by "orientable"?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 1:32
2
@Allure: Imagine a spacetime that was literally shaped like a Möbius strip, with a spacelike dimension (let's stick to only one, to keep things simple and easy to visualize) that goes around the strip and a timelike dimension that goes across the strip from one edge to the other. If you want, you could make an actual Möbius strip with paper and glue and draw some parallel "time arrows" across it. What you'll see is that, as you fill the whole strip with these arrows, when you get back to where you started, the arrows will have flipped around!
– Ilmari Karonen
Jan 4 at 10:51
@IlmariKaronen So in other words, going around the mobius strip space will reverse the flow of time relative to everything at that location, which in turn means that the directionality of time becomes purely relative.
– The Great Duck
Jan 5 at 6:53
add a comment |
Why does a sign difference between space and time lead to time that only flows forward?
It doesn't. Spacetimes don't even have to be time-orientable. This is similar to the idea that a Mobious strip is not an orientable surface. So you can have a metric with a $-+++$ signature but no direction you could define for time to flow, even if you got to set up the thermodynamics however you liked.
Why does a sign difference between space and time lead to time that only flows forward?
It doesn't. Spacetimes don't even have to be time-orientable. This is similar to the idea that a Mobious strip is not an orientable surface. So you can have a metric with a $-+++$ signature but no direction you could define for time to flow, even if you got to set up the thermodynamics however you liked.
answered Jan 3 at 23:27
Ben CrowellBen Crowell
48.9k4151294
48.9k4151294
I don't understand your answer I'm afraid. What do you mean by "orientable"?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 1:32
2
@Allure: Imagine a spacetime that was literally shaped like a Möbius strip, with a spacelike dimension (let's stick to only one, to keep things simple and easy to visualize) that goes around the strip and a timelike dimension that goes across the strip from one edge to the other. If you want, you could make an actual Möbius strip with paper and glue and draw some parallel "time arrows" across it. What you'll see is that, as you fill the whole strip with these arrows, when you get back to where you started, the arrows will have flipped around!
– Ilmari Karonen
Jan 4 at 10:51
@IlmariKaronen So in other words, going around the mobius strip space will reverse the flow of time relative to everything at that location, which in turn means that the directionality of time becomes purely relative.
– The Great Duck
Jan 5 at 6:53
add a comment |
I don't understand your answer I'm afraid. What do you mean by "orientable"?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 1:32
2
@Allure: Imagine a spacetime that was literally shaped like a Möbius strip, with a spacelike dimension (let's stick to only one, to keep things simple and easy to visualize) that goes around the strip and a timelike dimension that goes across the strip from one edge to the other. If you want, you could make an actual Möbius strip with paper and glue and draw some parallel "time arrows" across it. What you'll see is that, as you fill the whole strip with these arrows, when you get back to where you started, the arrows will have flipped around!
– Ilmari Karonen
Jan 4 at 10:51
@IlmariKaronen So in other words, going around the mobius strip space will reverse the flow of time relative to everything at that location, which in turn means that the directionality of time becomes purely relative.
– The Great Duck
Jan 5 at 6:53
I don't understand your answer I'm afraid. What do you mean by "orientable"?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 1:32
I don't understand your answer I'm afraid. What do you mean by "orientable"?
– Allure
Jan 4 at 1:32
2
2
@Allure: Imagine a spacetime that was literally shaped like a Möbius strip, with a spacelike dimension (let's stick to only one, to keep things simple and easy to visualize) that goes around the strip and a timelike dimension that goes across the strip from one edge to the other. If you want, you could make an actual Möbius strip with paper and glue and draw some parallel "time arrows" across it. What you'll see is that, as you fill the whole strip with these arrows, when you get back to where you started, the arrows will have flipped around!
– Ilmari Karonen
Jan 4 at 10:51
@Allure: Imagine a spacetime that was literally shaped like a Möbius strip, with a spacelike dimension (let's stick to only one, to keep things simple and easy to visualize) that goes around the strip and a timelike dimension that goes across the strip from one edge to the other. If you want, you could make an actual Möbius strip with paper and glue and draw some parallel "time arrows" across it. What you'll see is that, as you fill the whole strip with these arrows, when you get back to where you started, the arrows will have flipped around!
– Ilmari Karonen
Jan 4 at 10:51
@IlmariKaronen So in other words, going around the mobius strip space will reverse the flow of time relative to everything at that location, which in turn means that the directionality of time becomes purely relative.
– The Great Duck
Jan 5 at 6:53
@IlmariKaronen So in other words, going around the mobius strip space will reverse the flow of time relative to everything at that location, which in turn means that the directionality of time becomes purely relative.
– The Great Duck
Jan 5 at 6:53
add a comment |
The minus sign does not imply that time flows only in one direction. This is seen if we define the forward direction of time to be the direction in which entropy increases.
You cannot derive the $2^{nd}$ law of thermodynamics based on the fact that there is a minus sign on time and not the spatial parts. Indeed, this is a matter of convention as we could have put the minus sign on the spatial parts and a + on the time component.
However: I don't think this is the heart of your question. The minus sign is due to the fact that space and time are not separate entities but are part of one vector space called spacetime or minkowski space. The relative minus sign tells us about how they are connected. Namely, it tells us about the geometry of spacetime.
For a physical argument to why this is the case, I refer you to this answer by @Dvij Mankad.
add a comment |
The minus sign does not imply that time flows only in one direction. This is seen if we define the forward direction of time to be the direction in which entropy increases.
You cannot derive the $2^{nd}$ law of thermodynamics based on the fact that there is a minus sign on time and not the spatial parts. Indeed, this is a matter of convention as we could have put the minus sign on the spatial parts and a + on the time component.
However: I don't think this is the heart of your question. The minus sign is due to the fact that space and time are not separate entities but are part of one vector space called spacetime or minkowski space. The relative minus sign tells us about how they are connected. Namely, it tells us about the geometry of spacetime.
For a physical argument to why this is the case, I refer you to this answer by @Dvij Mankad.
add a comment |
The minus sign does not imply that time flows only in one direction. This is seen if we define the forward direction of time to be the direction in which entropy increases.
You cannot derive the $2^{nd}$ law of thermodynamics based on the fact that there is a minus sign on time and not the spatial parts. Indeed, this is a matter of convention as we could have put the minus sign on the spatial parts and a + on the time component.
However: I don't think this is the heart of your question. The minus sign is due to the fact that space and time are not separate entities but are part of one vector space called spacetime or minkowski space. The relative minus sign tells us about how they are connected. Namely, it tells us about the geometry of spacetime.
For a physical argument to why this is the case, I refer you to this answer by @Dvij Mankad.
The minus sign does not imply that time flows only in one direction. This is seen if we define the forward direction of time to be the direction in which entropy increases.
You cannot derive the $2^{nd}$ law of thermodynamics based on the fact that there is a minus sign on time and not the spatial parts. Indeed, this is a matter of convention as we could have put the minus sign on the spatial parts and a + on the time component.
However: I don't think this is the heart of your question. The minus sign is due to the fact that space and time are not separate entities but are part of one vector space called spacetime or minkowski space. The relative minus sign tells us about how they are connected. Namely, it tells us about the geometry of spacetime.
For a physical argument to why this is the case, I refer you to this answer by @Dvij Mankad.
answered Jan 3 at 22:54
InertialObserverInertialObserver
2,276623
2,276623
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f451979%2fwhy-does-a-sign-difference-between-space-and-time-lead-to-time-that-only-flows-f%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
It doesn't, you need more than that.
– ggcg
Jan 3 at 23:37
How would the universe look like if time sometimes flowed backwards? Your brain would also flow backwards, you know.
– Luaan
Jan 5 at 8:43