I;m a little confused

[LiveWire]

Now, ok, i asked my science teacher about the 4th dimension and she said it's when you can be in two different time periods at once....Is that true?

[jinydu]

Now, ok, i asked my science teacher about the 4th dimension and she said it's when you can be in two different time periods at once....Is that true?

No. Please read the threads around here. This site is (supposed to be) about a mathematical description of 4 spatial dimensions.

[solodeath]

there are theorys (my theorys) on where you can be at 2 place and time at once or two time at one place. But to others it would apper that you only apper 1 place at one time or vise versa.
suppose that if you were in the middle of two lighting strike, then to you, both would happen at the same time. But if ur friend was closer to to one of lighting strikes(hopfully not too close) then he/she would feel one happened first and the other happened later. now if we can have the same example but only on a space time graph, where there are 2 or more events happening at the same time(to you) because you were at the center of those events. But to other people it happened month in different. Then to them you are at the 1 event at 1 time, but u were at all events at 1 time. and vise versa

p.s. there may be error in this thinking, so plz tell me.

[jinydu]

there are theorys (my theorys) on where you can be at 2 place and time at once or two time at one place. But to others it would apper that you only apper 1 place at one time or vise versa.
suppose that if you were in the middle of two lighting strike, then to you, both would happen at the same time. But if ur friend was closer to to one of lighting strikes(hopfully not too close) then he/she would feel one happened first and the other happened later. now if we can have the same example but only on a space time graph, where there are 2 or more events happening at the same time(to you) because you were at the center of those events. But to other people it happened month in different. Then to them you are at the 1 event at 1 time, but u were at all events at 1 time. and vise versa

p.s. there may be error in this thinking, so plz tell me.

I think that what you're trying to say is that "simultaneity is relative". This is one of the important conclusions of Special Relativity. If two events happen in different places, and one observer claims that they happened at the same time, another observer may claim that one happened after the other. This is well established scientifically.

However, this does not mean that all time-ordering is relative. If, in one reference frame, an event happens in one place, and light from that first event reaches a second location before a second event happens there, then all observers agree that the first event happened before the second. Also, if two events happen in the same place at the same time in one reference frame, then all observers will agree that they happened in the same place at the same time.

[solodeath]

dam they stole my idea. caz i just camed up with this idea one day. yes the first part is but is the 2ed part? i mean the part of event happing in time. if we were looking at event in "gods" view of where all things happend at the sametime, yet at the same time nothing happened.

[jinydu]

dam they stole my idea. caz i just camed up with this idea one day.

Einstein came up with this idea (more accurately, he derived it from the basic postulates of Special Relativity) long before you did, all observers can agree on that :wink: .

yes the first part is but is the 2ed part? i mean the part of event happing in time. if we were looking at event in "gods" view of where all things happend at the sametime, yet at the same time nothing happened.

I don't really understand what you're trying to say there. Could you please rephrase your statement?