I have got an explantion for the complex behaviour. When a function in n dimensions, behaves in morethan n dimensions it occupies the imaginary space. For example, when a two dimensional system in x and y behaves in more than two dimensions, it takes the complex imaginary plane.
Again, in the case of a space time distribution, time occupies an imaginary axis. The effect of time on space is super imposed. Even when it has no notable impact except for the specificity of that point. If we consider space in n dimension, then n+1th dimension is defined by the time involved. However, the time scale may not be confined to have born from a single dimension. There is every possibility of time to behave as multi dimensional.
Also, the presence of a point, becomes a line in the complex plane - this is how i understand the super position of i on the real part.
Again, in the case of a space time distribution, time occupies an imaginary axis. The effect of time on space is super imposed. Even when it has no notable impact except for the specificity of that point. If we consider space in n dimension, then n+1th dimension is defined by the time involved. However, the time scale may not be confined to have born from a single dimension. There is every possibility of time to behave as multi dimensional.
Also, the presence of a point, becomes a line in the complex plane - this is how i understand the super position of i on the real part.
A number 0.0000001 will become 1, if we collapse the time and a little bit of selective amnesia.
4 comments:
it is rather a doubt than a comment. in the case of a space time distribution, time occupies an imaginary axis. The effect of time on space is super imposed. is it fair to allow time to occupy just an imaginary axis? doesn't it play a major role??? sorry bout my ignorance. just a doubt.
He... He... He... Why should something imaginary be weak?
Do you still own a doubt??
Seems, I have already answered your question... :D
Just now, noticed... cheche the below url...
http://weirdilluminati.blogspot.com/2007/07/more-on-complex.html
Post a Comment