The Geometry of Time

I can't get this out of my head, lately.

Time can be looked at in a variety of ways, typically metaphors involving rivers, trees, or fabrics. I'm making this thread to explore the different kinds of shapes with which people can model time and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of those ideas.

Line, river: the most simplistic, unless you also incorporate the idea of time travel, in which case it becomes absurdly paradoxical and wonderful. There is no other option, there is no fluidity, and there are no alternations. Implications of fate are inevitable. Example: That's So Raven.

Conical web, tree: time moves in different directions with every choice made by everything ever. Time travel seems to create extra branches of the metaphorical tree, resulting in what appear to be alternate realities. In some representations, even the tiniest things will upset greater things as they ripple outwards. Coincidentally, this model of time reflects its most typical media representation: The Butterfly Effect.

Planar web, fabric: time does not move necessarily forward; rather, events lead to one another. Alternate realities intersect on common events. Convolution is almost inevitable. Example: Monty Python's The Meaning of Life. Sort of.

Apocalyptic vortex: all realities converge on the same, time ending event, spiraling inwards in whatever fashion until everything is heat death and nothing hurts. Possible addition of a universal creation event which makes time look like a football. Possible unification of those two events to form a temporal donut. Same model, rudimentarily. Example: Keys to the Kingdom series.

Temporal singularity: Time, in itself, is not a flow of events, but the revolution of our perspectives upon a singularity. Time is something that cannot be defined as a shape, and is instead a point that only changes because its observers change their observations of it. Kurt Vonnegut says it better in Slaughterhouse V.

Feel free to throw in your own models andor trash my definitions.

Time is an extremely difficult concept to discuss since there is not a whole lot of objective evidence on the subject matter. Even all the theories and concepts you have provided seem to be mainly fiction and seem to be in the more philosophical area of study. Furthermore we need to decide whether we are discussing the dimension of time or rather the perception of time since it could lead to two different conversations.


However for the models of time that I have seen with any sort of evidence are the Newtonian theory of time and of course Einstein’s special theory of relativity that also has a different form of time. Newton’s version is common with all observers having the same time measured for any event. This works fine for everyday life but we have proven that this view is incorrect (and many other Newtonian concepts have been proven wrong). On the other hand Einstein’s version illustrates that time is in fact relative and can differ between two observers of an identical event. The concept of spacetime is also introduced which combines the two into a single continuum. This makes sense because the speed of time is contingent on the velocity and strength of gravity affecting the object relative to an observer (See Time Dilation).


These all help define time but there is also another concept which is the direction of time. As we have known all our life, time moves only in one direction and it is impossible to go the other way which is going back in time. But scientists have seen in the microscopic level time has shown to be time symmetric which means reversal of time at that level would not affect the descriptions of the microscopic objects. This is completely false in our observable universe at the macroscopic level mainly due to the second law of thermodynamics which says entropy of a closed system (our universe) can never decrease thus going back in time would contradict this rule.


Likewise the notion of time travel is also impossible in our current understanding of the world due to the natural laws. Time CAN be slowed or sped up but cannot be reversed entirely. Overall we don’t know a whole lot about this concept but perhaps as our technology continues to grow at an exponential rate we may begin to comprehend these concepts at a more enlightened level.

The one I'd agree with is the River Metaphor. It seems like the simplest and most beautiful way to capture the essence of time, at the very least, in the context of one's individual life. Your objection that it becomes paradoxical should time travel be possible seems like a contemptible way of argumentation. If we are to assume time travel is possible, we'd have to ring Stephen Hawking and let him deal with it.

The Tree Metaphor seems like a closer examination at the River one. The only difference is that the River one is wider, whereas the Tree one is more specific but they both have an unalterable path and move only forward.

Fabric and Vortex seem to be the same only we went from funny coincidences to chaos. Neither seems to have any implication on life as we know it and, my philosophical razor is that of a scientist. If you have no idea what you are talking about, there is no point in listening seriously.

The Singularity idea is, again, the River one. The main point of it being a river is to be a single, great unit. I see no reason to set this one apart from the River Metaphor... and that is why I think a river is the philosopher's way to look at Time. Still, Hawking and Einstein ought to have better takes on these.

I like to think of time not as any single geometric shape, but as a series of overlaping shapes, each shape representing a diffent reality, not another parralel unavers, but an entirly new reality with its own laws of physics and space/ time contingencys. I think that all these shapes are overlapping and convergent, and can be catoragarized as one word. Random.

Time is a man made creation that doesn't exist. In the same way that we created the concept of mathematics. They don't physically exist. It's just help us humans keep track of numbers, and time helps us humans keep track of the sun.

I'll agree that the word time is man made but that what it's describing is not. Same with mathematics. In fact you could say that about any word. It's man made but that what it's describing is not.

I wasn't just talking about the words. Math is an idea that doesn't refer two any physical object. Therefore it doesn't technically exist. Ideas and concepts are not objects. Same goes for time, and measurement of distance, weight, matter, all that stuff doesn't exist. Though Albert Einstein theorized that the whole concept of time is irrelevant anyway.

I understand you weren't just talking about the words, I'm disagreeing with you. Math by itself is a man made concept and if used by itself it remains as so. The thing is we don't use math by itself we use it to describe the world around us. Ideas and concepts certainly are not object but that doesn't make them any less real. Same goes for time, distance, weight, matter all of it.

You're completely missing the point. What I am arguing is whether or not math/time is something humans discovered or something they have created. I believe that it was created because you cannot actually see math happening. By that I mean that math/time is not something that actually exists in the universe, it is something that humans have created to help understand our world. Like if you have 5 candy bars and then you have another 5 candy bars you have 10. But that number doesn't exist unless you have somebody to count it. Math, time, numbers, operations, measurements, these are all mathematical systems we have created. Math is not inherent in this world we just use it as a means of modeling things that do exist. Math is only provable with more math, thus a tautology occurs. By that I mean that the only math known by humans is the math knowable by humans. You're saying that math and time are floating around in space and would be there regardless of if humans were able to process, and model it. If you believe that math/time inherently exists in nature you're believing that solely on faith similar to a god.

you know what I siad:



And what you said:



are basically the same.

Yeah but if you use math to describe or model something it doesn't make math in of itself a real thing.

You would really like to watch Steins Gate...

It's a personal favorite, actually! Temporal shenanigans fuel my soul.

I think time is only a concept and does not have any form. Like the concept of numbers. Both numbers and time aren't aren't physical objects. Studying the very nature of time is hard and there is also a chance that it is all in vain. A chance that we only use time to measure how long event X was from event Y. It's the same about distance too. We use it to measure.

We should look at time same as space. Its simply out there in same way as London is in UK. We are just creatures living in 4 dimensions (2d space dimensions creatures cant exist they wouldnt be able to digest because the would fall apart in two pieces) where we precieve 3 space dimension fully and time dimension just partially. Past and future exist and its just out there but we cant reach it. Time is defined now just by entropy and its important for symmetries in cosmos we have 10 symmetries in 4 dimensional space. From thoose symmetries we derive laws of conservation etc.
I recomend book by Paul Davies: About Time