tj444 » September 21st, 2017, 10:04 pm wrote:Mathematically you mention "sign in the metric is the only differences." So does changing sign the sign in the metric make any differences? When you mention sign in the metric I assume you are just referring to a + becomes a - or vice versa? Also are any other possible ways to mathematically express dimensions where changing the dimensions from 3 time dimensions to 1 space dimensions make a huge difference?

It has been noted by physicists that most of the mathematical laws don't treat time as special, not in the way we think during the living our lives. From special relativity we have learned to treat time and space as elements of a four vector and thus to formulate the laws of nature in a way that do not distinguish time from space. There is just that one difference of sign in the metric. The point is, that although much of physics you learn in textbooks does treat space and time quite differently, a lot of it is probably just our own prejudice, and relativity shows us that we really don't have to and probably shouldn't.

A related question is the arrow of time, because that is another stark difference between our experience of time and the role in plays in the mathematical laws of nature. We see the past and future as fundamentally different, but most of the mathematical laws do not. For most of them, they look pretty much the same either forwards or backwards in time. So while there are a couple things which do distinguish them, most don't. I will leave this as a side issue which you can explore if you want to.

tj444 » September 21st, 2017, 10:04 pm wrote:To explain what I mean by the time dimension I think of a 7 or 6 dimensional universe. You take those 3 or 2 dimensions and you add it to light. But you minus the 3 space dimensions up, down, left and right or you minus up and down and add the last 3 or 2 dimensions from the 7 or 6 dimensional universe to add up to 4.

So I am not referring to a 7 or 6 dimensional universe I am referring to a 4 dimensional universe that experiences different dimensions. I am not sure if this makes a difference compared to just going with the usual 4 dimensions.

I do not understand your meaning when you say, "and you add it to light."

Furthermore you have not addressed the real question I had because you didn't explain how adding a time dimension is different from adding a space dimension.

I explained the idea in my example by the sign of the metric and by adding another degree of freedom in our "motion" through time.

I don't know what this possibility you suggest is referring to. Light has dimensions?

tj444 » September 21st, 2017, 10:04 pm wrote: Just to let you know the math is above my head but I want to know if the math is possible and how would someone test the ideas above? Has someone ever tested the concepts?

No scientists do not pick a random number of space and time dimensions. When they explore the possibilities of other numbers of dimensions there is usually a reason for it. For example, they might explore various physical laws in 2 dimensions because there are variety of situations (like in crystals) where things might be restricted to 2 dimensions.

tj444 » September 21st, 2017, 10:04 pm wrote:The reason I am asking this is because string theory needs a bunch of dimensions but it would be cool if certain parts like light added up to 4 dimensions or if there were more or less dimensions but only certain parts such as light experience these greater or lower dimensions. Maybe this is a better explanation of quantum mechanics.

Once again I don't understand this talk of light having or adding up to a number of dimensions.

Many physicists have struggled to find an alternative to quantum mechanics. I prefer to accept the experimental results. That is what honest scientific inquiry should do.

tj444 » September 21st, 2017, 10:04 pm wrote:Also I was reading about light and how a photon experiences all its existence at once and this got me thinking maybe light doesn't experience reality the same as other stuff. I am not sure existence is the correct term.

I think this whole idea of anthropomorphizing light and talking about what it "experiences" is all on very very shaky ground. I seriously doubt whether it means anything whatsoever.