/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15026966
>Yes it does
No, it doesn't, you can define absolutely anything as a reference frame
>That doesn't even contradict time being a dimension.
I never said time isn't a dimension, learn to read
>x and y are the dimensions of a graph.
No, they are vectors which define the dimension of the graph, you are arguing semantics because you don't know the definitions of the words
>How does that make time nonphysical?
Because it isn't made of anything, it is just numbers assigned to any chosen instance of a frame of reference, the universe does not know what the time is, it doesn't look at a watch to know when atoms should decay, it doesn't count seconds on its nonexistent fingers, things simply happen, time is a metric reliant on the relative difference between things in a frame of reference, if you were to take any frame of reference and remove everything in it, there would be no such thing as time, because time is not a physical thing, there is no forwards or backwards, it's literal observational philosophy.