Summations Only

Well there is the temporal dimension. Are there any more spatial dimensions? Maybe, maybe not. Most of the theories that predict more are currently untested.

When working out the square of the distance between two points in a manifold/shape/space (which ever word you prefer) with any number of time or space dimensions, the square of the distance in a spatial dimension adds to the total square distance, where as distances in temporal dimensions subtract from it.Our universe behaves exactly like a manifold with three space dimensions and one time dimension.You mentioned Kant and Newton, e.t.c. having different ideas about time. This is irrelevant, as irrelevant as Aristotle's ideas about physics. These people lived before the 1850s when evidence that time was a dimension began to mount increasingly.1850-1890 - When you look at a spatial dimension is has a quantity conjugate to it, the momentum in that direction. They are said to be conjugate because they obey certain mathematical relationships with each other. It turned out that time obeyed the exact same relationship with Energy.
In fact over these decades it was found that for any relation obeyed by the spatial directions, a similar relation was obeyed by time.1890-1905 Maxwell's theory was found to be incompatible with the notion that time is fixed and immutable for all observers. Time must speed up or slow down depending on your motion. Anything else is incompatible with the laws of electromagnetism. Finally Einstein discovers the laws of spatial relativity showing exactly how time must distort for fast moving observers.1908 Minkowski realised that all of Einstein's observations could be explained by simply saying that time was another dimension, another physical extension of the universe.1915 This idea that time is a dimension and that the universe is really a four dimensional object was found by Einstein to be necessary to explain gravity. Time must be physically bent to describe gravity.The theories where time is a real physical extra dimension correctly match the behaviour of the real world.
Examples of successful predictions:
1. The precession of the perhelions of Mercury, Venus, Earth.
2. Anomalous magnetic moment of the electron.
3. Precession of binary stars about each other.
4. Frame dragging effects of satellites in Earth orbit.
5. Decay rates and decay products of every single particle ever observed.
6. Bending of light by cosmological masses.
7. Clock measurement differences near massive objects.Theories where time is an abstract notion invented by man are untenable in light of modern evidence. They are at least an entire century out of date.Edited by Son Goku, : Some typos.

There is a duration between events in your life. What is that duration then? Gravity is generated by mass. Why? Let's time things using something universal, such as the frequency of oscillation of Caesium atoms.Somebody moving at a half the speed of light past a collection of muons measure half of them to decay when the Caesium atoms they were carrying with them had oscillated 23,246 times. (Experimental fact)
Somebody stationary next to the muons would measure a half of them to decay when their Caesium atoms have oscillated 20,132 times. (Experimental fact)Why this difference in their time measurments?
Why is the ratio between the measurements 0.8660414695, the exact amount predicted by models where time is a dimension?(As for your actual example of the Earth's rotation, observers moving at high speeds relative to Earth see the Earth rotating faster.)

Relationships between two standardisations of measurement are not really related to physics. How do you think this is an important point?I'm not interested in how atomic clocks line up with the sidereal year, it's not an important point in relation to the nature of physical reality. No more than the relation between yards and meters. For half the speed of light the travelling was not done by human beings. If you want trips done by human beings there is the experiments by Hafele and Keating in the 1970s used atomic oscillation measurements on flying planes. They recorded a difference in the number of oscillations on the two planes in exact accordance with those predicted by time being a dimension. From the viewpoint of distant quasar, Earth's rotation is faster than from our point of view.

Yes, the spatial location of your house only requires the three spatial coordinates. However in describing objects in more general situations, such fluid flow, e.t.c. it is necessary to use a temporal label as well. This is basic physics, objects are at certain positions at certain times, you need to specify both.At slow speeds and weak gravity you can get away with using time as if it were just a "number", not a physical thing that can distort.However if gravity is strong this pretence becomes impossible to maintain.One cannot explain the precession of the perihelion of mercury without the bending of time.If time is not real then why does the perihelion of mercury precess as it does?

I didn't know how to respond to this in my first post, but I simply have to know. When you say God has a physical body does he actually have a male or female body for example?Also, like onifre, I'm wondering do you literally mean you hear him, or do you "feel his words" or something like that?

People have already performed experiments demonstrating time dilation. However, before I list them, what form of experiments will you accept? Surely you don't need to build a spaceship with a near-light engine and put human beings on it. Will you accept GPS results and similar measurements by inanimate apparatus?

Gravity would correct the energy levels inside an atom whose oscillations were used to measure time. This technically would affect the oscillations but the effect is so minor as to be negligable.
It has been experimentally shown that gravitational effects on particles are a minor effect, examples of experiments are those of V.V.Nesvizhevsky of the Institut Laue-Langevin in Grenoble.A more significant effect is that due to the curvature of spacetime, which results in clocks deeper in a gravitational field running at a slow rate compared to those outside. This is experimentally tested in every GPS system everyday. The slowing of time measured by GPS systems agrees exactly with the slowing of time General Relativity predicts from the assumption that time is a physically real extra dimension.

As I mentioned, and NoNukes has since provided more references and detail, experimental tests have been performed on the effects of gravity on atoms and subatomic particles.The effects have been shown to be negligible. Atomic energy levels are altered by gravity to a very small degree and hence this physical effect on the atomic structure of the clock could not be the cause of the disagreement between the satellite and Earth clocks.However General Relativity predicts it is a combination of the distortion of time itself (a physical dimension) and one other effect that causes the disagreements between the clocks. The amount of disagreement between the clocks agrees exactly with that predicted by General Relativity.There are two separate effects in General Relativity which change the rate of the clocks.
First of all there is the distortion of time itself caused by gravity. This causes clocks near the Earth to be slower compared to satellite clocks.Secondly, there is the effect of how different observers moving at different speeds split up our universe into the three-dimensions of space and the one dimension of time. Our universe is simply a four dimensional object/shape/manifold and there is no unique direction on this shape that you can definitively say is the time direction. The disagreement between how objects on the satellite and objects on the Earth parse time and space, means that a section of Earth time corresponds to less Satellite time. Hence satellite clocks run slower.
This effect is solely due to how objects divide up space and time and would be present even if spacetime were not distorted. It is called relative velocity time dilation.So the two effects:Relative Velocity time dilation:
How spacetime is split up into space and time is not unique and different observers will disagree. Happens even when spacetime is not curved and so even occurs in Special Relativity.Gravitational time dilation:
Due to the physical distortion of spacetime because of the presence of mass. This distortion also causes in the effect we call gravity, the tendency of massive objects to approach one and other.

Yes, to a negligible degree. General Relativity predicts the discrepancy between the clocks and states that the disagreement between the clocks is due to the warping/curvature of spacetime. General Relativity does not say the discrepancy is a result of the effects of gravity on the atoms of the clock. That's very odd because every GPS manufacturer is aware of this effect. How much have you looked? See the talk by Kyle O'Keefe "Relativity and GPS". He mentions the curvature of spacetime on several slides. O'Keefe works on GPS systems. I don't know how you could read anything on General Relativity and not encounter the distortion of time. This would like reading about evolution and not encountering the idea of natural selection.General Relativity has as its primary idea that spacetime can be distorted or bent. That's the centre of General Relativity. Everything predicted by the theory is a consequence of that idea. You have already told NoNukes that you accept that Special Relativity makes correct predictions. In Special (and General) Relativity, time is a dimension.In the case of special relativity all predictions of the the theory follow from the idea that time is a dimension.You have somehow done a lot of reading on both theories and never seen these foundational ideas, I find that hard to believe. Are you even reading what we write?
I was explaining two separate effects, one of which, the one you quoted, causes the satellite clock to run slower. However since it is not the only effect, the satellite clock runs faster overall. No. The relative velocity time discrepancy between the clocks is caused by the effect I explained in the post. Objects moving at the speed of the satellite divide the four dimensions of spacetime up into three dimensions of space and one of time differently to how objects on the Earth would. Special Relativity itself says this. Yes. The form of discrepancy between the clocks that is called gravitational time dilation is said by General Relativity to be caused by the distortion/stretching of time. General Relativity predicts the discrepancy using the idea that time is stretched. According to the Theory of Relativity time is a physically real extra dimension. Somehow you have read a lot about relativity and missed this core fact of the entire framework.Since relativity predicts the motions of cosmological entities to very high precision, it would appear that the idea that time is a physically real extra dimension is correct, despite how unintuitive it seems to you.

From that book:And yet there is no more common-place statement than that the world in which we live is a four-dimensional space-time continuum.

​

Similarly, the world of physical phenomena which was briefly called " world " by Minkowski is naturally four dimensional in the space-time sense.

​

The four-dimensional mode of consideration of the "world" is natural on the theory of relativityEdited by Son Goku, : No reason given.

No, of course it doesn't.However the fact that a theory which assumes time is a physically real dimension (the quotations from the man who made the theory should be strong enough evidence of that) is also supported by all experimental evidence, to the stage that it is the single most confirmed theory in physics, does suggest, quite strongly, that it is a fact.

We're well off at this point I think were currently on a tangent of a tangent of the main topic of the thread!

I doubt it too, they are professionals who work with atomic clocks as you said.So good thing they all mention the curvature of spacetime as the explanation for the GPS time measurments. In fact Neil Ashby wrote an article in Physics Today explicitly explaining this, see here:
http://www.ipgp.fr/...onal/GPS/Neil_Ashby_Relativity_GPS.pdfEdited by Son Goku, : ICANT said the quote, not me.

There is no point discussing anything until we get past this extremely basic point.General Relativity predicts that clocks are altered via the distortion of time.
It makes no sense to quote a source saying that General Relativity predicts something and then say there is no mention of the distortion of time, as the mentioning of temporal distortion is implicit in "General Relativity". General Relativity is about, the whole theory is centred around the idea that spacetime is curved.This would be like quoting a reference saying:
"Maxwell's theory predicts light will warm a surface"
and then saying there is no mention of an electric field, when Maxwell's theory is about electric fields.Or:
"The Alvarez hypothesis predicts a layer of Iridium deposits in the KT-layer"
and then saying there is no mention of a meteorite, when Alvarex hypothesis is about the impact of a meteorite.Do you understand what I'm saying? There's no point saying "X" is mentioned when "X" is part and parcel of the theory being mentioned.Edited by Son Goku, : Formatting.