First of all i make clear what i need to know. There may be too many theories about time, space and their relations.

What i want to know:

  • Is there some conceptions that are taken as MAIN or true in this area?
  • what is the MAIN conceptions nowadays?
  • I have my own idea, is there a conception that looks on this things, like i do? Or it was deprecated for some reasons?


On my opinion time is some kind of existence evaluation. For example: if we have no changes in some system, this system cant change for eternity - it's absolutely static, because if it changes at some point there will be the time between changes, it call the processes that will trigger other changes and the smallest time between changes will be the moment, so for time existence there must be something that can change its state. Its hard to understand the nature of time, but what i mean that time need some "things", to exist.


If time cant exist by its own and it exists for infinity, some kind of dimensions must exist for this long as well, it may have many posible dimentions, but i think it always was 3-dimensional. I'll try to explain why. The space is infinite. Its even not just infinite its infinite in every point of it, what it meens? Its not just infinite in x,y and z dimentions. Its infinite in every its point and heve some kind of subdimensions(levels) that have their own points and subdimensions. So it have some kind of deeps, have infinite number of subdimensions. So it's impossible to change it, because its to large (shortly).

This is not full explanation, just the idea of conception.

  • First off, welcome to philosophy.SE. Questions that ask "am I right?" or push a personal philosophy are off-topic here. There's a helpful post on meta.philosophy.stackexchange that explains that we're not trying to do philosophy here but rather to ask questions about philosophy, generously understood around the academic discipline. Can you make clearer what your question is? – virmaior Jul 25 '15 at 4:55
  • @virmaior thank you for greetings. I'm not really trying to ask "am I right?". I'm telling my vision of this things and i want to know is there this kind of ideas exists in philosophy, because i don't know all the things that are in present philosophy. I will try to restructure question to make it clear. – Zoltan Kurtyak Jul 25 '15 at 10:06

Hmm, there's a lot going on here, and it's not all completely coherent. But for a start, I would recommend looking here for a brief overview of how philosophers view time.

Besides that, I think I can address a few points you bring up.

Space is Infinite

Space is probably infinite, but the example you give to prove that this is impossible is flawed. First, space does not need energy to create. Space != Mass. Space can be hard to define, but is essentially unrelated to energy. Even the energy to move an object through a small or large amount of space is the same, all else held equal.

Second, the example of expanding points has some issues. First, a true point cannot be expanded, it's kind of arbitrarily set as the smallest possible unit. But even if you take something nearly as small as a point, and expand it to find an infinite number of points within, this doesn't create any impossibility. Just look at the number line. Between any two numbers, you can create an infinite number of irrational numbers. And between any two of those you can repeat the process. This is the same infinite expansion you mention, but it doesn't mean numbers aren't real.

Clarify Your Question

As for the rest, I suggest you clean up and clarify your question. First, lay out what you think time and space are, then give your arguments for why you think so. Use lists and titles where possible. Avoid run on sentences. Your example is a full paragraph but only two sentences.

| improve this answer | |
  • first of all i think the time is infinite. And i don't try to prove that it's impossible. "So it really can't have some start point" - this means that there is infinite amount of time before this point. Tell me why you think i was trying to prove the opposite? I don't saying that the time needs energy, i mean that must be "something", because there is probably impossible existence of absolute empty space, because there will be nothing that triggers the creation of something. I may write thing in bad manner, so i will try to restructure my question, so tell me also what you want here. – Zoltan Kurtyak Jul 25 '15 at 9:59

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.