Please back up your claim that "time" is a force. The word "time" is already taken. If you are claiming there is a "force" in the universe that speeds up and slows down all movement (time) for everything, that's an extraordinary claim, which requires extraordinary proof, and requires a word that is not already in existence with a different definition.
Bad syntax is how it all boils down. Such a force may exist, but it isn't "time". That's the problem with people who use language and words to interchangeably mean whatever they wish to assign to it, rather than the actual, literal definition.
Most people, when using the word "time", are referring to the constant and simultaneous movement of all matter, and seem to think it is like a river that "flows". This comes from the brain's ability to record memories and remember things that have already occurred (past) and project things that may occur (future) while experiencing things occurring currently (present). There is a continuum of movement (time) but it is made up only of the movements of matter through the three dimensions of space. There is clearly a force causing this movement, (ether), but the force and the movement are two different things, as are the measurement of the movement and its speed. It is important to separate them all for the sake of clarity, otherwise, people begin believing things that simply aren't true. They combine all of the concepts together into a belief system that makes no room for understanding each element of the movement, speed, velocity, space, distance, longevity, etc.
It annoys people to do that, because it makes the mathematical aspects much more complicated, but that is the only way to understand physics with any degree of accuracy.
To those who can't be bothered with accuracy, it's fine to call time a dimension if that's your preference, but it isn't accurate according to the parts of Einstein's theory of relativity that are not in conflict with one another.
Bad syntax is how it all boils down. Such a force may exist, but it isn't "time". That's the problem with people who use language and words to interchangeably mean whatever they wish to assign to it, rather than the actual, literal definition.
Most people, when using the word "time", are referring to the constant and simultaneous movement of all matter, and seem to think it is like a river that "flows". This comes from the brain's ability to record memories and remember things that have already occurred (past) and project things that may occur (future) while experiencing things occurring currently (present). There is a continuum of movement (time) but it is made up only of the movements of matter through the three dimensions of space. There is clearly a force causing this movement, (ether), but the force and the movement are two different things, as are the measurement of the movement and its speed. It is important to separate them all for the sake of clarity, otherwise, people begin believing things that simply aren't true. They combine all of the concepts together into a belief system that makes no room for understanding each element of the movement, speed, velocity, space, distance, longevity, etc.
It annoys people to do that, because it makes the mathematical aspects much more complicated, but that is the only way to understand physics with any degree of accuracy.
To those who can't be bothered with accuracy, it's fine to call time a dimension if that's your preference, but it isn't accurate according to the parts of Einstein's theory of relativity that are not in conflict with one another.
