Quote:
“Druid, tell me which direction time is from you”
Rambo, I thought it was you that stated that “we're well educated!” Then this question is forwarded concerning Time in the sense of a noun. The word “Time” is a cover word for the measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues Tim’s duration is measured in terms of events which succeed one another Example would be leisure time or a point where some occasional, or appointed time is fixed where some expected event will occur. (Seasonal Time, Lifetime, Time to retire, or Time to eat at the Big-Mac down the street, and so on) Time is a moment, hour, day, or year, as indicated by clock, or a calendar, or any of various systems of reckoning “time”.
Time is a series of recurring instances of repeated actions.
I believe that your remarks concerning the level of our education allows that you must have been told many times what time is.
So you can see that your question is confusing, and the confusion is compounded, with your provided answer of “You can't, it's at 90 degrees from all three physical dimensions”
Are you asking about atomic time around my ankle, waists, head, left, right, top, or bottom of me tarsal?
Are you saying that time is directional, and that I am the center of the direction?
What Time were you asking about?

In any Time event. Time to me is cyclical, and invented to satisfy human desires more so then the natural events that are not scheduled to occur.
But then I see time as irreverent, and to measure it is to create a past time, present time, and a future time.
All are merrily human concepts.
It is hard to answer such a general question when used in such a laid back manner like “which direction” time flows away from myself.
I see "Time" in the eyes of a druid.
Time is always now.
Nothing else.
But the dimensions thingy about M-Theory designating Space-Time, as an 11-dimensional separated by thin soft pliable sheet or layer especially of animal or plant origin, seems a bit too much even for me.

To answer the question of “Can you lean into those other dimensions?”, and again you assume I can’t with “no?” which only leads me to study the insinuation you are expressing with such abandonness.

: No, Rambo, I cannot lean into non-existence from inside the universal reality of all physical existence.

: Yes, Rambo I can lean into your fictional dimensions from inside the physical reality.

Every dimension, the M-theory theorizes I can observe that all those theoretical dimensions exist in only one reality.

Of course the one reality is an accumulation of every density available, and only minus the one dimension mentioned earlier, or to be below positive zero, and composed of scientific “Nothingness”, or as I insist scientific nonsense!

I see that you agree with me by pointing out this;
Quote:
“well then don’t be so sure you can’t have 0 dimensions,
and again you answer the thought with
Quote:
“Personally, I think I'd have to agree that you can't go smaller than the planck length - inside the universe. Even a 'brane without any expanded dimensions would still have a size, even if that was less than 10^-33 cm, and it would be impossible to determine. But that's because you're trapped on the surface of the brane. You can't shrink the universe any smaller than that.

We can't measure anything smaller than that because of QM - but that doesn't mean a point doesn't exist. We can conceptualise it, even if we can't measure it”
I am glad we cleared that up, Rambo.

:diz