Questions like how do I travel back and forth in time? are based within an erroneous definition of dimension. Consider the following critique of the “Freedom of Movement” definition:
ONE – There is no such thing as absolute “freedom” of per se spatial motion (i.e., independent of time). A much better definition characterizes the term dimension as a fundamental element of an interval of reality (as I said weeks ago). However, if you insist on sticking with the “freedom” concept (ironic for a Soviet, I’d think), maybe you should consider a definition that touches upon “degrees of freedom” (as opposed to undefined freedom), thereby allowing for temporal constraints.
TWO - In order to express a singular step of a vector in space-time, we require only one axis. So, according to your definition, the interval between a particle’s position in two consecutive frames does not exist in three spatial dimensions. After all, a particle cannot simultaneously move within three axes! Hence, armed with that deduction we'd subsequently derive a twofold notion that (1) nothing can simultaneously exist in three dimensions, and (2) three spatial dimensions can only exist in time.
See the point?
As long as you derive your concepts from the “freedom of movement” definition, you will continue to misunderstand the mutually dependent nature of “space” and “time.”
P.S. How do you not travel back and forth in time? Can you instantaneously transport yourself about? Sounds like Star Trek gobbledygook to me!