• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Tenth Dimension

Yeah, I posted it in ATOT (Shh!), but I wanted to see what the "smart" guys have to say.

Edit: BTW, the link works fine for me and many others...
 
I dont buy much it past the 4th dimension. 4-D as time makes sense. The 5-D then implies there are an infinite amount of parrallel universes possible essentially. But his logic makes it sound like we cannot go back from that, which is counter-inuitive to what he is saying. If we made a 2-D grid of time, which 5-D implies, then all times in all parrallel universes are incompassed, because if we can move forwards and backwards in any dimension why cant we go backwards from a point in the 5th dimension to a childhood we didnt have? Adding the 6th dimension doesnt fix this thought, and his loop of paper idea is flawwed. Although I dont believe in a parallel universe in the first place. So thats why I dont feel the 5-D is real, but it does make some form of logical sense.

Beyond that he just starts getting silly. Especially when he starts talking about inifinity and parrallel infinity it just sounds like hes recursively talking about the same thing. Using his logic we could just keep coming up with words and create a new array of arrays as points and go off into inifinite dimensions. But he stops at 10, I say we make up a word for a point containing a 10th dimension object, then make a 3-d space of it, and boom we have 11,12,13 etc. His logic is 100% flawed past 5-D unless you intend to go to infinite dimensional numbers.

Pretty much I dont buy anything but dimensions 1-4 (all proven), and anything more is contextually imginary which he seems to be saying to begin with. So its really 100% subjective making both of us correct and wrong.
 
Originally posted by: krotchy
Pretty much I dont buy anything but dimensions 1-4 (all proven), and anything more is contextually imginary which he seems to be saying to begin with. So its really 100% subjective making both of us correct and wrong.
Click to expand...
Real discussions on the possibility come from the result of some theories that allow or require more that 4 dimensions. These theories consist of rigorous mathematical equations. The mathematics alone determine if or how many extra dimensions are required. Even then these theories must undergo peer review as requirered to be published in establised scientific journals. That alone does not prove or disprove the validity of such theories. They are just testing the validty of the mathematical arguments. The real proof of whether or not more that 4 dimensions unfortunately will not be found there. The problem with all such theories is our current level of technology and understanding of physics are not advanced enough to even suggest a way to test the theories. Imaginary may not be the right word. Unproven may be better but I am not sure. In any case the real Universe favors no theory. Its nature is the way it is and nothing else. Logical discussion or wishful thinking on the subject will never provide an answer one way or another. Only good theories that can be tested will in the end lead to the prying of the truth from mother nature's grip.
 
The title is "Imagining the Tenth Dimension"

Can you even imagine the sixth dimension? Why start/stop at 10? Superstring theory provides for up to 26 dimensions, and so far its predictions coincide very well with reality.

krotchy, 5 dimensions do not necessarily imply parallel universes. It is possible for a curled up spacial dimension to exist without these extraneous effects. Kaluza-Klein towers of particles don't necessitate the existence of a parallel universe, although that is one possible interpretation.
 
Even NOVA told us string theory offered 26 dimensions. Though as we can't proove that either, we can only assume at this point(science not being able to measure any sort of dimension past 4) so no answers are really wrong here...
 
There, now I watched the thing, and boy was my new-age nonsense detector going off like crazy.

Modern multi-dimensional physics has eliminated the point as being the "valid" form of space. It's difficult to imagine, but space is not made of infinite dimensionless points.

The author seems to just randomly make up things and assumes that all extra dimensions are related in time. I am aware that superstrings vibrate in spatial dimensions that are curled up on one another. In the grand unification epoch, no dimensions were curled up and all forces were one. As the universe expanded, these extra dimensions curled up on one another, giving rise to the electroweak force and the strong and gravitational forces, and then eventually the 4 natural forces that we know today as the weak, strong, electromagnetic, and gravitational forces.

The extra little bits about how quantum mechanics and superstring theory justify the author's interpretation reminded me a lot of "What the bleep do we know," that fallacious new-age cult movie that tears at the very spirit of real science. So I decided to do a little research. Coincidentally, "Tenth Dimension" is also the name of an album by some heavy metal group known as "B L A Z E"

On the website, he admits that physicists tell us that reality is determined by ten spatial dimensions with 1 additional dimension of time, yet he just decided to argue that there are 3 spatial and 7 time dimensions for what appears to be no reason. 'The "theory of reality" that I advance on this website and in the book "Imagining the Tenth Dimension" is not the one that is commonly accepted by today's physicists.' Also, 'I invite you to think of this as an entertaining diversion that for some people will have a strong and thought-provoking connection to their impression of how the world really works.'

That gave me some relief. The author is at least honest on his own website. I'm still not convinced though, as the flash presentation clearly tries to disguise the book's interpretations and being direct consequences of quantum mechanics and string theory, as though he were presenting some scientific revelation to the masses. This book sure as hell isn't string theory. It's essentially just some concepts for you to think about. The book isn't on amazon yet.

It's a thought-provoking conceptual book based on no scientific evidence at best, and it's a thinly-veiled deception of actual science at worst.
 
Originally posted by: videogames101
Even NOVA told us string theory offered 26 dimensions. Though as we can't proove that either, we can only assume at this point(science not being able to measure any sort of dimension past 4) so no answers are really wrong here...
Click to expand...

Particle accelerators are being built right now to test the possibility of a fifth dimension. It is possible to test for the existence of extra dimensions. Look up Kaluza-Klein towers. Basically, if you can give a particle enough energy to bump it into moving in another dimension, then you would suddenly detect a particle with a higher rest mass. If this happens, then you have essentially observed a particle moving in a fourth spatial dimension.
 
To be perfectly honest, I got lost after the third dimension. Well, the fourth being time (or rather the constant change in the space we call time) doesn't sound right to be perceived as a dimension because you can't travel back and forth in it. It's more like a state. Actually, the first and the second also seem a bit odd: they are arbitrarily appointed conceptual parts of what we call space, but they don't even exist. How could anything exist without being a part of space? How could anything be a part of space without having three dimensions?
 
Originally posted by: Eeezee
Originally posted by: videogames101
Even NOVA told us string theory offered 26 dimensions. Though as we can't proove that either, we can only assume at this point(science not being able to measure any sort of dimension past 4) so no answers are really wrong here...
Click to expand...

Particle accelerators are being built right now to test the possibility of a fifth dimension. It is possible to test for the existence of extra dimensions. Look up Kaluza-Klein towers. Basically, if you can give a particle enough energy to bump it into moving in another dimension, then you would suddenly detect a particle with a higher rest mass. If this happens, then you have essentially observed a particle moving in a fourth spatial dimension.
Click to expand...

Somehow I don't feel that prooves another dimension, but shows the possibility of one. If we had more quantum physics figured out it is quite possible that we could use that as proof, or more knowledge would show us that that is not another dimension. My point is just we just don't know right now, as there is no hard evidence to support it.(Or there is no way to observe this hard evidence)
 
My math thesis was based on imaging 4-dimensional objects by looking at their 3-dimensional shadows and cross sections. I went through a lot of tylenol and advil. [joke]I found it much easier to imagine objects in n-dimensional space and then looking at the special case where n=10. [/joke]
 
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: Eeezee
Originally posted by: videogames101
Even NOVA told us string theory offered 26 dimensions. Though as we can't proove that either, we can only assume at this point(science not being able to measure any sort of dimension past 4) so no answers are really wrong here...
Click to expand...

Particle accelerators are being built right now to test the possibility of a fifth dimension. It is possible to test for the existence of extra dimensions. Look up Kaluza-Klein towers. Basically, if you can give a particle enough energy to bump it into moving in another dimension, then you would suddenly detect a particle with a higher rest mass. If this happens, then you have essentially observed a particle moving in a fourth spatial dimension.
Click to expand...

Somehow I don't feel that prooves another dimension, but shows the possibility of one. If we had more quantum physics figured out it is quite possible that we could use that as proof, or more knowledge would show us that that is not another dimension. My point is just we just don't know right now, as there is no hard evidence to support it.(Or there is no way to observe this hard evidence)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure of another way to explain a particle gaining a bunch of rest mass energy. There is really no better way to observe another spatial dimension than forcing an object to move in that dimension.

Yes, it's not a way to know for sure, but it is still very exciting. I don't know of any method for definitely proving that there is a 4th spatial dimension since we can't simply observe it. Forcing a particle to move in this extra dimension is as close as we'll be getting any time soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top