by use4d 138 Replies latest social current
there are 10 dimensions in string theory, 11 in brane-theory and 26 in bosonic space
Is it possible to express in layman's terms (such that I would understand) what exactly a "dimension" is in this context? I think of a dimension as something that I (or something) can move through.
Thanks!
Dave
I love the way the fellow announces that Einstein is wrong without demonstrating Einstein's error, then proceeds to relate a completely fabricated perception of the fourth dimension. Beside, if memory serves, Einstein was working from Riemann-Kaluza. He wasn't inventing a concept of the physical universe from whole cloth.
Also, your theory actually corresponds to some of Einstein's hypotheses. However, from what you have written here I doubt whether you have read anything of Einstein's work.
BTW, e actually does equal mc², in case you were saying he was wrong about that. Since he proposed an awful lot of things and you weren't specific I had to guess at what you were saying he was wrong about.
AuldSoul
I'd rather the 5th Dimension myself...
...of the "up, up, and away" class...
I think of a dimension as something that I (or something) can move through.
Well then in that case there are 4 dimensions you can move through and actually notice that you are moving through them.
1. Width
2 Length
3. Height
4. Time
...again the labels "width", "length" and "height" are not quite so accurate in describing the first three dimensions, because the 3 mix and merge together to form 3-dimensional Space. The 4th dimension Time is distinct. Its not worth talking about the 5th and further dimensions without twisting up one's brain into all kinds of knots, but the crux of the matter is that some particles are able to escape into the further dimensions thereby weakening their force or pull of attraction in the 4 dimensions that we can sence. Gravity for example is a very weak force in relation to some of the others, so it is said to exist primarily in a further dimension.
Physicists have seen particles as disipating energy in other dimensions by positing them instead of non-dimensional points, as multi-dimentional strings, or multi dimentional (mem)branes. The singularity which started the Big Bang is said to have been an infinately small point with no length width breadth or time. It then unravelled into more and more dimentions. Think of this...
a dot/period is 0-dimensional
a line drawn on paper (string) is 1-dimensional, it is "long" and it has "length"
the piece of paper (membrane) itself is 2-dimensional
and a whole wad of paper is 3-dimensional
the wad of paper is 4-dimensional... due to the fact that it doesn't just POP into existence for one micro-second then disappear from existence... it exists for a long "Time"
This view is very simplistic because even the dot/period has 4 dimensions when you go onto a smaller level of scale, but these examples are just to help one get ones mind around the concept of dimensions. When we look at the edge of a pice of paper, it seems like a 2-D line, when in fact there is a whole piece of paper just beyond our vision... Similarly we are mutli-demensional due to the fact that many of the particles that make us up seem to be specks, when in fact they exist in other dimensions as strings or membranes that are "beyond our vision" as it were... the "dot" that is the particle, is only part of its protrusion into our level of dimensional awareness... Note too that linguistically, we use the word "length" to describe both physical and spacial length, and a length of time.
Thank you, that was very clear. I'm sure I don't get it, but at least I have a clue about what it is I don't get!
Dave
AA,
A dimension is a conceptual device that is entirely related to perception. I realize that someone will likely disagree with me, but I think my argument in favor of that point is very strong. For this post, let D=spacial dimension.
For instance, neither you or I have ever perceived only 2D. Some people point to drawings on paper as an example however, even in this medium, there is an impression on the paper (however slight) and a "thickness" possessed of the medium used to draw. The paper also has thickness and texture. Therefore, the drawing itself is not 2D, although it may contain a conceptually 2D-esque drawing. In other words, even with such clinching proof, we have to conceive of the 2D aspects to see it as proof of 2D.
In this way, we can conceive of 1D although it can never be expressed (even in a drawing) because a 1 dimensional object can never be observed by us.
There is a famous illustration to explain how there could be more than 3 dimensions of space (and even objects that inhabit these). It requires imagination, but a reaches a certain point where it becomes very flawed.
"Imagine," the illustration begins, emphasizing the conceptual requirement, "that you are a 2D being living in a 2D world. A 3D balloon floats overhead in the third dimensional world that exists parallel to yours. How would you experience that balloon, in your 2D world?"
The standard answer is flawed. The standard answer is, "As a shadow." The actual answer is, you would not experience it at all. The reason is simple, to detect a shadow you must have height. In other words, a 2D being cannot see a shadow because of it perceptual limitations. Also, light cannot refract in 2D, so a 2D being would not see anything—not in the sense that we see, anyway. It would only appear as a shadow to a 3D being looking down at a 2D being's universe, but such a 3d being would be able to discern the cause of the shadow as well.
In a similar way, we are limited. We are blind from the perspective of 5D beings or objects. We have no point of reference for how anything in our universe impacts their universe, any more than a 2D being would understand the impacts of its actions on our universe.
There is more in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philosphy. Do waves travel through 3 dimensions of space? Yes, as surely as they travel through 2 and 1 dimensions of space. But it could very well be that we are trying to define and codify that which exists beyond our 3D. And, Doryakii, while you gave the textbook answer regarding the fourth dimension, could there not be a fourth SPACIAL dimension that we get hints of, and even "objects" that exist in a 4D universe? If so, aren't we ALSO living in that 4D spacial universe, whether we can perceive it as such or not?
And does our action in our perceptual universe impact the objects in other dimensions as well? Could gravity, for instance, be a manifestation of an object that exists in a higher dimensional "plane" (for lack of a better word, because planes in our concept would technically lose all meaning after 4D)?
We can imagine a 2D universe because we have a frame of reference for it. But, even then, our imagination is crippled by our experience in 3D. We cannot currently imagine a 26D universe. Or even correctly imagine a 4D universe. But, if there are such higher dimensions, it is certain that we ALSO live in them. Simultaneously, we exist in all dimensions. We are crippled by the limitations of our perceptions.
With this thinking in mind, how much room is there in a 1D universe? Dimensions are a conceptual device, a vain attempt to explain the inexplicable. Very useful, in some ways. But they are only concepts.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
O how i love dimensional theory.
I think its the 11 dimension's of the brane theory thats the funnest though.
I remember an article describing the theory as a ball of paper crumbled up into a tiny ball. Now you're supposed to imagine something small enough to fit into any of the holes. There is a possibility that anything entering into the hole can come out at any point on the peice of paper, so time and space was passable.
The 4th Dimension told me that the next jackpot lotto numbers will be:
23 43 42 01 05 12
Sounds like an infomercial from the galactic corp, spegula, responsible for quadrant 4, sector 89453765, of the forth dimension. Reserve yours now, get in on the ground foor of this new capitalist venture.
S
The 4th Dimension is an infinite access to The Truth
Do not get confused any further! Your convoluted asumptions are very wrong and false.
Einstain did not fiddle with spiritual matters but with physics. Since you are quoting Einstain, it implies you reffer to physics, and your basic premise ignores the fact that in physics, the 4th dimension is nothing more than the fourth coordinate in a graph that is required (along with three spatial dimensions) to specify a physical event.
To spiritualists, it means a higher plane of existence in space and time and this assumption is completely unrelated to Einstein's theories and physics.
Cheers,
Gerry
