Uses of The 4th Dimension (Einstein was wrong!)

by use4d 138 Replies latest social current

  • dorayakii
    dorayakii

    Well i must say AuldSoul what a brilliant explanation. From a casual glance, it does seem quite possible that the 5th dimension is a 4th spacial dimension, but i'd need to have a long old think about that one, lol. String-theory has a tendancy to get my brain in knots. I do agree though, that every thing that we experience in our world is in the 3rd dimensional level (or the 4th if you include a sence of the passage of time). Even the piece of paper or a dot are just illustrations to help ease the mind into this difficult concept. Interesting to note that it is called "string"-theory and "brane"-theory, even though strictly, strings and membranes do not exist as strings of membranes in their current form in any of the higher dimensions.

    Dune, that crumpled up paper illustration is quite interesting, and seems to relate to wormholes and warps in the fabric of the imperfect dimensional continua.

    Flyphisher, that comment was interesting. Time is said to be an illusion. It is merely another dimension, similar in quality to the other two, but we as living beings merely percieve it as something that moves forwards but not backwards, when it is in fact us who are moving in it.

    A similar illustration is the spinning Earth. Earth spins at over 1000 mph, but we don't percieve it because we are moving with it, at a constant rate. We therefore dont percieve it. The Earth spins around the sun and the Sun, and the Sun round the Galaxy, adding two more levels of speed to the equation, but equally, we do not percieve them.... When we are in a moving car or train though, we sence the movement, because we are closer to the level of the car and we can actually percieve inertia and motion outside. We only percieve movement when we are moving slightly against it, so when the object we are fixed to is small, tacit movements allow us to sence the overall movements. (Just like the eyes have to dart quickly about in order to see an object.)

    In the same way, we cannot sence the upper dimensions because we are not on there level. When we are still in space, we dont notice it, but we almost always notice Time, becuse we are always in motion in that dimension. The only time we seem to be able to completely ignore all 4 dimensions is if we are sleeping or engrossed in day-dreaming. Time therefore, seems to be the base-dimension, the 1st dimension, and not the 4th as i said before.

    I remember my A-Level Physics Professor noting that the 3 spacial dimensions go infinitely in either direction, but that Time only goes in one direction, forward. However, i couldn't get my head around that as a person who does not like exceptions unless there is a good reason (thats why i decided to become a linguist and not a physicist). Anyway, i questioned that maybe Time does go in both directions but that we are trapped on a downward slope as it were, on the dimensional "surface" of Time, or maybe there is another particle that fonctions like gravity.

    Time, like the spacial dimensions is never ending and never beginning. Time began, but it has no beginning. (In other words there was a moment where it did not exist, but it hs always existed in itself becuse it is infinite in itself.)... Highly theoretically then, if you were to travel faster than light and try to reach the end of the universe, you would reach right back at where you started again. (Just like Neo the train station in Matrix Revolutions).

    So theoretically, i argued, we are moving in Time, but since we don't know how... "big" the Time dimension is, we could have already been "here" several times this millenium or even just today. I thouhght that things do not have to occupy the exact same position in space the next time you reach the same spacial position again, so why would they have to be in Time? This was one of my arguements back then against backwards time travel... what is preventing the arrangement of things from being completely different the next time we go back? For all we know, Time is an infinitely small dimension, in which we are already travelling back and forth and round and round... I was never been able to get my head around that one, as i became a traitor to the sciences and decided to take up linguistics and philology as my main interest.... but recently the most simple answer came to my head: The reason why things will not be the same in the spacial dimentions is because of the very passage of Time. Things would indeed be in exactly the same position because they only move in space in relation to Time, without Time, they cannot move in either the 2nd, the 3rd or the 4th dimension. Like d'uh...

  • Oroborus21
    Oroborus21

    What no pyramid hat for when you go to sleep?

    -Eduardo

    PS: Dave a "dimension" is something which is measurable. There are three spacial dimensions measured in X,Y, Z coordinates (which essentially correlates to up/down, right/left, in/out if overlooking a plane which in real life we usually measure as height, width, & depth etc...

    The fourth dimension is the temporal dimension, time, which is measured in a variety of units again. Time is a physical dimension, that is it is a product and aspect of the physical universe (just think of how we measure time by physical properties whether it be the vibration of a cesium atom, flow of grains of sand in a glass or the revolution of the earth around the sun). As far as we know time is the one dimension which only goes in one direction, forward, but really smart people, aka scientists have postulated that it can go backwards theoretically.

    As for further dimensions these are all theoretical and provable only via high-level mathematics. String theory, depending on which type, has a variety of potential dimensions from 10 to 20 or more.

    Incidently, Jehovah God exists outside of the physical universe and thus he "looks down or into" the physical world and can thus see the river of time stretched out from the beginning of creation (aka the Big Bang) to its end or more probably to see that curves back upon itself. This is how he is able to be the Alpha and the Omega and the one knowing the future, because for him it is just a matter of looking further along the path to see what is ahead.

    PPS: "If Einstein was right, and space and time are indeed curved, then the shape of it will be the Oroborus."-EBL

  • silentWatcher
    silentWatcher

    he "looks down or into" the physical world and can thus see the river of time stretched out from the beginning of creation (aka the Big Bang) to its end or more probably to see that curves back upon itself.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    I have trouble coming up with an intuition about what 2 time dimesions would look like.

  • ellderwho
    ellderwho
    The 4th Dimension told me that the next jackpot lotto numbers will be:

    23 43 42 01 05 12

    Damn you, Im wishing for the lotto.

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    DISCLAIMER: Hyperdimensional explorations are of a purely conceptual nature. Since direct observation is not possible (due to limitations inherent in the human animal) and since something which cannot be observed cannot be established via the Scientific method, these discussions are relegated to hypotheses and speculation.

    For anyone still stuck in 3s + 1t space: http://www.hyperdimensia.com/

    This site includes a very simplified discussion of what hyperdimensionality is all about. It even discusses an "Ouroborus Effect" which might be of interest to one of our posters. It is observable when a 4s object enters our 3s world.

    Take a look at a computerized demonstration of conceptual objects with four spacial dimensions: http://www.hyperdimensia.com/viewer4d.html

    Keep in mind, that we would not be able to see objects that existed in four spatial dimensions as four dimensional objects, because we can only perceive 3 spatial dimensions. However, do we smugly assume that our perceptions encompass all physical space, or do we accept that just as the possibility of 3 spatial dimensions would seem absurd to a 2s being, 4 spatial dimensions and/or multiple dimensions of time may be a reality although we cannot perceive it directly?

    In thinking on it, remember that light does not slow down as we approach its speed. It maintains the difference between our speed and its own. This is not even a remotely possible property of something literally restrained by a 3s + 1t physical reality. We have evidence that there are more spatial dimensions, and probably at least one more dimension of time.

    As to time only moving forward or the spatial X, Y, Z coordinates for location or as starting points for measurement, both axioms are entirely dependant upon an observer and are relative (always) to something else. Try to define your exact location without explaining it as relative to something else and you'll have convinced yourself you don't exist in no time at all (pun intended).

    Respectfully,
    AuldSoul

  • stillajwexelder
    stillajwexelder

    welcome to the board BTW use4d

  • flyphisher
    flyphisher


    oroborus

    Incidently, Jehovah God exists outside of the physical universe and thus he "looks down or into" the physical world

    Sorry, I do not believe that. IMO there exists no "supernatural" world at all. The problem is we do not understand yet the physical laws of those spheres in which "God" exist, and so we transfer them to a "supernatural" sphere.

    Furthermore, I think if the universe had a begin with a "big bang", then God had a begin with the big bang too. Because (there is an easy proof!) --> BEFORE the big bang did happen, there was NO TIME. Time didn`t simply exist (read Stephen Hawking etc.). And when no TIME, then NO GOD. On the other hand, one can postulate, that God is identical with a pure mathematical/logical principle (axiom). Such mathematical axioms exist outside of any existing TIME too, as we all know. This is a possibility to start to understand "god" in a natural manner.

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    flyphisher,

    Ignoring the God argument entirely, for the moment, is it possible that the Big Bang was simply a manifestation of "objects" (by which I mean objects with 3 spacial dimensions) into our 3d universe?

    In other words, time only started with the Big Bang IF (1) we correctly understand the properties of time and (2) no events occurred in any other universe or any other dimension prior to the Big Bang. I will grant that time in our 3s+1t universe started with the Big Bang, as it was the first 3s+1t event from which to start marking the gaps spanning to other events.

    I don't believe we have enough data to assert a beginning point for time from every possible perspective.

    Respectfully,
    AuldSoul

  • flyphisher
    flyphisher

    AouldSoul

    time only started with the Big Bang IF (1) we correctly understand the properties of time and (2) no events occurred in any other universe

    Hello. The "big bang"-model is just one physical model. Other models do not support S. Hawkings "big-bang"-model, they postulate an everlasting universe that had no begin. They postulate cosmic expansion, followed by a big crunch, then followed by a new expansion... and sequences going on in eternity.

    But, if we once assume a "big-bang-model", we have to accept that no sort of universe (and therefore no events in any other universe or any other dimensions) occurred prior to the Big Bang. And therefore no TIME existed.

    TIME startet when a first elementar structure came into existence with ability to sense TIME. Not prior...! TIME can disappear in similar reverse manner too. In a so-called "black hole" there is no TIME, because there is no atomar or subatomar structure able to sense TIME anymore. In a black hole, the extremely compressed elementar structure "dies"- and finally, it disappears totally -; in the same manner as a biological structure may die. If you are dead, you cannot sense TIME too. You understand, I hope..

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    flyphisher,

    I do understand. The Big Bang explains the expansion of matter in a 3s+1t model (exclusively) and may be a very valid explanation within the confines of 3s+1t space. It cannot, however, rule out the preexistence of every possible thing in every possible dimension and every possible universe. Therefore, the Big Bang relies on the non-existence of anything (or the nearly infinite compression of everything) as the foundation for the assumption of the beginning of time but, as you clarified in your most recent post, the beginning of time only requires an observer and an observed event.

    QED, unless you can eliminate the possibility of events and/or observers existing in hyperdimensional space/time constructs you have to allow the egocentristic bias of the view expressed by Hawking—"our perspective is the only one possible" is the ultimate foundation of his theory regarding the beginning of time.

    I think it is extremely "convenient" that the model we choose to describe the universe with is also the one through which we most readily interact with the universe experientially. How extraordinarily lucky for us!

    Or, perhaps there is another explanation. One that doesn't necessitate us happening to be able to interpret all of physical reality from within the confines of our most comfortable perception model, namely the one we are born with (3s+1t).

    Respectfully,
    AuldSoul

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit