by Satanus 30 Replies latest jw friends
Here is a good video about what dimensions are:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDaKzQNlMFw
Here is another, more simple video with some cheesy animation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyTxCsIXE4
Here is an example of what a four dimensional cube would look to us in three dimensions. Humans can only see things in three dimensions so the four dimensional cube will appear to change shape when in reality it is just passing through our space.
See: And He Built a Crooked House (Heinlein); Flatland (Abbott).
:Yes or No.
Yes.
I mean, no.
No, it is definitely yes.
No, I think it can't.
Shit. I don't know.
Do I still get the blender?
Farkel
If you believe in quantum physics the answer could be yes. Scientist have seen elements in 2 places at
the same time, That observation is the begining of the bassis for parralel universes.
The theory is for every major event in your life one of you goes one way and one of you goes the other
way.
So in one dimension you may have a wife whos not real in the other dimension, or you may
be in jail in one dimension and thats not real in the other dimension.
But I have to qualify quantum physics is a theory just like evolution, Just like God, just like communism,
socialism, capitalism. All ideas that dont necessarily work when played out.
The devils in the details.
Some do see alternate universes as being made up of different constrained groupings of dimensions, our own universe being confined to a brane of three dimensions with other universes existing on other branes; it's not clear if these constricted dimensions are the same three, merely on another brane, or a different three, or some combination (in other words, it's not clear if what makes our universe distinct from another is the dimensions we use or the brane they're constrained upon).
Just got done taking quantum mechanics this semester as my last technical elective towards a mechanical engineering degree. The primary driver for theories describing the universe in more than four dimensions is that gravity is not understood very well, even with the special theory of relativity. Quantum physics mathematically describes electricty, magnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces with incredible accuracy. Many of the values predicted for physical constants of the universe match those obtained in experiments far more accurately than classical physics ever did. (Some to 20 decimal places or more). The equations of quantum mechanics can be simplified or reduced to the equations of classical physics when classical assumptions are made.
But when quantum mechanics is applied to gravity in a 4-dimensional universe, it doesn't work. It predicts gravity (and the gravitational constant) should be a lot stronger than what we observe. (By many orders of magnitude). One mathematical explanation for this is extra dimensions. As simply as I can state it, the extra gravitational force "bleeds off" into these extra dimensions. Also, since scientists have yet to observe any force carrier for gravity, gravity wave, or any subatomic particle from which the property of mass arises, it would also be possible that this originates in an extra dimension, and gravity and space-time curvature are the only effects that we are able to observe (or as yet know to look for) in our 4-dimensional universe.
The effort to understand gravity has led to the string, super-string, and brane theories that are around today that all have more than 4-dimensions. Theories like alternative realities have been made popular by sci-fi but are mostly fringe theories and are more based on new age metaphysics than mathematics or the scientific method. Some people have taken things like the uncertainty principle, superposition, entanglement, and probability, and ran with it in all sorts of philosophical directions without really understanding what the underlying mathematics means.
Like a previous poster mentioned, anything that is real (in the context of what I think the OP means) in a dimension in our universe would be real in all dimensions, but not necessarily observable, though its effects might be if one knows what to look for. Brane theory skews that idea somewhat but without getting technical the result from our point of view would be the same.
Again as mentioned "real" is a relative term. For example, AC electricity has both real values and imaginary values. The imaginary part can't be measured by an electric meter. But the imaginary part of the electricty costs real money for the electric company to produce. That part of your electric bill is estimated by a multiplying factor. Something else intriguing are "virtual particles" which are basically not real but can become real, and are used in the explanation of hawking radiation emitted by black holes.
Some good comments explaining the physics.
Farkel
The blender is sent (in my reality, anyway).
Here is an attractive physicist being interviewed on the charlie rose show http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-45154219728824809&sourceid=searchfeed%20#
She goes on to speculate a bit on extra dimensions, dimensions not included in the string theory model. Interesting stuff. Someone can make that clickable, if they would.
S
:Can something be real in another dimension, but not in this one?
If it was, how would you know then?
Farkel
jaguarbass beat me to it! Quatum Physics is quite facinating and the theory is that there could be multi-universes out there. Some interact with ours at different times. Quite interesting.
Here is the basis for the quantum theory. It's called the Two-Slit or Double-Slit Experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc
Here's another one that talks about the possibility of parallel universes:
If it's real in any universe, it's real. Isn't that string theory?
