Imagining the Tenth Dimension..

[Zico]

Total head mincer.. A mate showed me this, "Imagining the Tenth Dimension".....a new way of thinking about time and space by Rob Bryanton. Anyone on here read this?

Watch the flash clip....
http://tenthdimension.com/flash2.php

His Blog..
http://imaginingthetenthdimension.blogspot.com/


Whats the point of imagining something if it only exists in your mind.. Or am I missing the point? Why think in dimensions that we arent aware of and thus have no control over.. My head hurts and it aint the morning yet.. hic!.. :/

[dchen]

Total head mincer.. A mate showed me this, "Imagining the Tenth Dimension".....a new way of thinking about time and space by Rob Bryanton. Anyone on here read this?

Watch the flash clip....
http://tenthdimension.com/flash2.php

His Blog..
http://imaginingthetenthdimension.blogspot.com/


Whats the point of imagining something if it only exists in your mind.. Or am I missing the point? Why think in dimensions that we arent aware of and thus have no control over.. My head hurts and it aint the morning yet.. hic!.. :/

I haven't looked at the links yet, but each of these dimensions can potentially unlock a different method of transportation.

Right now, we are living in a world in which we are awared of 4 dimensions. 3 of them are physical spaces, length, width, and height sort to speak. The 4th dimension is time. We all move in these 4 dimensions simultaneously, and we can achieve the most efficient transportation method by optimizing any of these 4 dimensions.

Now, imagine if you have other dimensions you can actually use, it means you have many more choices to optimize your transportation needs. For example, if we are to travel from Los Angeles to London, instead of flying at certain speed at certain altitude and at a given route, we decide that we want to use these new dimensions that can potentially cut down the time by a large factor.

Well, that's the benefits I see at the moment. There are many more I am sure, but I think this is one that I think everyone can benefit from.

[Rollo]

The problem with this is that by definition, physical space is defined by three dimensions. Time is scalar and the Mass/Energy equations suggest that to move through it (ie time travel) reaches boundaries because you cannot go faster than the speed of light or slower than stop. It would be entirely reasonable to suggest that time is only scalar and thus it can not be folded.

It's a bit like trying to wish a pen from blue to red. It can be imagined, but it's not really possible.

[dchen]

The problem with this is that by definition, physical space is defined by three dimensions. Time is scalar and the Mass/Energy equations suggest that to move through it (ie time travel) reaches boundaries because you cannot go faster than the speed of light or slower than stop. It would be entirely reasonable to suggest that time is only scalar and thus it can not be folded.

It's a bit like trying to wish a pen from blue to red. It can be imagined, but it's not really possible.

That's not really true. The 4-dimension we know is bound by the equation we developed. However, many of the basic equations can easily be made to have more dimensions involved. Basides, many of these are not being imagined. Mathematically, I believe physics and mathematicians have proven that a total of 11 dimensions exist. Think outside of the box...

Also, remember the 4th dimension we are in now does not occupy any space, yet is directly related by the space we occupy. If you ask any one out there how many dimension we live in, I bet most will say 3 dimensions, even though we are currently in touch with a total of 4 dimension. And there are most likely many more out there. For one, there can be another dimension that is "outside" of the universe. Just because we don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. For one, none of the 4 dimensions explain what's beyond the universe, even though we know the universe is expanding, yet it is a boundary we can't currently go beyond of.

Another way to think of this: We know there are many stars out there, beyond the capability of our observation equipments, but we know they are there because of our calculations. Does that mean they don't exist?

[Rollo]

It's a spiffy little flash animation, but it sure as hell ain't string theory, or any other theory of physics I've heard of.

The idea that "choice" is a dimension, on the same footing as length and width, isn't part of quantum mechanics.

The idea that you can "fold things over" in six dimensions implies that there's more than one "time-like" direction, one to travel in, and one to "fold" in. No theory of physics with any currency has more than one "direction" of time.

His jump from seven to eight dimensions isn't consistent if he's using the analogy of going from a point to a branch, he should jump from seven to nine, just like he jumped from zero to two earlier when he jumped from a conventional point to a conventional "branch". But if he did things consistently, there would be eleven dimensions in the end, and he couldn't quite as easy claim that this is related in any way to string theory.

And if he can't conceive of a way to extend beyond the "tenth dimension", that's a failure of imagination on his part. Why not consider the collection of all "multiverses" of the type he sets up?

I haven't been this irritated by pseudoscientific BS since I watched (part of) What the Bleep Do We Know? If you're going to claim that you have an interesting new way of conceiving of ultimate reality, that's fine; go talk to the philosophers. But if you're going to claim that it's related to physics, with superstrings vibrating in your ten "dimensions", then that dog won't hunt.

One way to think about dimensions is to think about them as variable axis in Cartesian coordinate space. With one variable X, you have one dimension, a number line. With two variables, you have two dimensions. The two dimensions could represent height and width, or they could represent something else (like time vs. pressure) you can represent all kinds of things in these coordinate spaces. Time, width, height, pressure, density, color, current, voltage and on and on.

Imagine a cloud. The cloud can be represented as hundreds of three variable vectors, each one pointing out the location of a water droplet. or it could be represented as a 4-dimensional function where the independent variables are the location and the output of the function is the density at that point. Add in time, and you have five dimensions represented.

But keep in mind that the 'density' dimension is only a 'metaphorical' dimension. It's useful for doing math about clouds (or electron probability distribution around the atom) but it doesn't really 'exist'.

So you can pick whatever metaphors you want, as this guy did. Except his metaphors are quite stupid and useless.

The whole thing with 10 dimensions is that the maths works out when you figure that the strings get to vibrate in 10 dimensions, rather than just three.

[dchen]

By no mean am I supporting the guy's idea, since I have not seen or read his site yet. I am an engineer who works in the different coordinate system all the time, so I am well aware of constraints of x,y,z, or, r, theta, z, or r, rho, phi. However, I am saying that there are more than 4 dimensions, because there are too many things that cannot be explained by our 4 dimensions.

Since you are insisting there are only 4 dimensions. Could you explain what is outside of universe? Do you think it can be explained by our 4 dimensions? How about at event horizon?

Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Rollo]

STRAW MAN ALERT :eek:

I haven't insisted that there are only 4. Where do you get this from?


The whole thing with 10 dimensions is that the maths works out when you figure that the strings get to vibrate in 10 dimensions, rather than just three.

I'm suggesting that the theory of "folding dimensions" is flawed and that time is scalar because the energy equations have limits as velocity approches c.

Plenty of things exist that we can't see or observe. Did electricity, nuclear radiation and kangaroos exist before we could observe them? Of course.

[dchen]

STRAW MAN ALERT :eek:

I haven't insisted that there are only 4. Where do you get this from?



I'm suggesting that the theory of "folding dimensions" is flawed and that time is scalar because the energy equations have limits as velocity approches c.

Plenty of things exist that we can't see or observe. Did electricity, nuclear radiation and kangaroos exist before we could observe them? Of course.

Gotcha, I misunderstood your last post. Sorry about that.

[Erki]

I've seen that video before. At one point it got a little bit too complicated for my head. Bookmarked it for later time when I'm more advanced. :)

[Donney]

I'll woprry about the other dimension when I am aware about how or when can I use them. I am happy with the current four by now, which are quite complicated to optimize.

[Storm]

Another way to think of this: We know there are many stars out there, beyond the capability of our observation equipments, but we know they are there because of our calculations. Does that mean they don't exist?


But even if we cannot visually observe all those stars, surely we can detect them via emissions (X Ray, radio blah blah)...and of course there is a certain extrapolation of the number visible to find out actual (or the approximate number of stars around us).

If you say there are dimensions that exist "outside" our universe (assuming its a bounded universe to begin with, I think since its ever expanding we don't have a fixed boundary to it? As for those dimensions since they are out of our scope we cannot prove OR disprove them.

I haven't read that link yet though.

[edv]

I do know that the Fifth Dimension was available to Let The SunShine In. :)

[dchen]

But even if we cannot visually observe all those stars, surely we can detect them via emissions (X Ray, radio blah blah)...and of course there is a certain extrapolation of the number visible to find out actual (or the approximate number of stars around us).

If you say there are dimensions that exist "outside" our universe (assuming its a bounded universe to begin with, I think since its ever expanding we don't have a fixed boundary to it? As for those dimensions since they are out of our scope we cannot prove OR disprove them.

I haven't read that link yet though.

We can onlyl observe a limited amount of space, even if we are talking about x-ray or IR. Some stuff are just too far or emit too small of a signature for us to detect. However, I am sure physicists have their equations for calculating the mass of the universe.

As for outside of the universe, I guess that'll depends on what theory you are going after. One of the latest theory I have heard is that our universe is bounded, but anything within the universe cannot escape from it. Even if you get to the age of the universe and try to go through that boundary, you will end up in the opposite end of the universe as all edges are interconnected. Supposely there are math models to back this up.

Another one is the multiverse theory, which apparently more and more physicists are embracing. The theory says that our universe is a product of two or more universe colliding with each other, and the dimension we are in is because of that. It suppose to explain the expanding rate of the universe as well as the suppose violation of conservation of mass in our universe.

But I have to admit that I can't quite yet understand the fundamental of these theory yet. I have tried to understand string theory as well as quantum physics before, and the more I read about it, the more confuse I get. I guess I'll stick with my daily job of being an engineer.

[schmenke]

Will any of this help speed up my daily morning commute to the office? :mark:

[Zico]

Will any of this help speed up my daily morning commute to the office? :mark:

Yep.. by having a fertile imagination like this guy has...

was interesting tho to examine my own perception of reality. Cant believe he even runs his own forum on the subject. Wheres Steven Hawkings when you need him. ;)

[dchen]

Yep.. by having a fertile imagination like this guy has...

was interesting tho to examine my own perception of reality. Cant believe he even runs his own forum on the subject. Wheres Steven Hawkings when you need him. ;)

He is flying in vomit comet now ;)

[Storm]

But I have to admit that I can't quite yet understand the fundamental of these theory yet. I have tried to understand string theory as well as quantum physics before, and the more I read about it, the more confuse I get. I guess I'll stick with my daily job of being an engineer.

Bounded universe but still expanding sounds like a wave travelling in vaccuum...but hell ... :s

We are in the same boat although it does appear that you know a lot more ;)

Just a question..what type of an engineer are you?

schmenke...you had to bring us back to reality didnt you :p :

[CharlieJ]

Will any of this help speed up my daily morning commute to the office? :mark:
Only if you work a few thousand parsecs from where you live! ;)

[Erki]

Imagine teleporting yourself to work. :p :

Or going to work, particle by particle. http://www.rallifoorum.ee/foorum/images/smiles/new_scatter.gif

[CharlieJ]

Cool Smiley Erki. :)

[dchen]

Bounded universe but still expanding sounds like a wave travelling in vaccuum...but hell ... :s

We are in the same boat although it does appear that you know a lot more ;)

Just a question..what type of an engineer are you?

schmenke...you had to bring us back to reality didnt you :p :

I am a mechanical engineer by study, and an aerospace engineer by trade.