Thread: Fourth Dimension (analogy two)

If we consider like Mike NS did a single dimension 2^1, this gives us a straight line of length one. 2^2 a square of area 4. 2^3 a cube of volume 8.

Here's the controversial bit

2^4=(2^2)^2

We have defined the fourth dimension in a two dimensional plane. You could just say this gives you nothing special, only a sqaure with four times the area of 2^2. So in response to Mike NS's topic I think that when trying to figure out these neat methods for defining the fourth dimension, we tend to end up simply getting larger versions of shapes in lower dimensions. We must all talk about this more. You all must see this link, even if its just for the pictures. Read George Gamow's One two three infinity or type supercube into google images. The image you will see is a projection, as though you had shone light onto, a four dimensional cube.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:D...dimensions.jpg

never really liked the concept of dimensions myself.

I prefer that there is a master dimension, and all the other so-called dimensions are illusions and byproducts of the master.

The master dimension is gravity. All other dimensions are created as illusions of gravity when you take the relative frame into account.

For instance.

Gravity produces the 3 dimensions of size by an illusion depending on whether or not you are moving at c. If you're moving at c, there are no size dimensions . Everything moving at c, is literally in the same place from its own frame of reference. Distances between energy moving at c, is an illusion of our own because we are not in that frame of reference, as we are not moving at c. Imagine we see 2 photons travelling in opposite directions to eachother. In the photons reference, they are still in the same place. It is us that have observed an illusion of seperation because of gravity.

Time, the 4th dimension is likewise, anythhing moving at c, does not experience time, so aswell as everything being in the same place, it is in the same place AT the same time. We only experience time, becuase we are not in that frame of reference. Take our 2 photons travelling away from eachother - they're seperated by a light year - but in their frame of reference, there is no time difference between them, exactly 0.

Now, it gets freaky, because as far as the elementals of the universe are concerned, the whole universe exists in the same place, at exactly the same time. There are no dimensions as far as the elementals are concerned. And everything is made of elementals. Including us.

What does this mean? The big bang happened 0 seconds ago, and the end of the universe comes in 0 seconds time. Therefore, the universe sees itself as just a virtual particle?

The universe doesnt see the big bang as an expansion, because there are no dimensions as far as its frame of reference is concerned to expand into.

So, really, the universe doesn't exist, never has, never will. What has happened though is that somehow, in this phase of non-existance, gravity has given us time and spacial dimension, so that we perceive it as real.

The more gravity we have, the slower time runs and the larger the spatial dimensions appear. Stand in a blackhole, and you will see an entire universe. It maybe that we couldn't stand in a black hole, because we aren't native to it - but what if structures evolved in a blackhole that formed under its unique combination of time and gravity. They - theoreticizing about life outside the blackhole would imagine that structures could not form in such a place with low gravity and rapid time. Yet as far as we are both concerned, the relative frame between us shows that mathmatically there is no difference in perception until we cross the boundary of the event horizon and enter a different universe.

flame away!

Gravity is not a dimension mate its a force. Thats a philosophical arguement in my books but I can see where you are coming from. Anything moving at c would expierience its own but to it would get to any given place in no time at all if measured by an intertial observer. The thing is your arguement is utterly flawed if light travel is impossible which it most probably is, because mass would be infinite. Therefore c could never be reached, and the big bang would have happened a time ago that was not = to 0. We observe no illusion with photons because they have no mass. Although nicely put

im not quite saying that, ill try to elaborate a bit.

I know gravity is a force and not a dimension.

What I am trying to convey, is that the four dimensions as we perceive them pop out of (to coin a phrase) a 'superdimension' that encompasses them all.

Im not trying to overthrow any of the current theories about the evolution of the universe. They are correct from our perspective and our frame of reference. We see distances and we percive time.

Imagine this, we view a wave as a squiggy sinusoidal line where there is a definate distance between subsequent zero crossing and peaks. But a photon doesn't have the luxury of this. It cant, because it has no frame of reference that allows for a distance. A photon will only ever see all those peaks and troughs in exactly the same place.

We see that it takes a set time to travel from point A to point B. But a photon doesn't have this luxury.

No distance, no time.

Is it any wonder that we can set up experiments to show that a photon behaves as a particle and a wave? - Yet for a photon, a particle and a wave must be the same thing - a zero dimensional point - all thats changed is our ability to determine between them because we have a different frame of reference, ie we are not travelling at c - so is it an illusion.

There is nothing odd about a slit experiment from a photons POV. The wave interference pattern - we perceive, but all those 'bands' are in the same place, no distance, so why is it odd. It doesn't matter if the photon hit a screen on the other side of the universe. Its still the same place as far as the photons frame of reference. So there is nothing spooky.

Im not saying c could never be reached. I know this. But if everything was at c to start with - which it must have been to be in a singularity - then the issue is not if you can attain c, but why have some things slowed down from c, so that they could eventually form into mass, when they had slowed down far enough.

The quest to understand the big-bang and dimensions, is not what we are currently doing, which is to find a reason for the singularity to expand, but is a quest to find what caused the slowdown for some elements of the singularity so that they could form structures that percieved dimension and time.

Its all an illusion, but why?

I think it has an entirely natural explanation, things tend to slow down by default. Maybe because some property of this 'superdimension' changed, and the four dimensions we know popped out of it as things slowed down.

You mean we come from a singularity in which neither room or time existed?

When E = mc^2, energy is mass. They have the same dimensions, it is just that the change (speed) in each and every dimension is switched. In a photon for instance, the time stands almost still, but the room moves. In mass, the room stands almost still but the time moves.

And if you now say that the room does not stand still for a mass, I ofcourse meant all in all. The galaxy we live in attracts itself roomly, as the photon attracts itself timely, what I mean by that is that the photon bends space and have size, so it bends itself doesn't it? just like a galaxy does in room. So a photon could be a galaxy. But if it is a galaxy then galaxies must pulse, cause the photons size surely won't shrink in long perspective right?

Can you ever believe in that?

Does anyone here want to know what the actual definition of dimension is?

The spatial dimensions are length, height and width. Rest is time. And you know, the others.

Neutralino

What exists on paper does not necassarily exist in reality.
These kind of puzzles are not realistic.
Can you construct a physical equivalent?

NS

I like to think of a sphere as a uni-directional object, that is it has only 'radius'. I know that's gonna be difficult for you to imagine. Ever thought we might have got it wrong from the start? - we are a 1 dimensional universe. we talk about 'Length breadth and width' but what about all the other directions in between?

Maybe it's one and not three, then time is another dimension, space another, gravity another, etc.

If you can bring yourselves to accept this, then I can see that black holes might exist...

Doesn't matter. Call gravity whatever you like.

Vektors are still vektors, coordinates are still coordinates. Gravity has atleast four coordinates, without coordinates in gravity, the gravity can't tell you were you are. you choose which coordinates you use (all in 90 degree angle to eachother), and you never need more coordinates then what we call dimensions of one object in relation to another to calculate the distance between them (dimensions defined as such). God is a totaly different thing, not to confuse with dimensions. Gravity change the coordinates and more importantly has dimensions. But I would agree that both dimensions and gravity is important.

You allready know what I think, that our visible universe is merely some photons.
that h in hf is merely a measure of how small an energy can be for a part of it to be unable to escape a certain distance under any circumstances. For instance, the fastest speed is still light speed, and only photons move in that speed through room (not counting mass moving through time in the speed of light, c why the fourth dimension is also called i*c*t)
So if it can escape which we know it can, it has escaped pretty long. but if the universe would bang again because of the mass dissapearence in the electron, then they would have to dissapear by themselves in some way. Probably because of the photon being an electromagnetic wave and the momentum becoming zero when the mass becomes zero. And I don't believe some spaceship would get further then the big bang itself, even if they are a bit on the way.

I hope you agree with the first part.