Why three dimensions?

[Leto Atrides]

We'll have to explain you a long lesson regarding some Tesseract, 4th dimensional objects, geometry and relativily

So, look it on a science book.

Though, when you get into 4 dimensional objects, like hypercubes, you're not technically using time as your 4th dimension, you're assuming a fourth spatial dimension.

 

[Leto Atrides]

If we could move faster then the speed of light in the oposite direction of the speed of light we could travel back in time

In all seriousnes, someone needs to get on top of that.

 

[Corinthian™]

Though, when you get into 4 dimensional objects, like hypercubes, you're not technically using time as your 4th dimension, you're assuming a fourth spatial dimension.

Geomethrically speaking yes.

Mathematically speaking, no.

Have you tried to figure out a figure with a formula of x^4 + 3x^2 + 34x - 7?

It's really hard to translate from that to a figure.

 

[Leto Atrides]

Geomethrically speaking yes.

Mathematically speaking, no.

Have you tried to figure out a figure with a formula of x^4 + 3x^2 + 34x - 7?

It's really hard to translate from that to a figure.

Yeah, I was basically picturing one of these:

And those problems do take forever.

 

[Sentinel X]

Think of dimensions as axes, or lines, that you you can move along. You can move forward and back, that's on dimension. Left and right, that is the second one. Up and down is the third. (Note: the first 3 are interchangable. Up and down can be first if you want, doesn't matter). In the same way, time is a dimension, because you can only move forward or back. There is no sideways in time, just like in the first.

Movement in time is more limited; we can (as far as we know) only move at a set rate, and only forward. But still, it is a direction in which we move.

Yeah thats how I always thought it was, I took Pre Cal this year and we dealt with some x y z axis problems.

I get the whole movent idea along with demension and time but I dont why theyd classify that as a demension, I get what they mean and all now but still..

 

[Leto Atrides]

I'm not too good with the details, but I think when you get in to the whole space-time thing, time can interact with the first 3 dimensions in similar ways that they can interact with each other.

 

[Colossal Spoons]

We don't live in 3 dimensions, we just see in 3 dimensions.

Exactly. Look up "hypercubes" or "tesseracts"

Ill take physics next year

I learned about 4-D worlds in the summer class I'm taking now: Time Travel; which is based off of metaphysics.

 

[Abaddon]

so yeah,anyways...

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Some scientists believe we live in 36 dimensional space with the bottom 4 and top 28 out of our range of perception.

 

[FunBobPants]

If we could move faster then the speed of light in the oposite direction of the speed of light we could travel back in time

 

[8Ball2/JanG5]

The universe isn't 3D. We can move freely in 3 of them, sense 4, and there are others that we don't percieve. Dimensions are essentially just axes of direction (forward and back, left and right, up and down, forward and back in time, etc).

And the "multiverse" concept doesn't have anything to do with dimensionality (at least not in the sense you're saying). A multiverse is a concept involving quantum mechanics. Different particle wave-form collapses form their own constantly-splitting variant universes, thereby having an infinite number of universes, one for every outcome of every possibility.

I'm not sure if it was what you meant, but it bugs the crap out of me when people think dimesions are places or something. "It's an alien from another dimension!" etc.

According to current string theory studies in subatomic particles, there is 11 main dimensions rather than the traditional (post-eisenstein) 4.

 

[Cyclops]

It's three dimensions because that's the way we are able to interpret the world around us. It's how we choose to define it. If we chose to define it in more or less, then there would be more or less. Plain and simple.

 

[Dark Phantom]

If we could move faster then the speed of light in the oposite direction of the speed of light we could travel back in time

According to H.G Wells and Einstein, its technically only possible to time travel into the future by moving faster than the speed of light. There's no way of reaching back to a specific point in the past. Only the future.

i know you were joking, but there are others who are too oblivious and ignorant

 

[ScottyBBadd]

...Can someone tell me if what he just said made any sense whatsoever?

Not really.

 

[Manic]

According to current string theory studies in subatomic particles, there is 11 main dimensions rather than the traditional (post-eisenstein) 4.

Why 11? Can't we just increase the output of the 10th dimension?

 

[Danalys]

According to H.G Wells and Einstein, its technically only possible to time travel into the future by moving faster than the speed of light. There's no way of reaching back to a specific point in the past. Only the future.

i know you were joking, but there are others who are too oblivious and ignorant

i though you would get time dilation instead, flight of the navigator style. is there something about breaching c which stops or reverses time dilation.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

We all know that I loathe Christianity, but DUH, if there weren't some rubies dispersed in there with the horse-s*** it wouldn't've taken off.

This thread reminds me of Romans 1:22

"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"


We're 3-Dimensional creatures. That's why we are.
Maybe after we die we level-up to the 4th dimension, and meet all of those sex-crazed Reptilians who slurp menstrual blood.

 

[Danalys]

heh ironic. ever seen a truely 2d object in 3d space wilhelm? no, because you can't. everything in the universe exists in all the dimentions of the universe. we only percieve 4 of them as was said before. close one eye and keep your head still and you'll see this world in 2d. doesn't change the world tho just the perception of it.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

heh ironic. ever seen a truely 2d object in 3d space wilhelm? no, because you can't. everything in the universe exists in all the dimentions of the universe. we only percieve 4 of them as was said before. close one eye and keep your head still and you'll see this world in 2d. doesn't change the world tho just the perception of it.

I KNOW!
That's what I'm SAYING!

Also, if you're going to pretend to be more perceptive, puh-LEASE take the time to check your spelling. I mean,...just for me.

People that never bothered to learn how to spell really chaff my hide.

This post of yours was particularly painful for me.

 

[Corinthian™]

Why 11? Can't we just increase the output of the 10th dimension?

Because we don't know what the other 7 dimensions are exactly. We just *think* we know that they are there...

 

[Danalys]

spellings boring. too much memorisation of specifics for my liking. also it breaks it's own rules. i'd much prefer a phonetic writing system. also that wasn't what you were saying. unless you didn't signal a joke as one. or you could have been refering to the first post only.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Seriously, it's so helpful (most of the time).
" "I" before "E" except after "C".



Am I the only one here that cherishes the beauty of the interface,...between our consciousnesses?

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

spellings boring.

No. Arrogant displays of ignorance are boring. We get enough of that on Skid-Row.
Knowledge is what's cool.

2 U

 

[Danalys]

still readable. infact you can get all the internal letters of word in the wrong order and it's still readable. discussing spelling to divert from the arguement is often a sign you've lost anyway.

 

[Danalys]

No. Arrogant displays of ignorance are boring. We get enough of that on Skid-Row.
Knowledge is what's cool.

2 U

it's slow methodical and always the same, just like you. sounds boring to me.