Yes sir, here you go, sir. http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/dimens.html It's not actually called that, I just nicknamed it myself because it was.... erm... cool.
love your name for some reason ok, i am presenting this--so we can also look at it. haven't seen your link yet. i will Fourth Dimension www.fractalwisdom.com/FractalWisdom/fourth.html i'd forgot about fractals....!
Wow, some people can get pretty carried away when it comes to considering extra dimensions. Exactly *where* is the link between a vector perpendicular to each of the usual x, y, and z unit vectors, and consciousness, energy, or reality?
to tell u the truth, ad found it and put it here as a form of 'bookmark'. i only glanced at it yet. so am not sayin 'this is IT'.....we've a long ways to go yet
))))))like to here: www.fusionanomaly.net/dimensions.html let's keep in mind---to spose u can challoenge tis if u wish-----consciousness is not dimensional. consciousness is NOT-located. it is not a 'thing' itis rather how matter-energy feels from the inside. butis not 'inside' as say brain is inside skull
hahhhh just had quick look. seems like a bit of a KcKenna-fest. dont like it where he says matter's been 'invaded'-----always thoughyt M a bit on the Platonic side. he admitted so himself what we is saying is consciousness is ALWAYS with matter-energy. itis not INVADED by consciousness from some 'hifher dimension/levl' anway. gonna read Hurricane nagel's contribution. i will say more about othr links later please join in explore
OK, have read it. is very what i'd term 'abstracty' not much meat for the common people to grasp.....also errrr where about socalled @god dimension' did i miss it didn't like the analogy of Roman warriors standing on hills neither. but interesting and nowhere did i hear 'consciousness' 'mentioned'---i mean. ok. it says that eg., Einstein's 'time' dimensions was like a hill-lookout that allowed him, etc to see a deeper picture, and then teres about the 5th dimension guy--forgot name but i KNOW that psychedelic experience most CERTAInly is to be mentioned in this regard whats this man though is what i am wanting to research? ...its absence from such discourses as that is conspicupus. but understandable given the prohibition of it...! but i want to include it in te research
I want to ask a simple question. i dont want a mathematical answer, as such, but an observational one. If you open up the link i gave which shows the Hypercube. WHy do you think it is a VISUAL representation of 4dimensional reality on a 2D plane? what are our views about this please?
Duendy, the "god" dimension is the 11th dimension, and yes it was barely mentioned. The only thing they know is that it's curled up, and damn near invisible. I took a more scientific approach, because all this psychedelic crap that happens when you meditate/take LSD are just neurotransmitters and all that, an illusion for the brain. Meditating will make you more focused and has other positive effects I agree, but won't let you see in other dimensions. As far as seeing 4 dimensions here's some thought experiments for you; 1) A 3 dimensional cube unfolded will produce 6 squares. A 4 dimensional cube unfolded will produce 6 cubes. 2) Imagine a 3 dimensional cube held over a light, it casts a 2 dimensional shadow. A 4 dimensional cube over a light, will cast a cube as a shadow.. this one's a bit strange.
YES...thanks for that. of course. if you remember a few posts back i aid how about the plane wit shphere passing thru it? and that in that 2D example 2D prson sees 2D circles, NOt sphere? well i also nticed how reports of 'paranormal' events involve THREE D events dont they....? so doesn't tis tally with what you just said? what do you tink?
utter nonsense.... and you guys say my proposals are wacked.... come on seriously... i have given you all a clear proposal for the progression of dimensions as state of space which follows mathmatical precision preset by the values of that energy applied, where in up to 28 dimensions are considerable... and not as unimaginable intangeble things.... but as part of a natural progressive pattern in levels of 90 degree vectors forces. but... hea... i guess im just wasting my time. -MT
In your bosonic theory there exists a particle that goes faster than light, it brings the theory crashing down to a halt.
Here's what I think : 1) When nothing is decomposed, zero objects remain. One segment, when decomposed, becomes two dots. A square, when decomposed, becomes four equal segments. A cube, when decomposed, becomes six equal squares. So if you follow this pattern, a 4-D cube will decompose into eight cubes. Another way to link it up is this : a dot superimposed on one end of a segment gives 1 dot remaining, a segment superimposed on a side of a square will give 3 sides remaining, and a square superimposed on a face of a cube will give 5 other faces remaining. So the progression is 1,3,5,... 2) This is similar to projection of surfaces in vector math. Essentially the light can project up to the second dimension - in the sense that assuming parallel rays, will behave as if perpendicular membranes penetrate through the n-dimensional object leaving an imprint or puncture on the membrane. Any dimension can contain a lower dimension, so these two dimensional membranes can imprint dots (0th) or segments (1st) on them. The second dimension is the most an imprint shadow can take. Therefore, a 2-D object will cast a 2-D shadow, a 3-D object a 2-D shadow, a 4-D object a 2-D shadow, etc.
About a year or so back I ran a thought experiment and basically concluded that you cannot represent a hypercube on a two-dimensional surface.
A conclusion can be tentative, and later disproved. I have seen your link, duendy, but I am still not quite convinced that one can draw a hypercube on 2D space.
......why? you can see it. did you look? i asked a question precisely aboutnit above. i am asking what do you SEE when you look at that hypercube? just that. what do you see?
hmmmmmm alright. noones playing at lookin at hypercube i'll look then. i am emphasizing observing because i want to keep it real. i can accomadtate all the abstracty stuff, but it can get just a teeensy weeensy bit cerebreal when i look at HYPER>cube I see cube being intwo places at '''once?....at once? i am not sure or does cube change postiion veryswiftly. so quickly the image can seem to move. but aren'y we also making very quichk measurements where its position is? so before we do make rthat decision, howeve swift. i am wondering if its actual state is neither 'either' 'or'...? tis conundrum reminds me of the particle/wave in physics. there too, the experimenter also makes a 'decision' which actualizes 'position'. again wehave tis ambivalance. and the groundstate--as it were is 'Uncertain' and 'Indeterminate' and THIS reminds me of psycheDELIC observation
