What is the 6th Dimension?

You sound like a creationist.

About 10-^15 metre. Waves do not have mass but an electron is said to be 1/1840th mass of a proton. I'm not interested in poor quality physics which says it might be one thing or the other.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Creationist is too nice a name. More like a dogmatist.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Jozen-Bo. You cannot have a U shaped one dimension string. A 1D string is just a straight line. A string has to be at least 2D to bend, because it has to move through a second dimension. 1D strings can exist but can only connect to 2D and higher strings since being 1D they can have no connections of any kind on them.

Think of the way a computer works. Thought is just like that with laid down memories which can be accessed along set paths. The more intricate the brain, the more possible paths for any thought line to run along, so the more possibilities. Machines can now see areas of the brain light up when people have emotions and some machines are getting close to mind reading on certain thoughts. Thoughts are just electro-chemical, so 3D. Nothing special. A simple computer can out think us in many respects.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Kaneda. I cannot disagree with your perception regarding your initial statement (regarding a U string)...It is correct. However, by bending that string you do not instantly get a 2 dimensional interface. It becomes something like 1.1 or 1.3 and increases to 2 as the angle gets sharper. We see this at work in the study of Chaos, where somethings such as a Lorence Attractor is defined as 1.43 dimensional (it looks like a spiral). The bending of the string in my example is the bending of the 1st dimension itself, if it is straight...it is 100% 1 dimensional, bend it a little and it is 90% 1 dimensional and 10% 2 dimensional (proportions may vary). The bridge between dimensions is quite obviously angular- we bend and curve them at angles to derive higher or lower dimensions. So we cannot say a U string is 1 dimensional and we cannot say it is 2 dimensional, it is somewhere in between. This is not my theory- it is the common knowledge of any expert in Chaos Science. If this doesn't make sense to you try studying Chaos instead of physic, it is the most advance of all the scientific fields- in fact it is the only field that glues and bonds the others together. It deserves the publicity of the spot light in searching for a unified theory.
Also, think about this...good old Albert Einstein stated that in accordance to the laws of relativity if we have a object travel through space in a perfect straight line (a 1 dimension trajectory) then after a tremendous amount of time it will return to its original coordinate in space-time...though it never bend one way or another. Its like a hyperbolic curved ring- but we never see the curves with our eyes...its hidden. Finding hidden attractors is art of learning to perceive higher dimensions, they are everywhere all around us...just look.
Also, consider this odd fact of numbers...they have a limit as to how big they can get!!! This mathmatic fact. Normally we might think that you can keep adding 1 to a number to get a bigger number forever into infinity...without ever reaching an end...but this is not so. This has been proven in accordance with the Hiesenburg Principle. We can never know what that number is or when it breaks down, but we know it will eventually breakdown...reaching a point where the numbers are so astronomicly huge they lose all signifigance and meaning, they cease to mean anything so they cease to be numbers. So then even a 1 dimension (which cannot have a beginning or an end without imposing a space around it) has inherent the characterisitics of a hyberbolic
ring, we just can't possibly know when it becomes like this...but that is does.
One last thing...how can the 1st dimension move? Adding the factor of motion
relies upon something beyond this. The dimension itself cannot move, something can move parellal with it, but even if it where a point we now need
to expand our picture to include describing its operation of motion. The 1st dimension is not something we can pick up and carrying around, it has no location to begin with.

Unfortunately, we do not have access to our memories via machines because we cannot even find them, science hasn't done that. We still barely understand them or how they truely work. But if you have proof otherwise, I am more then eager to investigate!!! Yes, we know that they must run on patterns that look like little squiggly lines that contain pockets of unfolding information, but we can't locate or predict or extract that information in full- not even in parts enough to get pictures. We seem to be talking in spirals...another attractor...I see cycles repeating already.
"thought are just electro-chemical", so 3d. This statement is based off the idea that electrons themselves are 3d, or that all particles are 3d. It overlooks the fact that electrons and chemicals operate as waves (like the kind we can surf on)and not particles (like balls bouncing in a box) when interacting with each other. The particles are like the left-overs of wave attractions of possibility.
We are still in the process of defining even what an electron is, we don't have it figured out. We know that it is made of pairs, it has a anti-electron and if these two touch-they cancel each other out and annihlilate. We know that an electron is made from quarons and quarons from quarks. These quarks are made of coiled energy strings and they are made of little tiny rings-0-that vibrate and pulsated in many dimensions all at once. These rings themselves are multi-dimensional- not 3d. There is also a fractal interface at work, again not 3d. With all the characteristics, we cannot possibly describe an electron or a chemical process with the mere variables of up/down, left/right, and forward/backward. Its already gotten more complicated then that.
But, let's go further...these 'particles' only can be seen as such in a single instantaneous moment without time. That is Heisenburg principle knowledge. Throw in time and we have a wave. Stranger still is the knowledge of particle intaglement, where to particles come into contact with each other,
become entangled as 1, exchange all vibratory patterns of knowledge, and then seperate. From that point on they are always one, when knew patterns of information enter one then the other is instantaneous effects no matter how far apart they are- this is faster then the speed of light- its instant.
How can we possibly use mere 3-dimensional thinking to explain that? We can't.
These are the facts. It is rather naive to think that electrons are 3rd dimensional. The 3rd dimension is the space around (and in) these multi-dimension bits of life-energy that accommodates them.

To say it is "nothing special", I can understand how with this attitude one might not have enough interest to fully grasp the entirety of the variables. All knowledge is very very special, it is intimate.

A computer can out think us in many ways, but we possess far superior sensory equipment. A computer cannot see the waves of images rotating on a spin- optical cameras work on intervals not nearly as in sink with the flow of time as our own human eye. Try taking a bicycle, spinning the wheel so fast that you see the counter-spin images waving past, and then film it. You won't catch that with camera. We have something computers don't- but most certaintly would if they could. Orgasms!!! We feel, see, hear, smell, and taste
better then any computer. This is only discussing our senses for perceive the external world. We have 5 other senses that we use to perceive the inner world as well.

Kaneda, your thinking and this is good...perhaps you possess the stuff to tap
the brilliance that is all around you- thus becoming brilliant. I hope so. But you cannot take any bit of knowledge for granted in order to do this- it is a sacred gift- treasure it and cherish it and it will illuminate you. It is no mistake
that as a human you posses a mind that can be filled with living knowledge to an extent beyond that of a fish.
I think you can do it- I'm very optimistic.

 

The main problem with Dimensions is someone will hear a specific number of dimension and then invent meaning to them. This is more observable with people that have dominant left hemispheres which is usually attributed to artists. In certain neurological conditions, a person might do something without thinking about it and then have a dominant left hemisphere make up some reason why it was done.

If people truly want to learn about the number of dimensions then just do a search for various reference material, however be prepared for a lot of conflicting information on the subject, especially from 'freely provided' information which is usually written by people that 'make stuff up'.

 

"Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out" - Richard Feynman

 

''The main problem with Dimensions is someone will hear a specific number of dimension and then invent meaning to them. ''

Hello Stryder,
The problem u are referring to generally occures when we try to understanding the nature of dimensions beyond the 3rd. What are they like? How do they play into what is phenomena? What do they mean for an individual and a collective? The dimensions 0-3 are generally understood through a censensus of concsiousness and there certainly is a meaning to/within linearity, planar, and spatial reality. This understanding helps us to understand other things in parellal to the ideas of of these dimensions. Linear math function, linear thinking, etc.
I do believe u got ur brain hemispheres confused. It is the right brain hemisphere that is creative and artisic. Just look anywhere on the internet, for Example:

(((Right Brain vs. Left Brain

Definition
This theory of the structure and functions of the mind suggests that the two different sides of the brain control two different "modes" of thinking. It also suggests that each of us prefers one mode over the other.
Discussion
Experimentation has shown that the two different sides, or hemispheres, of the brain are responsible for different manners of thinking. The following table illustrates the differences between left-brain and right-brain thinking:


Left Brain
Logical
Sequential
Rational
Analytical
Objective
Looks at parts

Right Brain
Random
Intuitive
Holistic
Synthesizing
Subjective
Looks at wholes

Most individuals have a distinct preference for one of these styles of thinking. Some, however, are more whole-brained and equally adept at both modes. In general, schools tend to favor left-brain modes of thinking, while downplaying the right-brain ones. Left-brain scholastic subjects focus on logical thinking, analysis, and accuracy. Right-brained subjects, on the other hand, focus on aesthetics, feeling, and creativity.))))
-The writing in brackets is not my own- go anywhere on the internet and see: right=creative, left=logical...etc.


''If people truly want to learn about the number of dimensions then just do a search for various reference material, however be prepared for a lot of conflicting information on the subject,''

I certianly agree with this...we must look at as many angles as possible until we get a clear picture. Also, entering deep states of meditation can be tremendously helpful, as well of looking at as many different patterns as possible. Also...we need to utualize both hemispheres if we are to have any chance at all at understanding the truth of the nature of dimensions.

 

Go to this page. It will explain all 10 dimensions to you in an understandable format.

 

superluminal. Silly boy. An open mind does not mean an open head.

 

The speed of my internet was slower than my interest in that site so I gave up on it. Ten physical dimensions aren't hard to imagine. Only so if you go off into funny and unnecessary shapes. But why do we need more than three physical dimensions? Certainly strings can work well in 1,2 and 3 dimensions.

 

Jozen-Bo. A 1D string is a perfectly straight line. Add anything to it and it is no longer a 1D string. For a line to curve, it must have a 2D or 3D component. The same to have any add-ons of any kind. I did have a discussion about this with someone on another forum but his mind was so locked into what his text book said that he could not see something as basic as that a 1D string cannot bend.

I'm not sure I think strings exist anyway, as people think of strings. I see them more as folds in space itself.

For something to be able to travel in a straight line and get back on itself needs a four physical dimension sphere on which our 3D universe is like a skin so that it is like drawing a line around a ball and getting back to the starting point. However, Einstein, Hawking and others have yet to explain how space can expand in a four physical dimensional manner.

I would think that an electron is a basic particle with no internal structure of other particles, like a proton has.

Entanglement is spinning one particle up, another down so you get the equivalwent of (say) 1. Then if you measure one, you know the other, whether you measure it there or at the other end of the universe. Spooky memory.

We can equip a computer with what is necessary, certainly eyes better than ours which can see in all spectrums, a nose that is nearly as good as a dog's, hearing far better, taste is a bit of a problem and touch far more sensitive than ours. Could you learn a new language in a minute like a computer can? Or a new skill just as fast? Could you remember thousands of books instantly? Or find a single word in a whole book? Can you communicate trillions of bits of information in seconds? Can you even remember what you was doing this time yesterday?

A fish has the most minimal intelligence and is said to have a memory lasting only seconds. were it not almost "fully automatic", it would die almost immediately.

 

Really?

Well, simple statements like this, in the face of one of the most mathemetically challenging theories ever devised, are a bit egocentric, wouldn't you say?

And no, they can't. In order for the propertes of the known particles to emerge, typically 11 dimensions are required for string theory to work.

 

superluminal. Yes, really.

Quantum trickery is just like magic. it needs a lot of hocus pocus to make people believe it is clever and is impossible, despite being just a mundane illusion.

 

Ok genius, spill it. Explain all of the known phenomena of particles and light with your super-dooper theory, just as good (perfectly so far) as QM and QED.

Then explain how Bell's inequalities are wrong and all quantum phenomena are really purely local.

Go!

 

Kaneda. ''A 1D string is a perfectly straight line.''

Even something so simple as a 1 dimensional string can be hard to fully understand. For example, in order for there to be a line there has to be something outside of the line that distinguishes it from the line. What ever that is, it has to be above, below, and on both sides of the line. If it can't be distinguished than we don't have a line. Lets put it another way...if we draw a white line on a white peice of paper...we won't see the line. If the paper is black then the line is can be distinguished. This statement neither agrees nor disagrees with ur own, because its simply another angle of observation.

''I'm not sure I think strings exist anyway, as people think of strings. I see them more as folds in space itself.''

If I am correct...then strings neither exist nor do they not exist. Seing them as folds might work if we see those folds as a whirlpool of compression and expansion, where the 'line' is the equilibrial center of the whirl. But now we are begining to mix things up...the whirling arms are curved space folding itself into or out of a line (of compressed space)- and as I visilize this in my mind...I am remind of the several hundred pictures of light people have devised to try and explain its shape and motion.
There is something here...as we can imagine that water in a bathtub is like space and the drain pipe is the line. Then the whirlpool is where the water compresses towards a smaller space; it takes on the form of a whirl because this allows more space to be compacted then any of shape.

''However, Einstein, Hawking and others have yet to explain how space can expand in a four physical dimensional manner.''
No they haven't!!!

''I would think that an electron is a basic particle with no internal structure of other particles, like a proton has.''
An electron can be compared to a photon- they are roughly they same size and contain both an electric feild and a magnetic feild fused from oppossite polarities. I will return to this subject later, as my time is limited right now.

''Entanglement is spinning one particle up, another down so you get the equivalwent of (say) 1.''
Cool, isn't it?

''We can equip a computer with what is necessary, certainly eyes better than ours which can see in all spectrums'',

OK...u got me! A computer can moniter and record the quantities of change far better then we can...but can a computer have an ORGASM? I would much rather be an orgasmic creature then I would a numb one...even if the price is pain and death. Don't get me wrong...I love computers and suspect that they are somehow consious and alive...considering how they process electricity. If computer mechanisms are developed in the future that can feel the quality as well as the quantity (can feel pain and pleasure) then given a chance they will probobly become curious as to how to accumulate more pleasure and avoid more pain. Giving a computer emotional aspects will certainly slow down and confuse it, dealing with emotions is not so easy as dealing with logic.


''A fish has the most minimal intelligence and is said to have a memory lasting only seconds.''
Yesterday I was at work and set aside alot of time to look at over 300 different sites to look for the symmetry of colors. I have nearly every picture I examined logged into my access banks of memory. I drank 4 cups of coffee, ate a chocalate santa, had pork-salad-mashed pototoes for dinner. I drew some pictures and then I had sex with my wife before drawing more picture of my own and then going to sleep. Yes...I can remember almost every detail of yesterday, I have to go back much, much further before memories become distorted.
In order to properly operate my invention of the Mind Portal Wheel Calendar I have to record and convert everything I do into a geometric encrypted code-using shapes-numbers-and-colors to mix and compound. The mere act of doing this helps to lock in the memories and causes me to live the past as much as the present and future- I can still hear what others told me echoing with every day before. I even had the clear memory of being born out of my mother one day while sitting on a bus-a flash back. I've had flash backs that go even further back than being born.
I must apoligize...words will never capture the essence of the experience of traveling in the Mind Portal. Its like a non-virgin trying to explain what an orgasm is like to a virgin. U have to do it yourself or u will never understand what it really is. I will extend on offer to U-Kaneda...I can e-mail u the basic print and leave it to u to build ur own wheel- as the mind portal is a physical thing u can touch and look at and spin (mastery of this Portal gives u a virtual reality of space within ur mind- like the holodeck in star trek!!!!...but u are going into ur mind)...as well as something more then that-it merges the intangible with the tangible!!! If U accept then U would then be an insider with access to something that the general public will not have access to until my initial expirement is over. (then again...I might change my mind and release this Portal to the market much sooner then my original intention).

 

Mickmeister. ''Go to this page. It will explain all 10 dimensions to you in an understandable format.''

I have seen this page and found it of interest. It agrees with my own theory that all the dimensions close into themselves as they open up simultaneously. It focuses on perceiving a relative universe of motion and time. How do we explain dimensions if we remove the element of relativity, motion, change, or time??? In an absolute Universe there is no time, motion, or change- it is absolved in the absolution of Everything! Perhaps we need a Polor model that unites the Absolute with the Relative- veiwing the dimensions of motion, change, time and the dimensions of space, form, preservation. We would then want to show how these two are connected.

If U can explain the symetry of color I would love to hear this- as well as the symmetry of dimensions. Why?...because if the supposed princple that ''for ever action there is an opposite and equal reaction'' is true- then even these two things must contian symmetry. If either one of them doesn't...then the statement is not true and a magor backbone of scientific thought must be re-evaluated.

 

I'm sorry ? A one-dimensional object ? lol

 

As a pioneer in modern scientific research, I find this topic of discussion fairly unintelligent and irrelevant on various arguments.

 

As a pioneer in modern inanity research, I have to agree.

 

Enmos. A line stretching in one dimension but having only length, with no width or breadth. I would call it a fold in space.