# Zero Dimension

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Mickmeister, May 17, 2007.

1. ### Big ChillerRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,106
A mathematical point represents zero dimension (sort of) but it cannot be said to be a continuum then it wouldn't be zero dimension.

3. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
Oh good grief.
If you have a point (zero dimensions) in which direction does it logically extend?
Any and all.
No one mentioned "continuum".

5. ### Big ChillerRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,106
Mathematicians may see it that way but I am curious, how about you? Do you believe the point extends in all physical directions and if it does how is it zero dimension ?

7. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
Er, clue...
I'm the one pointing out the meaning.
I'm a design engineer: it's a given.
From a point you can extend in any direction you wish to get a line.

8. ### Big ChillerRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,106
How are physical directions any different from the dimensions?

9. ### Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
Everything breaks down to spherical, so I think that this is just a mind game.

10. ### arfa branecall me arfValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,711
Easy. A position vector at (0,0,0) doesn't extend anywhere because it has no magnitude. But a vector also has direction. For the 0-vector this is undefined or "anywhere you like". Something like infinity being a number that's either as large as you like, or larger.

11. ### Big ChillerRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,106
Clearly only the mathematical point is known to represent zero dimension.
Nothing outside mathematics.

12. ### Me-Ki-GalBannedBanned

Messages:
4,634
wow . Interesting thought . They say that god makes one and the devil makes two. Anybody ever heard that ? A whacked out crazy psychiatrist told Me that( not Q. ) A long time ago . Crazy from Portland ! His kids were rebuilding motors in cars at the age of 6 . He said his wife's pussy was always wet and your wife's should be too. Can you believe the things people that call them selves Professionals will tell an audience. He was a real doctor is the thing . I don't know why he had to brag about his wife's , well you know ( do I have to say it again ) Wet pussy.
Zero dimension ? Is that like when you don't get any . Non existent so to speak? If there is a point ? Don't the point exist and there for is no longer zero dimension. So can a point really even be zero dimension ? I would think it would be no point ? After all if you got a point you typically spit it out and if it really is a point it expands into all kinds of dementia. Like rumors . Rumor has it.

13. ### Me-Ki-GalBannedBanned

Messages:
4,634
wow ! I get it . It is like a circle . A circle inside the circle . You know I always thought of layout as in 3 points . From there you could lay out anything . Lately I been thinking about 1 point layout and everything is measured from that one point . You got all directions ! Unlimited . I have not tried it yet . 3 point reference gives you a good space interpretation for cross checking . I don't know what the cross check would be . Just the one point I guess . I did build that milking facility all coming off the hub now that I think about it . Yeah the hub was god now that it is coming back ( Fuckers making Me think about building ) Everything was measured off that single point . What do you know ? It worked. You can wash the cow shit out like nothing you ever seen too. That is Aussie stuff at work for yeah all . Aussies come up with that stuff ! Mind bending Milking equipment. Touching 456 cows a day 3 times . Can't tell you how many titties that is

14. ### river

Messages:
11,058
because in the physical reality of things

zero dimensions means nothing

since physical dimensions have three fundamental dimensions associated with physical manifestation

15. ### Big ChillerRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,106
Zero dimensions does not necessarily mean nothing it can be asserted to mean nothing, it can be thought of as a kind of infinity without physical directions.

16. ### arfa branecall me arfValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,711
Or, you could think of it as a kind of physical position with an infinity of directions.

Since infinity isn't "physical" I guess your definition might fly--but not physically.
The thing about vectors is, any single vector can be a composition of an infinite number of other vectors. Thus, by backwards induction the 0-vector is an infinity of vectors whose composition has scalar product = 0 but whose composition of directions doesn't vanish, since how could you know which directions cancel each other (there are an infinite number of pairs of vectors to sum over)?

17. ### Big ChillerRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,106
That is the mathematical abstraction referencing the mathematical infinity.

Last edited: Oct 14, 2011
18. ### wellwisherBannedBanned

Messages:
5,160
A point is an example of 0-D. It defines the origin of higher dimensions, but it of itself does not define any direction, length, width or depth or combinations thereof.

An interesting concept are fractional dimensions such as 0.5-D. Based on the concept of fractional dimensions, 1-D would be an infinite line such as an axis on a graph which extends to infinity (---->). As the length of this axis becomes finite instead of infinite, the line becomes <1-D. When the line finally shrinks all the way to a point we get 0-D.

19. ### AlphaNumericFully ionizedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
6,697
That is not the definition of a non-integer dimension.

A square is 2 dimensional because if you scale all lengths by a factor $\lambda$ then its area scales by $\lambda^{2}$. Likewise a cube is 3 dimensional because it would scale like $\lambda^{3}$. Something which is non-integer dimensional would scale by some value inbetween. See the Wiki page on Fractal dimensions.

20. ### wellwisherBannedBanned

Messages:
5,160
I was not talking about fractals but perceptual dimensions. For example, a small finite line and an infinite line are both considered 1-D, but the small finite line is closer to a point than it is to an infinite line in terms of perception, with a point define as 0-D. It would make more sense to define that small finite line something <1 but >0 .

Say we had something like a relief drawing, where the drawing is primarily in 2-D but parts of it have some extension in 3-D space. It would be more descriptive to call it 2.6-D. This would tell us something about its ratio of 2-D to 3-D making it easier to percieve in the mind.

Say we had a 3-D drawing on a flat piece of paper. We call it 3-D but it is really on a plane so it is 2-D. But that would lead to confusion since we are trying to express 3-D. We might call that 2.3-D. At 2.5-D and over we get relief drawing but at 2.5-D or less it is on a plane but done with shadowing.

Last edited: Oct 18, 2011
21. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
Incorrect. By defintion it's 2D.

Also incorrect.
A drawing is 2D (although the thickness of the graphite [pencil line] makes it 3D).

Also incorrect.

Please, go look up the the definitions.

As is often the case you're confusing appearance with reality.

Last edited: Oct 19, 2011
22. ### StryderKeeper of "good" ideas.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
13,101
One other factor missed is in 3D drawing/Modelling a cube is made up of Vertices (Vertex) which are angle points that are represented in either three dimensions based upon a Cartesian system or utilise engine placement through matrix mathematics (usually applied for animation sequences through refreshing, when moving the camera view in relationship to an objects placement). In all cases the points themselves contain at least three dimensions (in the Matrix model there is actually a fourth entity applied as a control.)

There is also relative placement of the centre of a model to the centre of the world that the model is applied.

Therefore a point in those environment's contains more than one dimension for it's placement. (in fact the central 0,0,0 radix of a Cartesian system still contains the zero or null values to define it's initial placement)