Another Dimension:thought

That's right Ankit.Our thought is what we think about the reality around us and ,sometimes, it goes down to history because we change it (reality) or turn it into something else.
So you are pretending that not only ourselves could do the job but other stuff that would help us at any field.But we have to see that we first do the trick so the other things or whatever you want to call it act.
 
reality

Just a thought.... If your individual reality is based on your perception of what you as an individual perceive.

Then that must mean reality is mutiple by design.

LOsT ?????
ok... listen up..

If you and I both looked at a cup of coffee on a teak table in a room with possibly pink curtains...

I may see a hot coffee on a pretty table, near pretty pink curtains.

But you may scan the room quickly and only see a gastly mistake.... a coffee cup with no coaster on a genuine teak table ..... coffee staining this classic master peice . ... meanwhile ..you didnt even perceive that there were curtains in the room... hence...they will not become part of your peception nor reality in your mind.

Now in saying this .... both parties may argue at a later date ...about the certainty of curtains in the room....
I say yes definately .
YOu say No definately not ,after all you saw the room too.

both perceptions were based on the reality perceived as individuals with different perceptions of the same senario...... so who's reality is correct ..........and in who's mind?

If each persons reality is based on his or her own perception...and your perception differs from mine then basically reality is different for everybody..thus making reality multiple by design , with no one reality being the true and correct one


cheers:confused:
 
razz ...

I'm confused by your example.

I don't see where one's perception of reality, and the values one attributes to
the perception, has anything to do with the 'reality' of the room. The room is
the same regardless (ex. if a picture had been taken at the time) of how each
of the individuals preceive it.

Take care and welcome aboard Sciforums.
 
Thoughts

I see we have all fallen into the "tree falling in a forest" trap again. Well, Chagur sensibly admitted that the room (your "paradigm") is the same regardless. I mostly agree with that, but he's assuming that whatever the camera sees is "reality" (whatever the hell that is).

For example, a camera doesn't see air, we don't see air, but it's there. Having said that, Razz's example is needlessly complex. Basically, he's trying to say that if two people looked at a painting, they would have different perceptions (Freudian diagrams, for example). :eek:

Philosophically, reality is different for everyone. For example, two people hear the same news, one may react with remorse, the other with depression. Because the values that people place on different elements (things, basically, like violence) govern their reactions and feelings. Thus, if they feel a certain way, their philosophy reflects that.

To be continued....

;)
 
reality

Chagur... you wrote...
..................................................................................................
(I don't see where one's perception of reality, and the values one attributes to the perception, has anything to do with the 'reality' of the room.
The room is the same regardless (ex. if a picture had been taken at the time) of how each of the individuals preceive it. )
..................................................................................................

The above statement is your opinion (wich i respect )and you make some great points, I used a bad example for my theory and for this i apologise.
Even so, as someone else pointed out ,
I am expected to trust a picture as proof of reality?

how can you prove a 2 dimensional picture can varify, and clarify
multi dimensional reality.

ufo freaks have been trying to use pictures as proof of reality for donkeys years, only to be shot down by the scientific community repeatedly, to many factors can influence a photograph.

...take as many pictures as you like, but the perception of those looking at this image/ picture you talk of , will still perceive the veiwed image differently, thus altering individual reality.

more to the point..
how is reality defined in the first place?
like it or not reality cant be defined without utilising your own perception.

Kind of like in this instance...does chicken taste the same to you as it does to me.
If so ...prove it.

you read, comprehend, study or educate yourself about what you believe to be factual by "YOUR PERCEPTION" of information made available to you.
nomatter what the medium...
so how can you be sure that "YOUR PERCEPTION" of all you aknowledge is correct ?
Your education for instance...is based on others, multiple perceptions, opinions and theories, wich i might add are ever changing, and diposable.

In my Uneducated opinion..Reality doesnt exist, its merely peception verses personal opinion etc, rolled into a conciousness i call..
MY REALITY.

We each have our own reality, thus making reality multiple by design.

cheers



ps: thankyou to those of you who take the time to post on these threads, i have learnt alot.
You guys n gals have opened my mind to various new theories and possiblities, that have allowed me to grow as a person.

lets just hope you lot dont open my mind to much as to allow my brain to fall out. lol :D
 
razz ...

Good point: "how can you prove a 2 dimensional picture can varify, and
clarify multi dimensional reality."

Take a stereoptic picture?

Take care ;)
 
I thought of this the other day, I realised that when you see something that could of happened if you hadn't have taken a different route could actually be a completely different reality.

For instance, you could say that if I hadn't of gone to work late you wouldn't have been hit by a snowball from your neighbour, you imagine that if you had been early they wouldn't have hit you.
That thought is some parallel universe that has been defined by your thoughts perhaps.

(Afterall the entire composition of an atom is just matrices of energy and photon mechanics, you could actually look at atoms being a mergence of highly sped photons, so we are like solid holograms.)
<CENTER>First there was light</CENTER>
Click to expand...

(I'm sure Tony1 knows that quote)
 
Notes from a mathematician

We are entering "chaos theory" territory here, methinks. Chaos Theory is perhaps the most encompassing stipulation in mathematics EVER. Depending on your view, Relativity Theory can be an easier theory to work in than this...

Chaos Theory is a branch of applied mathematics based on the fact that seemingly irregular, unpredictable phenomena can arise from the sensitivity of some well-defined differential equations (I know what you're thinking) to small changes in their initial conditions. Chaos theory promises applications in many areas, for example in fluid turbulence and in meteorology.
Quantum physics is somewhat of a son, if you will, of chaos theory.

Chaotic behaviour is not random behaviour, since current conditions are still linked to future conditions (Laplacian determinism), but the future is only predictable on a limited scale. Chaotic systems do not repeat themselves exactly, but they often behave in a loosely recurrent fashion. This explains why short-term weather forecasts can be upwards of 80% accurate, but long-term forecasts can be wildly imprecise.:rolleyes: :p

Originally, the theory was introduced to describe unpredictability in meteorology, as exemplified by the butterfly effect. It has been suggested that the dynamical equations governing the weather are so sensitive to the initial data that whether or not a butterfly flaps its wings in one part of the world may make the difference between a tornado occurring or not occurring in some other part of the world. Chaos theory has subsequently been extended to other branches of science; for example to turbulent flow, planetary dynamics, and electrical oscillations in physics, and to combustion processes and oscillating reactions in chemistry. You might wanna check out "attractors" and "fractals".

Another topic being courted here is of quantum parallel worlds..well, currently, work is being undertaken to create quantum computers that send information to computers apparently in "other worlds". ", which can be infinite, so the time taken for calculations is zero, which is paradoxic in itself.

O, the webs we weave...
 
This explains why short-term weather forecasts can be upwards of 80% accurate, but long-term forecasts can be wildly imprecise
Click to expand...

It may be due to the multiple variables that affect at micro and macro level with each a small subsystem itself. Together they act differently over time. Like a noise which has all frequencies present simultaneously. Some are long waves and some are short waves.

There is an investment company (I read in Forbes, I think) that uses Chaotic behaviour of the stock market to predict various stock futures. EU just bought a massive computer from IBM to predict weather in Europe.

Too many variables....
 
Originally posted by Hevene
Alpha

I'm not sure how many dimensions we have now, but there's certainly a few. It's all a matter of fitting them together to find the Superstring Theory.
Click to expand...
Superstring theory (and M-Theory) predict 11 dimensions: 10 space, and 1 time.
 
Currently, there's no exact answer to the number of dimensions since there's always something missing in each one.
 
I wonder if there is only one Time dimension or for each 4 dimesions, time is independent such that each one will be 90 degrees out of phase to each other - in the 5 - dimensional space.
 
Originally posted by Hevene
Currently, there's no exact answer to the number of dimensions since there's always something missing in each one.
Click to expand...
Actually M-Theory predicts the number of dimensions in the universe. It actually requires that there be 11 dimensions.
 
I think I've come up with a way to explain multiple dimensions a bit better, and give you some visual explaination.:

lets say you have a ship in space at a particular time, that you log its positioning down in 4 Dimensions.

Time
Height ,Width , Lengh

You decide that the craft is journeying across space, But since space doesn't rely upon a polar position to judge direction, you have to work with a 3 Dimension Grid space to pinpoint any given position.

Below is an example, The first input on the Left is for the first Timespace Node and the input on the Right is that of the Timespace Node at a given Time point.

Code: 
     12:00       >>>        12:10  
40 , 200 , 70    >>>   25 , 225 , -80

(The Above can be percieved as 7 Dimensional)

It shows that there are 3 Dimensions for each Node (The spacial postioning of the craft) and 1 Time dimension for each (Although time gets called a constant, and it singularly exists in both Nodes)

The perception of spacial existance between these Nodes is what would be refered to as Spacetime.

To percieve 11 Dimensions you could use the above and add an extra node, e.g.

Code: 
     12:00       >>>        12:10       >>>     12:20
40 , 200 , 70    >>>   25 , 225 , -80   >>>  3 , 90 , -100

So how do you get 11 dimensions???
Well you have 3 dimensions for each node (9 in total), again you have a Time dimension, but it's now split into 2 Legs (12:00 > 12:10 and 12:10 > 12:20), add the 9 and the 2 together and you get 11.

[Please note:
My coordinates aren't in any particular size, and do not really follow any particular trajectory, but you could work out speed etc from them.

Also there are other pieces of information that can be added to further the dimensional analyse, but they usually reference to a polar positioning system rather than a coordinate one.]
 
Tedman,

I doubt that you can consider a primitive mesh of interconnected neurons a dimension. After all, dimensions are independent of each other. That's what makes them dimensions. And no complex form, including the human brain, can create a dimension. Now, whether the brain, through billions of years of evolution, has actually connected itself to a dimension that already existed, that's something to consider.

Tom
 
I was talking about the fact that all living thing in the entire universe(considering that we are not alone) can see the reality in a different way than the others do. Now that we are taking a dimension as idependent thats the best example because nobody has the same opinion to say.

Let me clarify that not only thought does the trick but the whole package needed that only life can provide. Yes...the universe and we have adapted each other. Somehow , we will inherit and harness it.Don't you think guys.

Tedman, I am the same:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top