Exploring Dimensions and Reflections: A Unified Perspective

[kbingh64]

It is a science website, so we have to be tough.

Just a quick browse in wiki should give him better ideas, takes two minutes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension

Recognize the below avatar? I will be sending them a strongly worded e-mail!

https://phys.org/news/2025-01-mars-marsquakes-revealed.html

From a technical perspective, there is essentially only one linear dimension, and that is length. Width and height are, in fact, also lengths. When we refer to spatial dimensions where Length, Width, and Height are multiples of each other, the concept of the fourth dimension becomes a multiple of the three-dimensional space.

Interestingly, mirrors can be used to replicate properties of four-dimensional space and beyond. For example, if we could perceive in three dimensions, we would be able to see both the front and back of objects simultaneously. In a mirror, hold an object in front of a mirror. You can view the object and see the front, then look at the reflection, and you can see the back of the object at the same time, thus fulfilling a property of three-dimensional vision. Additionally, we can feel and touch things in 3D since our arms, hands, and fingers extend into 3D space. We can grasp things and feel both the front and back of objects.

Taking this concept further, visualizing the fourth dimension is akin to looking into two facing mirrors. This setup creates multiple reflections of three-dimensional space, effectively emulating the time element of the fourth dimension by repeating 3D space along a line. Although each iteration is merely a reflection, it still mimics the characteristics of four-dimensional space.

 

[(Q)]

From a technical perspective, there is essentially only one linear dimension, and that is length. Width and height are, in fact, also lengths. When we refer to spatial dimensions where Length, Width, and Height are multiples of each other, the concept of the fourth dimension becomes a multiple of the three-dimensional space.

Too bad you didn't bother taking the time to understand dimensions before posting that nonsense.

 

[DaveC426913]

From a technical perspective, there is essentially only one linear dimension, and that is length

No. From a technical perspective there are three spatial dimensions, none of which have precedence over any other. They have no particular names.

We have a bunch of unscientific labels that we apply arbitrarily depending on circumstances: length, width, height, depth, span, breadth, X, Y, Z, etc.

Just today I was looking at an Amazon package whose assembled dimensions were depth: 54", width: 21" but whose boxed dimensions were width: 54", depth: 21".

 

[Zero Point Native]

Recommended more credible by who? You?

Duh

 

[James R]

From a technical perspective, there is essentially only one linear dimension, and that is length. Width and height are, in fact, also lengths.

That's not a technical description of what a dimension is.

Look at it this way:

To uniquely specify the location of any point on a line (curved or straight), you need just one number (e.g. the distance from one end of the line). Therefore, a line is one-dimensional.

To uniquely specify the location of any point in a solid cube (for example), you need three numbers (e.g. the distance in height, length and width from one corner of the cube). Hence, a cube is three-dimensional.

If you look at a cube in a mirror, you don't add any dimensions, because you still only need three numbers to specify the location of any point inside the "cube in the mirror".

An actual example of a four-dimensional object is a hypercube (or tesseract). To uniquely specify the location of a single point in a solid hypercube, you need four numbers (e.g. the distances in four spatial dimensions from one corner of the hypercube).

Interestingly, mirrors can be used to replicate properties of four-dimensional space and beyond.

They can not.

For example, if we could perceive in three dimensions, we would be able to see both the front and back of objects simultaneously. In a mirror, hold an object in front of a mirror. You can view the object and see the front, then look at the reflection, and you can see the back of the object at the same time, thus fulfilling a property of three-dimensional vision.

What you are talking about, there is a property of light, known as reflection. Mirrors reflect light, you see.

That has nothing to do with extra dimensions.

Additionally, we can feel and touch things in 3D since our arms, hands, and fingers extend into 3D space.

More specifically, we can (if nothing is in the way), move our arms, hands or fingers to a point inside a three-dimensional space, whose coordinates can be uniquely specified using only three numbers.

Taking this concept further, visualizing the fourth dimension is akin to looking into two facing mirrors.

No. That doesn't help at all to visualise a fourth spatial dimension.

A fourth spatial dimension would lie in a direction perpendicular to all three of the "left-right", "forwards-backwards" and "up-down" directions. We can't look in that direction, if its exists.

Does this help you to understand?