Someone once told me that physicsists believe that there are 11(?) dimensions to the universe. If this is so, isn't it possible that our concept of god is really just a being from a higher dimension. Or as a friend of mine put it, 'are we god's cartoons?'
higher dimensions
- Thread starter Enigma'07
- Start date
geistkiesel
Valued Senior Member
If so, I get to be the Roadrunner, you get to be - Wily Coyote.Bammmmm!Enigma'07 said:
{Remember the time you tied a rope around your waste and tied the other end to a log spanning a deep canyon.? Ingenious. You heard me toot tootin commin' down the road, and you timed it just right. I came around the corner heading right for you, you were swinging from the rope, your spear pointed right at . . .Bammmm. The rope was about 6 feet too long. remember that one? Ouuch!}
Geistkiesel.
Enigma'07 said:
Yep, there's a therory called M-theory that proposes that there are 11 dimensions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory
With respect to your concept of god, I can't give you any insight, given that I don't have a concept of god of any kind
kriminal99
Registered Senior Member
Good god what does this mean? I can fabricate any number of dimensions I want cant I ? length, width, time, dogs, cats, hot women, Flabbergasted Poindexters , etc right?
No, the mathematics of M-theory require 11 dimensions, 7 of which are wrapped up tighter than a (undecorous analogy deleted). Somewhere down at the Planck scale I seem to remember.
HallsofIvy
Registered Senior Member
Mathematically? Sure, knock yourself out. Some problems in statistical mechanics deal in millions of dimensions (6 dimensions, x, y, z, vx, vy, vz for each particle.)kriminal99 said:
But my impression was that the original post was asking about spacial dimension in string theory.
6 actually. That 7th one is time.
Actually, string theory has been around for decades now.
Er, no. Depending on your definition of god. If by god you mean "a being worthy of worship", then to you, perhaps, but not to me. But technically God is defined as the creator of the universe, so no.
the string theory speculates that there are a number of different types of strings ,the ones that make up our matter are open ended strings that are ''tied' to our membrane which is what they call our plane of existance but the other type is like a rubber band it is a string that it's ends meet and these are not ''tied down'' and can move from our plane of existance these are gravitons which make up gravity waves so then is it possible to communicate via gravity waves with other beings on other membranes/planes of existance ,if they exist?
kriminal99
Registered Senior Member
Actually I think it makes sense to say there are more than 3 spacial dimensions at least considering the crude way we define dimensions.
Imagine a 2 dimensional coordinate plane. Consider the equation x=y. We normally associate this with a diagonol line. But why?
Take out your graphing calculator and look carefully at this line. You will see stairs that appear to be a diagonol line from far away. Is this a limitation of the calculator? Yes and now. The stairs could be smaller, but the pixels on the screen are only so small. But it is also a limitation of our math... lengths not paralell to an axis in a k-plane can only be defined in terms of lengths that are.
Imagine looking really close at a really small staircase that looks like a diagonol line. Now square the parts that go up. Now zoom back out and what do you see? The curve y=x^2.
On a piece of paper we can simply draw a diagonol line for y=x that seems as natural as when we drew the axes. But this is due to the nature of reality. While it might be the case that we are in a "3-dimensional" space and the grid is just smaller than would ever allow us to tell, does anyone honestly believe this?
We have defined dimension, as far as space is concerned, the wrong way. We may be able to crudely model our space using euclidean geometry, but the fact remains that in reality a length in any direction has its own meaning rather than being defined in terms of perpindicular axes, and yet still interacts with every other line.
If the math in question is well founded, it would be interesting to look at. It might give insight into how REAL space is constructed rather than how we pathetically try to model it with our math.
Imagine a 2 dimensional coordinate plane. Consider the equation x=y. We normally associate this with a diagonol line. But why?
Take out your graphing calculator and look carefully at this line. You will see stairs that appear to be a diagonol line from far away. Is this a limitation of the calculator? Yes and now. The stairs could be smaller, but the pixels on the screen are only so small. But it is also a limitation of our math... lengths not paralell to an axis in a k-plane can only be defined in terms of lengths that are.
Imagine looking really close at a really small staircase that looks like a diagonol line. Now square the parts that go up. Now zoom back out and what do you see? The curve y=x^2.
On a piece of paper we can simply draw a diagonol line for y=x that seems as natural as when we drew the axes. But this is due to the nature of reality. While it might be the case that we are in a "3-dimensional" space and the grid is just smaller than would ever allow us to tell, does anyone honestly believe this?
We have defined dimension, as far as space is concerned, the wrong way. We may be able to crudely model our space using euclidean geometry, but the fact remains that in reality a length in any direction has its own meaning rather than being defined in terms of perpindicular axes, and yet still interacts with every other line.
If the math in question is well founded, it would be interesting to look at. It might give insight into how REAL space is constructed rather than how we pathetically try to model it with our math.
Yes.
K99 knows the truth (Egomaniacal crackpot).
kriminal99
Registered Senior Member
You just don't get it do you? You are actually so incredibly small minded that it is beyond your comprehension that that other people don't believe everything they are told?
What in the world do you think makes someone right or wrong SL? Are you some kind of naive sociology nut? Whatever most people believe is always right? Like in nazi germany when supposedly most people wanted to burn all non blue eyed blonde haired people?
Do you just not think at all? If not then why are you here?
What in the world do you think makes someone right or wrong SL? Are you some kind of naive sociology nut? Whatever most people believe is always right? Like in nazi germany when supposedly most people wanted to burn all non blue eyed blonde haired people?
Do you just not think at all? If not then why are you here?
Cranks are annoying.
Yeah, that's the explanation for the reason we don't see these other dimensions. They're supposed to be so small that atoms and even light can't go there.
Greedy? LOL. The number is dictated by the math of the theory. It has nothing to do with greed.
I know time isn't curled. I was think of the standard four dimensions, time included, then miscounted somewhere.
Hi, Enigma'07. Let's keep it simple. Dimensions are measurements; centimeters on a marked rule, degrees on a protractor, seconds on a clock. That's where dimensions exist. They're just a way of comparing things. I use four at most.
God? Like, spirits, angels, devils? That's called supernatural. It's all imaginary. Once upon a time, it's how we explained things. Now, it's just film and pulp fun.
God? Like, spirits, angels, devils? That's called supernatural. It's all imaginary. Once upon a time, it's how we explained things. Now, it's just film and pulp fun.
It should be noted that string theory is pretty out there as far as theories go, and that most physicists either don't care that much about it or are pretty confident that the theory is wrong.
Enigma'07 said:
I don't know about gods.... but theoretically.... there should be an infinite number of dimensions.... or at least u can express an infinite number of dimensions.... If you know what a 1D "thing" with "size" 5 looks like (a line).... you can move that 1D thing 5 spaces, and connect the vertices. Now you have a 2D object, or a square. If you move the square 5 spaces, and connect the vertices, you now have a 3D object, or a cube, If you do the same thing with the cube, you can get a 4D object or tetracube. So if you keep on doing that, it will be possible to express more than 11 dimensions... although you won't know what each dimension actually is.
That seems a bit misleading, Lazcisco. It seems to confuse an infinity of points and lines with actual dimensions. Dimensions are measurements usually referenced to some coordinate system. Dimensions length, width, height, time, electromagnetic and electromotive forces and such, positioned somehow in a spatial and/or time framework and representing certain values or functions acting or changing over a given space and/or time. Does that seem sensible to you?