17 Jul '17 19:59

How can scientists prove more than 4 dimensions?

- Joined
- 20 May '17
- Moves
- 2073

Cosmos- Joined
- 14 Apr '05
- Moves
- 52945

Cape Town- Joined
- 20 May '17
- Moves
- 2073

Cosmos- Joined
- 31 May '12
- Moves
- 2056

- Joined
- 27 Oct '08
- Moves
- 3087

Germany18 Jul '17 06:28

In physics and mathematics, one can and does use any number of dimensions depending on the problem at hand, including zero, one, any finite number, infinite and fractional.*Originally posted by ogb***How can scientists prove more than 4 dimensions?**

You're probably referring to string theory. While I'm not an expert on the topic, as far as I understand many variations of string theory require more than 4 physical dimensions. You would show that these theories are correct by empirically verifying their predictions. In the case of string theory, this is extremely hard, which is why few people are working on the topic.- Joined
- 28 Dec '04
- Moves
- 52619

slatington, pa, usa19 Jul '17 22:041 edit

Here is a book I read:*Originally posted by @kazetnagorra***In physics and mathematics, one can and does use any number of dimensions depending on the problem at hand, including zero, one, any finite number, infinite and fractional.**

You're probably referring to string theory. While I'm not an expert on the topic, as far as I understand many variations of string theory require more than 4 physical dimensions. ...[text shortened]... case of string theory, this is extremely hard, which is why few people are working on the topic.

The Trouble with Physics, by Lee Smolin:

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

This Wiki gives a 50 cent tour of the book. He hates string theory, bottom lineđź™‚

And another physicist chimes in: Peter Woit

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

Woit and Smolin both object to string theory on the grounds it has yet to make a single prediction that can be tested by any kind of technology in the foreseeable future.