Dimension Theory

Standard memberRemoved
Science 22 Jul '17 21:15
  1. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    12 Jul '17
    Moves
    1824
    22 Jul '17 21:15
    I got to thinking that the universe must really be conceivably empty but provably is not. So I got the idea that each dimension cannot contain it's own number. e.g. zero zero's in the zero'th etch.

    Any Mathematicians/Physicists that can confirm this please?
  2. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    12 Jul '17
    Moves
    1824
    22 Jul '17 21:181 edit
    This gave rise to the notion that each dimension is itself empty and instead defined by it's surrounding dimensions. e.g 3 is a combination of 2nd and 4th.
    A bit like seeing the image of a whale in an underwater slipstream.

    What do you think?

    edit. So trying to see a 3 in the third dimension would be a bit like trying to see the whole of a swimming pool that you're stood in. You'd need to get out the pool to see the pool in it's entirety.
  3. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3089
    22 Jul '17 21:18
    I can confirm it's nonsense.
  4. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    12 Jul '17
    Moves
    1824
    22 Jul '17 21:22
    Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
    I can confirm it's nonsense.
    Is that arrogance talking or do you care to share?
  5. Cosmos
    Joined
    20 May '17
    Moves
    2075
    22 Jul '17 22:58
    That's why Gravity is so very weak..most of it is in another dimension hooked up with our 4..
  6. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    12 Jul '17
    Moves
    1824
    23 Jul '17 05:301 edit
    Originally posted by @ogb
    That's why Gravity is so very weak..most of it is in another dimension hooked up with our 4..
    That makes a lot of sense to me. What about dark matter. Looks like a dirty hack to me. What if that value could vary in a tiny tiny way? Could we halt the universe from a cold death?
  7. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    23 Jul '17 06:482 edits
    Originally posted by @christopher-albon
    Is that arrogance talking or ...
    No, he is a qualified PHYSICIST.
    That means if he says it's nonsense, unless you have good reason to believe the contrary, your default assumption should be it probably is.
  8. Standard memberlemon lime
    ook ook ahchoo
    oLd ScHoOl
    Joined
    31 May '13
    Moves
    5577
    23 Jul '17 07:26
    I'm searching for the default assumption key...








    can't find it
  9. Standard memberlemon lime
    ook ook ahchoo
    oLd ScHoOl
    Joined
    31 May '13
    Moves
    5577
    23 Jul '17 07:28
    Originally posted by @christopher-albon
    Is that arrogance talking or do you care to share?
    1) yes
    2) apparently not
  10. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3089
    23 Jul '17 08:21
    Originally posted by @christopher-albon
    Is that arrogance talking or do you care to share?
    If you would like to come up with new theories, you should first understand the current ones. Start with special relativity - grab a book on electrodynamics and have a go.
  11. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    12 Jul '17
    Moves
    1824
    23 Jul '17 08:311 edit
    Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
    If you would like to come up with new theories, you should first understand the current ones. Start with special relativity - grab a book on electrodynamics and have a go.
    First rule of science is to check the instruments isn't it? I must be rusty!

    Edit. Is that why those probes you fired off are off course, relatively speaking?
  12. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    23 Jul '17 08:52
    Originally posted by @christopher-albon
    Is that arrogance talking ...
    In this case the arrogance is valid.

    If you want to drag your posts out of the nonsense realm then try expanding on them in understandable language.
    What do you mean by your first sentence in the OP?
  13. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    23 Jul '17 08:53
    Originally posted by @christopher-albon
    So I got the idea that each dimension cannot contain it's own number. e.g. zero zero's in the zero'th etch.

    Any Mathematicians/Physicists that can confirm this please?
    As a mathematician, that make no sense whatsoever.
    Dimensions don't contain numbers, nor are they numbered (except by convention).
    Do you even know what a dimension is?
  14. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    12 Jul '17
    Moves
    1824
    23 Jul '17 09:01
    Hey, don't shoot the messenger. Just wondering is all.
  15. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    23 Jul '17 09:173 edits
    Originally posted by @christopher-albon
    First rule of science is to check the instruments isn't it?
    what has "check the instruments" got to do with understanding the current scientific theories (which you clearly don't and that is just part of your problem) ? -your responses make no sense. You seem to be unable to follow the conversation let alone understanding the current scientific theories.
Back to Top