posted
Very interesting. First time I've been able to get close to understanding string theory, 5+ dimensions, etc. But what's that at the end about not being the "accepted explanation"? Does the video not demonstrate an apt metaphor or is it wrong or what?
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
String theory proposes "sub"-dimensions -- dimensions that are themselves curled up in our dimension to appear as a line or point in our third dimension, as well as our own dimension being curled up in another, higher dimension. Last I checked, there is an estimated 7 sub-dimensions in our three-dimensional space.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does it matter, at that point, whether we consider them "sub" or "super"? I mean, from a strictly layperson standpoint, does it matter whether the probability axis operates around or within space-time? for that matter, do the words "around" or "within" have any meaning for how probability relates to space-time?
Edit: taking a cue from the fact that they assign "color" to sub-nuclear particles, I'm gonna say "no" Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
People have a tendency to search desperately for answers to meaningless questions. It's one of the things that kept civilization alive. Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was some discussion of this here earlier.
I would summarize that by saying this guy's not explaining anything all that scientific, even if he does have a slick video.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by vonk: Very interesting. First time I've been able to get close to understanding string theory, 5+ dimensions, etc. But what's that at the end about not being the "accepted explanation"? Does the video not demonstrate an apt metaphor or is it wrong or what?
I believe string theory posits the existence of additional spatial dimensions. The video only goes up to three spatial dimensions.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by HollowEarth: I would summarize that by saying this guy's not explaining anything all that scientific, even if he does have a slick video.
Agreed. Starting with the point at which he treats time as being the fourth dimension.
It's interesting and sort of cool, but he's pulling stuff out of his rear. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
so creatures from the 5th dimension such as Mxyzptlk are not the most powerful of the dimensional beings? I think this makes it sound like they should be from about dimension 8 or so.
Posts: 2332 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I firmly believe that any extra dimensions must include rivkas that use eyeroll smilies, even if that is all they contain.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I've read, the physics "community" isn't all to fond of this guy or his ideas.
Really, his tenth dimension stuff isn't really a theory or anything, it's more of a thought experiment. I don't think he's actually proposing it as fact, but rather as a way to look at it.
But dang it if it isn't interesting. It helps you visualize the term "dimensions" in the first place, particularly with how it relates to time.
Posts: 290 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah. The video made some of the scenes in Donny Darko make way more sense (the tubes coming out of his chest was him being able to see into the fourth (or fifth?) gen.) and the Tralfamadorians view of life compared to human's (the flatbed train with Man tied down on his back with blinders) came immediately to mind. So even if it's not true, in the "scientific" sense, it's still pretty freakin' neat.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer: People have a tendency to search desperately for answers to meaningless questions. It's one of the things that kept civilization alive.
This was my initial feeling too... But in a weird way, it's just logic. Whether or not the tenth dimension will ever impact our lives, you can't deny that it's the logical extension of the following the first-to the second-to the third dimension rule, which IS part of our lives.
Posts: 930 | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have never understood how time is considered a higher dimension. Hypothetically, one- and two-dimensional creatures could experience time as well, but not as a manifestation of the next-highest dimension.
Besides, these hypotheses are awaiting experimental confirmation.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
Besides, these hypotheses are awaiting experimental confirmation.
What on earth would that be like?
I was talking about string theory because that's what the website was about. Did you think I was talking about the existence of Flatland? Because that would be a big discovery.
quote:Originally posted by The Reader: I have never understood how time is considered a higher dimension. Hypothetically, one- and two-dimensional creatures could experience time as well, but not as a manifestation of the next-highest dimension.
If a two dimensional critter experienced time, that'd be the third dimension for the critter. Dimensions are interchangeable. It's just a matter of rotation from one axis to another.
The noted physicist Jacob Burroughs posits that we could rotate through dimensions while still experiencing only three spacial dimensions and one time dimension, but be experiencing duration along what we now consider to be a spacial duration.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by aragorn64: It helps you visualize the term "dimensions" in the first place, particularly with how it relates to time.
Not accurately.
Not any less accurately than string theory does. Physicists have completely failed up to this point in showing through experimentation that string theory could be correct or just a bunch of bull. It's made no predictions that they have been able to test the past thirty or so years they've been raving about it. There may be hope with the large hadron collider, but what if they don't find the Higgs boson? What if it essentially does nothing to further our understanding of physics, and the attempts at finding a quantum theory of gravity?
Honestly, we need stuff like this. Whether or not it has much actual merit is important, but it's also important for people to start thinking in ways like this. Just ask Newton or Einstein -- you don't solve the mysteries of physics without that type of thinking. I'd wager 99.9% of those paths lead the wrong way, but they get us THINKING in the right direction. As far as I'm concerned, the next advances are most likely going to be results of inductive, rather than deductive reasoning. But we need an induced theory that can actually be tested, and I don't think string theory is doing that. I'll eat crow if it turns out otherwise, but I'll still stand by the fact that this guys thread of thinking is more helpful than not. It's probably utter crap, but it's the kind of merging of creative, lateral thinking that physics needs.
Posts: 290 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm still furious that the US Government killed our own super collider when it was 90% finished...grrr... idiots... the brain drain is going to seriously hurt us.
Anwyay, just spent an hour or two watching This Elegant Universe on YouTube and how String Theory evolved into M-Theory...
I had no idea that Grand Unified Theory is within our grasp!! Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Reader: I was talking about string theory because that's what the website was about. Did you think I was talking about the existence of Flatland? Because that would be a big discovery.
quote:Originally posted by aragorn64: Not any less accurately than string theory does. Physicists have completely failed up to this point in showing through experimentation that string theory could be correct or just a bunch of bull. It's made no predictions that they have been able to test the past thirty or so years they've been raving about it. There may be hope with the large hadron collider, but what if they don't find the Higgs boson? What if it essentially does nothing to further our understanding of physics, and the attempts at finding a quantum theory of gravity?
You're aware that string theory isn't the only thing that people are working on? That some reasonable advances in math have come from the work? That many other arguably more important advances have been made in the last 30 years?
quote:Honestly, we need stuff like this. Whether or not it has much actual merit is important, but it's also important for people to start thinking in ways like this. Just ask Newton or Einstein -- you don't solve the mysteries of physics without that type of thinking. I'd wager 99.9% of those paths lead the wrong way, but they get us THINKING in the right direction. As far as I'm concerned, the next advances are most likely going to be results of inductive, rather than deductive reasoning. But we need an induced theory that can actually be tested, and I don't think string theory is doing that. I'll eat crow if it turns out otherwise, but I'll still stand by the fact that this guys thread of thinking is more helpful than not. It's probably utter crap, but it's the kind of merging of creative, lateral thinking that physics needs.
Fine. The thinking should be related to the world as we understand it though. Lateral thinking is great, but some grounding is necessary, otherwise you're just wanking.
quote:Originally posted by Telperion the Silver: I'm still furious that the US Government killed our own super collider when it was 90% finished...grrr... idiots... the brain drain is going to seriously hurt us.
There is much more to physics than super colliders and particle physics even if it doesn't have the publicity that the super expensive particle physics experiments have.
Part of the reason that it doesn't have the publicity is that many of these other experiements don't individually involve as many people or as big of a budget. Part of getting and keeping a fantastically large budget, as these particle physics experiments have, is generating publicity, to the point that they have people on this full time. This is something that for the most part the rest of the physics community lacks.
It's not clear to me what brain drain your talking about. I think it worth pointing out that senior field leading researchers from Europe have been coming here since we don't have mandatory retirement ages like large parts of Europe do. Also, its not like there is lack of people that would like to have research jobs. It's the complete opposite, and has been for quite a while.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
Just one thought; if this is not the accepted expanation, what use is it? If I explained that clouds are really candyfloss bubbles made by Sky Giants it would be 'running contrary to the accepted mainstream viewpoint' and also about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
So what I'm basically asking is how valid is this explanation? Are we talking close, but simplified for dummies or totally in the Territory of the Chocolate Teapot?
Posts: 892 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Others will disagree, of course. But that's exactly why I objected to this -- it becomes something someone has to unlearn later. As a former teacher, I hate "models" like that.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It shouldn't come as too much of a surprise to learn that despite being well aware of how wrong it was, I enjoyed it and showed it to my son.
I did make sure he understood that that's not how the fourth (and higher) dimension really is. We had a fun discussion about the curvature of dimensions.
*goes off to teach about electron orbits*
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Physics it might not be, but what I'm surprised everyone is missing is the application to Laundry Science. Folding through the 5th dimension is likely to revolutionize the industry.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Others will disagree, of course. But that's exactly why I objected to this -- it becomes something someone has to unlearn later. As a former teacher, I hate "models" like that.
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Physics it might not be, but what I'm surprised everyone is missing is the application to Laundry Science. Folding through the 5th dimension is likely to revolutionize the industry.
That's how people lose socks in the dryer.
From what I understand about physics, time isn't a dimension. Time is a subjective observation based on experience of entropy and something to do with relativity. Am I close to being right?
Posts: 684 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Physics it might not be, but what I'm surprised everyone is missing is the application to Laundry Science. Folding through the 5th dimension is likely to revolutionize the industry.
quote:Originally posted by The Reader: From what I understand about physics, time isn't a dimension. Time is a subjective observation based on experience of entropy and something to do with relativity. Am I close to being right?
Time is generally considered to be a 4th dimension. The wikipedia entries on Spacetime and World lines provide some insight into this subject (and their summaries are good enough that I won't attempt to rephrase them). Distance in spacetime depends on position and time.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Playing the role of" is not the same thing as "is."
Calling time the 4th dimension is a type of shorthand. Unlike the three dimensions (and other theoretical spatial dimensions), time is not interchangeable in any meaningful sense.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The extra spatial dimensions predicted by string theory are not interchangeable with classical spatial dimensions because they are not flat (spacetime is not flat either but these extra dimensions don't have the same degree of "non-flatness"). Lets call one of these extra dimensions "w". You could not (for example) specify a cube using x,y,w coordinates.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Quantum physics tells us that the subatomic particles that make up our world are collapsed from waves of probability simply by the act of observation. In the picture we are drawing for ourselves here, we can now start to see how each of us are collapsing the indeterminate wave of probable futures contained in the fifth dimension into the fourth dimensional line that we are experiencing as “time”.
This is where the video loses me. I get that quantum physics is really weird stuff, but our observations actually cause things? And this is in some way related to the choices I make?
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Quantum physics tells us that the subatomic particles that make up our world are collapsed from waves of probability simply by the act of observation. In the picture we are drawing for ourselves here, we can now start to see how each of us are collapsing the indeterminate wave of probable futures contained in the fifth dimension into the fourth dimensional line that we are experiencing as “time”.
This is where the video loses me. I get that quantum physics is really weird stuff, but our observations actually cause things? And this is in some way related to the choices I make?
From what I've heard and read, yes, Quantum Reality can be influenced by the observer. From what I remember in Quantum Reality the particles exist everywhere at the same time until they are observed...kind of of like the electron cloud...you can tell the speed but not the location...or the location but not the speed...
Wasn't there a recent experiment when they actually proved Quantum Reality (or was it Quantum Tunneling)... they fired a particle at a screen with two slits...and this particle was to go through one or the other and hit the detector on the other side to see which slit it went through. But lo! It went through BOTH at the same time!
Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It sounds like this one But wouldn't it not work if someone was looking at it, or recording it?
EDIT - Oh, I guess so.
quote:A remarkable result follows from a variation of the double-slit experiment in which detectors are placed in either or both of the two slits in an attempt to determine which slit the photon passes through on its way to the screen. Placing a detector even in just one of the slits will result in the disappearance of the interference pattern.
quote:Quantum physics tells us that the subatomic particles that make up our world are collapsed from waves of probability simply by the act of observation. In the picture we are drawing for ourselves here, we can now start to see how each of us are collapsing the indeterminate wave of probable futures contained in the fifth dimension into the fourth dimensional line that we are experiencing as “time”.
I get it now. He's using quantum mechanics as a metaphor for his proposed model, not as an explanation for how his model works.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
