So, about the 5 dimensions. I was doing a bit of thinking about dimensions, and I had a few questions. Couldn't the following be what the 5 dimensions are? 5th dimension - Core of all dimensions, where all of matter exists, time speed is infinite. 4th dimension - This is what determines time speed give from 5th dimension, form of relativity 3rd dimension - Formation of the matter from 5th dimension, dimensions are xt, yt, and zt being that time determines the location of a particle. 2nd dimension - Gives formation of 3rd dimension. 1st dimension - Gives formation of 3rd dimension as well I just wanted people's inputs on this. I hope I posted in the right section.
Gregg Schaffter, I'm not sure what this tells me. (QUESTION) Does this relate to a coordinate system of any kind? We normally understand coordinates (x, y, z, t) in space-time in a uniform way. An object is described by its connections made between multiple coordinates. For instance a cube has 8 equally spaced and interconnected coordinates, with a ninth coordinate in time. What is the convention for your 5th Dimension? What does an object in 5 dimensions look like in our world? Can you draw it? Most Respectfully, R
In physics and mathematics, the dimension of a space or object is informally defined as the minimum number of coordinates needed to specify any point within it.[1][2] Thus a line has a dimension of one because only one coordinate is needed to specify a point on it (for example, the point at 5 on a number line). A surface such as a plane or the surface of a cylinder or sphere has a dimension of two because two coordinates are needed to specify a point on it (for example, to locate a point on the surface of a sphere you need both its latitude and its longitude). The inside of a cube, a cylinder or a sphere is three-dimensional because three co-ordinates are needed to locate a point within these spaces. In physical terms, dimension refers to the constituent structure of all space (cf. volume) and its position in time (perceived as a scalar dimension along the t-axis), as well as the spatial constitution of objects within—structures that correlate with both particle and field conceptions, interact according to relative properties of mass—and are fundamentally mathematical in description. These, or other axes, may be referenced to uniquely identify a point or structure in its attitude and relationship to other objects and occurrences. Physical theories that incorporate time, such as general relativity, are said to work in 4-dimensional "spacetime", (defined as a Minkowski space). Modern theories tend to be "higher-dimensional" including quantum field and string theories. The state-space of quantum mechanics is an infinite-dimensional function space. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...t4G4Dg&usg=AFQjCNH3isvx_cOoajV74tKOTx88djFYFw
This isn't related to the coordinate system. In the Geometrical world, the (xt, ty, and zt) would not apply because in Geometry we mainly focus on shape rather than time itself, though these coordinates could be used if time was to be a variable in the geometrical problem. The existence of the 5th dimension could be said to be the existence of the Universe itself. For the 5th dimension, the Universe could be said to be the 5th dimension, but for us to perceive the 5th dimension we need the 3rd dimension and for one to perceive the 3rd dimension from a relative stand point, we need the 4th dimension. An object in the 5th dimension, theoretically, pretty much has an infinite amount of shapes due to relativity. For example, for one person, a baseball may look like a sphere, but to the other it may look like an ellipsoid, which this idea is supported by the General Theory of Relativity, being that perspectives of one person may not be exact to another. I hope this answers your question.
Gregg Schaffter: You really need to do some reading about 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D, et cetra spaces. Avoid any texts/articles relating to Special or General Relativity which use time as the 4th coordinate in a special type of 4D space (often referred to as Minkosky space). When you get a clear concept of the difference between Plane and Solid Geometry (2D & 3D space), you can extrapolate your thought some notions about 4D & 5D spaces. Whatever your concept is, you are mis-using (likely misunderstanding) the word dimension. This results in misdescribing whatever thoughts you are trying to explain.
My proposal is not to be given in Mathematical dimensions. It is to be given as physical terms relying on the idea that the 3rd dimension is a perceiving of the 5th dimension. I don't see how I am misusing the terms here. If you are talking about me providing the 1st and 2nd dimension, those are explained to be how we perceive parts of the 3rd dimension. And I have done reading on etcetera spaces before, for your information. I am simply uniting concepts of dimensions from a physical stand point, not a mathematical view.
I don't mind this model at all, I usually don't like talking dimensions, but this looks alright. I look at anything which shares space time as matter, so the 1D up to 4D all produce or define matter, then I look at your 5D as a backgound from which matter stands out. The relativity theories - 4D, are the glue by which matter sticks to the background or 5D.
Too many non-scientist information sources present things like the 4th or 5th dimensions to be things like thought or energy or another universe. They aren't. They are just other directions like up/down, left/right etc. In string theory where you have 9+1 dimensions, the 9 spatial dimensions are just like the 3 we already know about, except there's 9. In school you learn to write vectors like the x axis vector (1,0,0), the y axis vector (0,1,0) and the z axis vector (0,0,1). In string theory with 9 dimensions you have (1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0), (0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0), (0,0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0) etc. It's really that simple to extend a formalism to include extra dimensions. Ever done anything with polynomials? Then you've worked with an infinite dimensional vector space. \(1,\, x^{1},\, x^{2},\, x^{3},\, x^{4},\, \ldots\). That's just a fancy way of writing \(\mathbf{e}_{1},\mathbf{e}_{2}\) etc. Polynomials are actually MORE complicated because you can multiply them, as well as add them (they form a mathematical structure known as a ring, over and above being a vector space). There's a lot of crazy stuff in theoretical physics already, it doesn't need to be made more bat shit by mislabelling directions! /edit And I'm kicking this to the maths/physics forum where it's more appropriate since there's tons of 5 dimensional models in theoretical physics, not all of them having relevance to cosmology or astrophysics.
