What is the 4th Dimension?

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Jozen-Bo, May 18, 2010.

  1. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    I take it that your answer is no then.
    Pity.
    3 time dimensions would be far more satisfying.
    Our actions would then have shapes.

    But we are getting into metaphysics.
    Have a good day at work.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    This is exactly the point.

    Science, when done properly, is always open for good ideas. That doesn't prevent us from calculating things in the mean time.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,885
    BenTheMan: A simple question: Do you view reality as static geometry?

    No motion & no past/preset/future which is what the GR model represents.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    @ Dino
    By static, I think that what was meant was that the universe was not increasing or decreasing in size. In accordance with the information Einstein had at the time, that was correct, but it has since been found to be wrong.

    It doesn't disprove the theory, but means that the expansion of space now needs to be taken into consideration.
    It never meant that there is no motion, or past present and future.

    @Ben.
    I've found a scientist who thinks that there is one extra time dimension.
    Probably a crackpot, but we are on the way to my ideal of three.
    http://www.physorg.com/news98468776.html
     
  8. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    GR seems to suggest this interpretation, and there are no experimental tests which suggest otherwise.
     
  9. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Sure, it's possible, but probably not likely.
     
  10. thinking Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,504
    look there are three fundamnetal dimensions

    length , depth and breadth

    to the existence of things thats all that matters

    now to understand these things as far as their movements requires time

    because time helps understand the nature of the object and the objects interactions with other objects
     
  11. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    There's at least FOUR.

    And time.
     
  12. thinking Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,504
    but NOT to the objects themselves

    to the objects themselves , time matters not

    movement by objects is based on the nature of the objects themselves , not on time
     
  13. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    Which happens to be a claim you have made several times before and failed utterly to explain comprehensibly or substantiate.
     
  14. thinking Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,504
    sure I have because there has been no solid argument against my claim
     
  15. thinking Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,504
    as Shing-Tung Yau said

    and I quote

    " Topology describes the overall shape of the tree without details - but without the tree to start with , we would have nothing "

    from the Discovery magazine June 2010 pg 68
     
  16. kurros Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    793
    What do you mean? Sure objects extend in time, if they didn't they'd only exist for some infinitesimal interval of time and you'd never even notice their existence.
     
  17. Zweistein Registered Member

    Messages:
    40
    4th dimensio is equal to other 3, space is 4D. space is timeless, see my post Block Universe, yours 2stein
     

Share This Page