5-th dimension: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Philosophy of Science » 5-th dimension » 5-th dimension

5-th dimension

stats
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 1

Posted 10/13/08 - 01:13 AM: Subject: 5-th dimension	#1
Hi I believe the many unsolved and unanswered problems that we have are due to lack of dimensions where we can solve them - and not the lack of our solving abilities. Currently we are trying to imagine some things to solve some problems, most of times those things are barely imaginable like the Einstein's "growing mass" while the speed grows, or the "infinitely small and infinitely condensed mass" in the big bang theory, and actually many other things. Our current state of science where we have big problems trying to "imagine" some things, and then some of us say "it is not imaginable, so just suppose it is so .. don't even try ..", reminds me when we were kids and were just going from solving 2D problems to 3D problems. Most of the class although good at calculating things on a triangle - had pretty big trouble trying to calculate something on say a pyramid or a sphere. The source of their trouble was of course the introduction of the 3-rd dimension, which is harder to accept and manipulate with. However it is impossible to calculate say the volume of a sphere without the 3-rd dimension. No matter how brilliant you are, you can not calculate the volume of that sphere simply by manipulating with it's 2D projection which is just a circle. Let's try to guess what we were trying to talk about if we weren't aware of the 3-rd dimension and were to find the volume of a sphere by using only X and Y (2D). Some genius people would probably use sentences like "imagine an infinite amount of circles which start from a dot then grow by infinitely small steps... then suddenly start decreasing in size and eventually end up to a dot again". You see, the keywords in this description are "infinitely small", "infinitely large", "imagine", etc .. and actually any attempt to describe a sphere in 2D world will end up using those terms. Now, look at what we use in our current science. Statements like "An object that moves with speed of light has infinite mass" or "the infinitely condensed mass was the beginning of the universe" , etc. Are we missing a dimension here? Do you see the similarities between describing a sphere in 2D and between what our current science tries to express? I don't have a strict proof of which dimension we are missing, but I do have at least one suggestion of what it could be. Let me ask you a question. Could your monitor that is in front of you - be on the Moon right now? Would that fact break any laws of nature? All I am asking is just your monitor have different coordinates at this point of time, which is absolutely possible. However, the answer to my question is NO. Why? Because it was in front of you 1 second ago, and it cannot possibly be on the Moon now. So, the only thing that keeps your beloved monitor in front of you is the a REASON, and that reason in this case is expressed by the physical laws not allowing your monitor to travel that great distance in that small time. So, in this case the REASON has looked back in time for 1 second and found out a connection that will NOT allow your monitor to be on moon now. It actually has put some boundaries across your monitor to keep it in place. You will say that what I just called a REASON is nothing more than a collection of physical laws - a projection of them, a collection of them. And you are right. If you think some further, you will also find out that reason is actually a projection of TIME+SPACE, simply because all the physical laws are projection of those 4 dimension and REASON is just a projection of all the physical laws - so REASON itself is a projection of the current 4 dimensions we use. And that is absolutely right. But .. isn't time a projection of the 3 space dimensions and the physical laws governing the movement in a case of a moving object? if you have the movement's equation and the coordinates of the object - you can say what time is it. And vice-versa you can tell the coordinates of the object if a time and movement equation are given. So, the conclusion would be that the 3 space coordinates, the time, and the physical laws are always together and are projection of each other. Meaning, given the rest of them - you can find the missing one. Now, I don't know (yet) how to use this dimension which I would as of now call REASON, however I am sure that it is missing (or not enough stressed) in our current science. I am not ready to defend this and start proving everything related to this, however I do honestly think that using "REASON" (or whatever better name you may find for it) as the 5-th dimension is the way to go to make the science more "solvable" . Ideally, it will probably be the complete collection of all the laws of nature, and at that point it may be used to draw REASONABLE boundaries across any problem - meaning that the solution to the problem lies inside those boundaries. And with good accuracy and good amount of those physical laws to form the REASON, those boundaries will become smaller and smaller and eventually end up to THE dot which is the solution to given problem. Just like the above case with your monitor, I drew a boundary that didn't let your monitor to go to the moon (using only 1 law - which is "no travel faster than light speed is possible"), And now if you add more laws to my REASONABLE boundaries - you will end up not letting your monitor go further than your town, then your neighborhood, then your home, and then eventually end up keeping it at the exact place where it is now (the dot) - and that will be solution to the problem. I would very appreciate any feedback and thoughts and challenges regarding this topic. Please share your thoughts with me, we may end up developing something very useful. Thanks Edited by stats on 10/13/08 - 01:18 AM

ughaibu
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 01, 2006
Total Topics: 13
Total Posts: 221

Posted 10/13/08 - 01:25 AM:	#2
What would your view be if it turned out that all hyper-dimensional geometries were logically incoherent?

swstephe
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2006
Location: borneo island
Total Topics: 22
Total Posts: 2150

Posted 10/13/08 - 02:00 AM:	#3
stats wrote: Hi I believe the many unsolved and unanswered problems that we have are due to lack of dimensions where we can solve them - and not the lack of our solving abilities. Currently we are trying to imagine some things to solve some problems, most of times those things are barely imaginable like the Einstein's "growing mass" while the speed grows, or the "infinitely small and infinitely condensed mass" in the big bang theory, and actually many other things. There are no lack of dimensions, we can come up with as many as needed. Current string and M-theory is debating on between 10 and 11 dimensions. One person came out with a book called "Imagining the Tenth Dimension". They have a nice interactive flash application which can help you envision it too, (although it starts to sound like New Age talk than science. check it out at http://www.tenthdimension.com/ Nothing else you say makes sense. We can deal with circles, spheres, hyperspheres, etc. It poses no problems to math or science, although it may be a difficult concept to imagine.
Ethics is the measuring of morality. Morality is the measuring of good. Good is the measuring of benefit. Benefit is the measure of values.

wuliheron
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Location: Newport News, Va
Total Topics: 10
Total Posts: 3157

Posted 10/13/08 - 06:04 AM:	#4
As useful as the concept of multiple dimensions is and as tempting as it might be to over simplify the applications for the concept might be, it is much more complex than you might imagine. For example, there is no reason why all the dimensions have to be the same size and according to Einstein's Relativity the dimension of time is enormously larger than the three spatial dimensions. Einstein spent the last ten years of his life attempting to create theory that included a fifth dimension and failed. If the idea of classic multiple dimensions blows your mind, try fractional dimensions. One of the hottest new theories in physics is noncommutative fractal geometry.

Cadrache
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 09, 2006
Location: AB, Canada
Total Topics: 43
Total Posts: 1002

Posted 10/13/08 - 06:29 AM:	#5
Simply put; there is also the assumption, in this case that the 5th dimension must co-relate to the previous 4; which might not have to be. It may be that it only needs co-relate to any 2 of the previous said dimensions to make a definable effect.

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.