This is rad.
Click the 'Imagining the Tenth Dimension' link.
Explores the different dimensions of reality, in laymens terms, with visuals.
I want the book now.
Printable View
This is rad.
Click the 'Imagining the Tenth Dimension' link.
Explores the different dimensions of reality, in laymens terms, with visuals.
I want the book now.
Nice.
I don't know that this has anything to do with the real 11 dimensional space that string theorey discusses. It's more a matter of mathematics than it it is spacial concepts.
I've been mind fucked.
Sweet. I'd always just taken an understanding of 1-6th dimensions for granted but like, I never took it to the next level in my private ruminations. That's awesome.
Ten dimensions, eh? So that's eight that women drivers can't handle then.
Awesome. I wonder how crazy some of the theories are for folding infinities. I think I want to buy this book.
Nice 1950s sitcom joke.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Yoshi- more controversial than The Family Circus.
-edit- Just watched the video, but it lost me long about dimension 5. A few too many unexplained suppositions combined with difficulty picturing what they were saying in a meaningful way. Really neat stuff, though, and I may have to read the whole book to get the full explanation.
James
This reminds me how great Slaughterhouse 5 is.
Thats pretty fucking sweet.
I thought the same thing. Thinking about seeing my entire life depresses the hell out of me for some reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
It loses me at 5 because I'm a determinist.
I heard our third dimension is the same as Japan's sixth dimension...
That was cool, thanks.
I guess "women's lib" didn't fix the problem after 50 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Yea. String theory is not physically verifiable as of yet. It's just a lot of math on a piece of paper. It's not even really much of a theory. It will probably fade away and die before it becomes that "theory of everything" physicists are trying to figure out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Well, M theory has pretty much revised string theory into an internally consistent model of the universe that so far hasn't been found to conflict with anything in accepted physics.
But whatever, this flash thingy really has nothing to do with string theory, and it doesn't seem to have any basis in actual physics. It's more pop sci-fi than anything.
This is what I was suspecting, but its still rad.Quote:
Originally Posted by kedawa
all i thought while watching this was "god i love my mobius strips" and yah that was cool, not a ton of new information, interesting having it all dumbed down and animated though.
is it just pop scifi-y? then whats the actual current theory?
I don't fully understand it, but it has something to do with dimensions that are directional rather than positional, like instead of being a straight line, they've collapsed into an infinitly small circle.
If anyone wants to check out a cool show on string theory, there's a one called The Elegant Universe that you can watch online here.
The fullscreen option is just the hi-res version zoomed in to fullscreen, btw.
Bump for great Justice. Also very little actual discussion went on here :(
I missed this the first time around, and I think it is awesome. I remember thinking about what the 5th, and so on dimensions would be (as I can really only imagine up to 4) and this enlightens me.
Although I have done mathematical proofs that deal with infinite dimensions (which really doesn't make much sense to me, but whatever).
This still has just as little basis in actual science as it did when it was posted.
I guess that makes it not worth discussing then.
perhaps someone who lives there can verify this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Anyone.
I need a volunteer who lives in Japan.
If only bbobb had gone there instead of Spain...
Yeah, you live and you learn.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gas
The guys do realize that once Lord Gas has latched on to a meme it's over, right?
Actually Biff and Drew latching onto it are the true signs.
The explanation was fairly well-stated; they did a good job at simplifying the concepts of the 0-10 dimensions. I think I'll borrow the book when my local library gets it.
Which dimension has the cowboy world in it? Because I totally want to go there.
I've always had trouble thinking 4th dimensionally, now they have 10? Geez, I'm fucked.
Well it's not exactly the way of showing a 10th dimensional object, even though there is technically already one. What is it called again, Hypercube or something like that?
Hypercube in 10 dimensions:
H_10 = { (x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4, x_5, x_6, x_7, x_8, x_9, x_10) : 0 <= x_i <= 1 for each i=1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 }
In fact, four dimensional mathematics is notoriously the hardest to manage. The list of geometrical dimensions in order of how hard it is to do geometry goes: 4, 3, 2, higher dimensions (hardest to not as hardest).Quote:
I've always had trouble thinking 4th dimensionally, now they have 10? Geez, I'm fucked.
Why are the low dimensions harder? This all stems from the following fact: If you have two curves which close up on themselves in an n-dimensional space, then as long as the dimension is > 4 you can fill in the middle of the curves with disks (pieces of a surface) so that the two pieces you filled in do not intersect. This gives you a way of chopping up a high dimensional space into more manageable pieces with simpler geometry. On the other hand, in dimension four the best you can do is fill in the curves with little surface pieces that intersect in finitely many points, so you loose the decomposition of your space. Things should be worse in dimension 3, since the best you can do is find surface pieces that intersect in some curves (think of two circles linked together in space), and in some instances things are worse (see the poincare conjecture), but on the whole we have more intuition for three dimensional spaces.
I'm having enough trouble enough with the first 3 dimensions. I'll pass, thanks.