Explode your brain.
polycounter lvl 18
The Tenth Dimension
Watch the 'explanation vids' starting from 0, and listen very carefully. It all makes sense at the end, but can get a tad confusing around the 6-8th dimensions.
Watch the 'explanation vids' starting from 0, and listen very carefully. It all makes sense at the end, but can get a tad confusing around the 6-8th dimensions.
Replies
Tho by the time they hit the 9th dimension i was getting nauceous @_@, thats some deep stuff
So when can I get my Geforce 6.02 x 10^23 10d accelerator with quantum QPU?
[/ QUOTE ]
Just fold the fourth dimension like a piece of paper and teleport to 20 years from now. It's that simple, really.
And, he says that there are multiple timelines, based on your decisions, and a lot of other stuff. But, your decisions are influenced by who-knows-what, being influenced by something before that... So, as I see it, there's only one timeline. Chance, luck and randomness simply don't exist.
this is a good video explaining the probability function and multiple dimensions
http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=1667
what he says in the video is that at any instance in time there is an infinite amount of possibilities that branch off... dont think of it as random, chance and luck .. think of it as a probability function.. it collapses into one possibility at each instance giving you the perception of 1 timeline to you as an observant from a 3rd dimension..
but to an observant in 4th dimension there is an infinite amount of possibilites triggered by events that we call chance, luck and random etc ...
as for the explanation of the 3rd dimension
think of a cylinder .. in 2nd dimensions you can only view it as a crosssection instance .. so each time you'd view a circle .. you cannot percieve it as a cylinder .. and you cant jump from one edge to another because you can only view it in instances ..
in a 3rd dimension you fold the 2nd and you can be at any point at any given time.. you can now view it in 3d .. your eyes can jump from it's front to it's back ... simple as that
To the viewer, there is one timeline, a guy is bored, he goes ouside, buys a hooker, finds true love.
To the movie maker, there are many different timelines. The guy is bored, he goes outside, gets hit by a car, goes to the hospital, falls in love with the nurse.
Or any number of different paths. The movie maker can see them all (because he is the one creating them), whereas the viewer only sees one.
So in essence, the movie maker is actually seeing another dimension.
So, as I see it, there's only one timeline. Chance, luck and randomness simply don't exist.
[/ QUOTE ]
You'll find true coincidence in quantum physics, modern physics dont' involve a determinated universe anymore, that was 80 years ago. This is also discussed as the source of the free will, but so far no relevant quantum mechanical procedures were found that influence our mind. But we don't know much about the way the human brain works anyway, so we can still consider it.
Loading this flash takes forever here, that's why I couldn't watch it so far. Does anyone else have problems too?
hrm speaking of which .. LS, you are a devoted christian, what are your views on these quantum physics theories ?
in fact, quantum physics is like "pop" science. And in fact, quatum physics only exists to explain what we cannot explain, being, the uncontrollable moreover unexplainable properties of the universe of gravity. Current explanations move from using wavelengths into dimensions but I humblely think that all properties of the universe use wavelengths and this includes gravity.
having 10 dimensions is to not simplify but to excuse. It is science on it's most tangent tip, making extra pathways for theories with holes. Filling those holes with excuses.
Once gravity has been fully theorised in waves, essentially part of Einsteins Thoery of Everything, the dimensions will shrink back to four. IMHO.
Although watching Equinox, Arena and Horizon (UK docs), you could be excused for taking in anything they beltch. Hench my view point. Popular science.
Comrade i suggest you read up a little more on this probability function and the behaviour of light as wave and particle ...
[/ QUOTE ]
Wavicles... I've read a little on the ideas and complications, but I haven't actually seen a true explanation of the phenomenon yet.
[ QUOTE ]
but to an observant in 4th dimension there is an infinite amount of possibilites triggered by events that we call chance, luck and random etc ...
[/ QUOTE ]
But, taking a real life example such as throwing a dice. We've all been taught that the chance you'll get a five is 6 to 1. But in reality, the side of the dice that comes up is dependent on how hard you're throwing, the pressure in the air, gravity, bounciness of the dice, and a lot of other things. Were you to throw a dice in exactly the same conditions, I'd say you get the number. It's and action-reaction, even if we can only see the reaction.
I find it hard to imagine that it's not so at the smaller scale. In ye olde days, throwing a dice was the work of luck (or the will of God). These days, it's not. The concept of something being completely *random* is just so hard for me to understand, that I can't help but see it as not being able to see the actions that make the reaction.
[ QUOTE ]
as for the explanation of the 3rd dimension
think of a cylinder .. in 2nd dimensions you can only view it as a crosssection instance .. so each time you'd view a circle .. you cannot percieve it as a cylinder .. and you cant jump from one edge to another because you can only view it in instances ..
[/ QUOTE ]
Like on of those hospital scans. Though, if there's only two dimensions, there's no mass, because something would be x by y by 0 (= 0). And without mass, there aren't any dots to be connected by time, so there's no time... Which makes the second dimensions alone pretty much impossible.
If only we'd get more physics than just Volts 'n Amps at school, I wouldn't be saying such stupid things :P . Just having a hard time accepting what I don't understand here.
Wait, I thought quantum physics and gravity are currently incompatible which is what the GUT would be for?
I think gravity waves have been detected already but the decay in strength of gravity is a bit strange which is where all those extra dimensions come from (since they alter the falloff equation).
The idea of dimensional time still seems stupid to me. Either you assume that every point in time exists at the same time* (which would make the idea of time pointless since nothing would happen), that only one point exists at the same time* (which would turn the time dimension into a spatial dimension in which everything has constant velocity (since it cannot fall behind without "disappearing" from our view)) or that the mass of the universe changes (since the past would exist and have mass and gravity but the future would still be created).
By the way, gravity travels instantly overany distance, ignoring light speed, yes? Are gravity fields distorted along the velocity vector of an object since its future and past versions would exact gravity at the present?
*= Time being metatime here, i.e. if measured from a point that could see all "time" dimensions, what would you see?
as for dice, the overall probability of getting any one number is 1/number of sides. Air pressure, bounce, surface texture, etc all basically boil down into the overall 1/6 probability. Try it some time.
Its not completely random. nothing is. Random is simply a way for us to describe phenomena we cannot determine the outcome of based on the starting conditions. If you could compute every last variable that goes into a roll of the dice you could predict what number comes up, however the number of variables is so horendously high it wouldn't be worth the computation. ITs like weather prediction. We generally know what tomorrows weather will be, however there is still a % chance of those conditions. Predictions further days out get increasingly innacurate untill predictions are as good as guesses. Its a chaotic system.
A 2 dimensional world is perfectly possible. mass is not dependant on volume. We just like to calculate it that way because we started calculating mass with displacement. make yourself a top down ball maze game. Mass exists, collision exists, time exists, but its all still 2d.
Dimensional time is just like dimensional space, except it deals with probability and causality rather than volume and distace. Think of time like the infinite space of your favorite modeling program. Then think of your life as a sphere in that space. Specifically a globe in any 3d ap. The poles are the singular start and end of your life. Every vertex on that sphere is a possible place/time/state for you to be in, and just which points you actually experience depends wholly on what choices you make.
Also gravity isn't instant, its just faster than light, and decays in the same maner as light difuses. And no it is not distorted along the velocity vector of an object any more than light is. It may experience a form of doppler effect, course that Im not sure of.
I feel that of any crowd gamers should be able to deal with multi dimensional time far easier than others. I mean we have prince of persia: sands of time, we have time dilation controls in most space fighter sims, we have quicksaves and continues for cryin out loud. Every one of those options is a form of multi-dimensional time within the game universe. The same principles apply to our universe, so long as you can grasp that our little view of the cosmos MAY not be all there really is. We and all our beloved phenomena exist within a system, and things outside that system do not have to play by our rules.
suppose you have dice in your hand and you shake it .. you are hodling the probability function .. at any instance the dice can be 1, 2 , 3 ,4 , 5 or 6 .. but as soon as your release and roll it you force to collapse that probability function .. just the fact that the number that you see is 5 .. doesnt mean that 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 dont exist .. they existed as a probability .. it works the same with dimensions above 4th ... at which all instances are possible
That's kind of an unnecessary point to make, though, because one- and two-dimensional space only exist as theoretical constructs anyway. Even the smallest quark of detectable matter has a three-dimensional form; nothing in the natural world exists in less than three-dimensions (or at least not as far as we currently know).
I'm such a fucking nerd
hrm speaking of which .. LS, you are a devoted christian, what are your views on these quantum physics theories ?
[/ QUOTE ]
I couldn't say much about it to be honest. I have thought of it as possible portal of invasion of the supernatural of course, but those are pure assumptions. There is an interesting essay about it written by H
yeah thats exatly what I thought, which is why vailias your example seems confusing.. how do you know that gravity has a speed by the way?
[/ QUOTE ]
the best explanation for gravity I've heard in my life was that it's an accumilation pushing us, not a force pulling us. So the decay is really just less dense. Density happens around objects with large mass, like the earth.
It really can't be proven either way, but sciences current widespread belief is that gravity comes from another dimension, and that sounds like an excuse to me.
I cant just swallow the bs that if you dont observe light for example it acts in one way and if you do observe it then it acts in another way, yet the end result is the same.
Or that stuff about - its not there untill you observe it and make it happen or something, i mean around a crazy person you should have all those crazy things then but there isnt any.
Not to mention that they claim that traditional physics and chemistry etc. are all wrong yet it all works and can be proven with experiments - thats what you cant say about quantum physics...
Not to mention its propably so small that you cant even see it and thus you cant really verify anything and that means they might aswell made the whole thing up to get funding or whatever.
Have to agree with hawken, quantum physics is just an excuse and it should be called quantum filosophy if anything.
I cant just swallow the bs that if you dont observe light for example it acts in one way and if you do observe it then it acts in another way, yet the end result is the same.
Or that stuff about - its not there untill you observe it and make it happen or something, i mean around a crazy person you should have all those crazy things then but there isnt any.
Not to mention that they claim that traditional physics and chemistry etc. are all wrong yet it all works and can be proven with experiments - thats what you cant say about quantum physics...
[/ QUOTE ]
The philosophical interpretation of quantum physics is the part where the opinions diverge.
I think the universe simply isn't as mechanical as we wish it to be. Einstein had huge problems accepting this to the extend where he desperately fought against any kind of indeterminate process although they were accepted among most of the new physicist.
ComradeJ: the factors that influence the roll of the dice, wind, gravity, air pressure etc are all part of that probability function ..
suppose you have dice in your hand and you shake it .. you are hodling the probability function .. at any instance the dice can be 1, 2 , 3 ,4 , 5 or 6 .. but as soon as your release and roll it you force to collapse that probability function .. just the fact that the number that you see is 5 .. doesnt mean that 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 dont exist .. they existed as a probability .. it works the same with dimensions above 4th ... at which all instances are possible
[/ QUOTE ]
I do believe that all the other options have never existed. It's a what-if scenario. If I had thrown harder, would I have gotten a 4? Well, you didn't throw harder, and you didn't because of all kinds of miniscule reasons. How strong you are, what your emotion at the time is, and even chemical levels of whatnot in your blood. Nothing just randomly happens, everything has a reason behind it, no matter how invisible that reason is to us (I can't tell what the air density is, or how much of chemical x you have in your blood, so I can't calculate how the dice is going to roll). The numbers that aren't 5 never existed, because in that condition, everything was set on your throwing a 5. The Big Bang itself set things in motion to make you at this point throw a 5.
it sounds kind of like you're describing the concept of destiny.. is it really a view that lets us analyse things scientifically?
[/ QUOTE ]
well science believes that the big bang creates destiny, and also the concept that if you can create a computer powerfull enough to understand the big bang, you may well be able to predict the future, is widely accepted.
not that I believe in the big bang.
science believes that the big bang creates destiny
[/ QUOTE ]
thats a different science to the one that came up with 10 dimensions? if the starting conditions determine the way things go then theres none of this 'possible futures' stuff surely..
it's a dumbed down version of the explanation... not that i am implying that you are stupid or anything
I dont think you can come outright and say that this is all BS, just becaues you yourself cant swallow the concept for whatever reason, doesnt mean the experiments and theories dont have real basis based on empirical proof.
ComradeJ: I just dont think you are getting this, it's mathematics/probability .. just becaues it's not there doesnt mean it doesnt exist, and the slits experiment is the perfect proof of that. As you are shaking your dice you are holding in your hand.. When you choose to roll it you collapse the function and out of all the possibilities one is had to be chosen because the dice can only balance on one side .. the physical factors that affect which number you roll is the reason you are holding this probability funciton ..
How can you accept that all other options never existed if you are in fact rolling a dice??? Mathematics my friend, mathematics...
I am not saying that i firmly believe in this quantum physics theory, but basic observations and mathematical calculations can provide close scientific evidence, and there might be some truth in these theories
[ QUOTE ]
it sounds kind of like you're describing the concept of destiny.. is it really a view that lets us analyse things scientifically?
[/ QUOTE ]
well science believes that the big bang creates destiny, and also the concept that if you can create a computer powerfull enough to understand the big bang, you may well be able to predict the future, is widely accepted.
not that I believe in the big bang.
[/ QUOTE ]
It was accepted 60 years ago, but as soon as you have any indeterminate element, as small as it may be, this is simply impossible. And we know a few indeterminate elements nowadays.
That depends on whether they are truly nondeterministic or whether they follow a pattern us puny humans just cannot comprehend.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly. Look at Chaos Mathematics; several simple equations were found that accurately map chaotic systems that prior to 1960 were thought of as pure entropy.
I haven't watched the vid yet, do they mention fractal dimensions? The Koch curve is somewhere around 1.26.
[ QUOTE ]
science believes that the big bang creates destiny
[/ QUOTE ]
thats a different science to the one that came up with 10 dimensions? if the starting conditions determine the way things go then theres none of this 'possible futures' stuff surely..
[/ QUOTE ]
exactly, they conflict
PBS made a miniseries out of Elegant Universe that you can watch, in segments here