|
|
Can dimensions be limited, or is the universe really infinite?By Engineer Saviour - Blaze Labs From our point of view, the universe seems to be infinite, and it seems that it's not only infinite but even ever expanding. Now that you should be able to understand how our seemingly 3D space time universe can all fit in a 4D hypersphere, which in turn can fit on a surface of a 5D hypershere and so on, where a difference in time is equivalent to a different point within its volume, you can understand why the universe as seen by a 3D observing creature/mind has no limits.
A 1D creature cannot understand what is a circle other than observing all the points making it up, one by one. Similarly a 2D creature cannot understand what is a sphere other by observing the flow of circles making it up. We see that in all cases, walking around, or observing the flow through time, is necessary to observe a higher dimensional space.
The question is, how can we know how many dimensions is the universe made up from. All the arguments mentioned above can be applied to any dimension and would imply the possibility of an infinite dimension space. But mathematics shows us that there are yet unknown reasons for which an ultimate dimension may be reached. One very interesting curve is the plot of surface area of hyperspheres of different dimensions, shown below. One would easily think that as we go higher in dimensions, the surface area of the n-sphere would increase at each stage, and yet, something very strange occurs, as a maxima in its surface area is reached at the 7th dimension. Could this indicate the real ultimate dimension of the universe?.
What would an n*D observer see if the universe in which he lives in is his own n*D dimensions ? - the answer is 'a still, or static (frozen in time) spatial shape of n*D dimensions'. A 2D creature does not need to move around the circle to recognise it or know anything else about it, and a 3D creature does not have to flow through circular slices of a sphere to recognise a sphere. Note that the actions move and flow both require the time dimension to make sense, but recognise is an act that reacts to the shape of a static structure and needs no time. For an n*D observer, the n-dimensional universe is static, lifeless, and does not change through time, but has all the knowledge of what's within all lower dimensions. Let's name this ultimate n*D observer as the universal observer. For the universal observer, time does not exist, since both himself and the universe are the same thing and neither himself nor the universe is effected by time in lower dimensions, and from a lower dimensional observer point of view he can be said to be existing from eternity to eternity. For those mathematically minded, let's take a car accelerating in a road. If we integrate the observed acceleration m/s2 with respect to time we get a car driving at a velocity measured in m/s. We have thus moved the motion of the car one dimension up with repect to time. If we integrate further the velocity with respect to time, we get the total distance covered in metres, no time. So did the road distance exist before or after the car started acceleration? As you see the 'road', the time independent dimension is NECESSARY for all other actions (differentiations with respect to time) to take place, and hence the universe should be limited in its number of dimensions, with the highest dimension being time independent, and being the universal observer itself. Next Page: Zero
Point Energy & Over Unity |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| constantine | Thursday, 12th April 2007 2:28am - No.1136 |
| Much of what you said here makes scence. however though the universal observer (lol sounds like a god) has no scence of time and lives in a static universe. no time? then is he from his own point of view eternal? did he start a the moment the universe was created or if hes eternal was the universe created? just as i can look a 2 dimensional drawring of a circle and understand it for what it is. surely the universal observer would be able to see the dimensions beneath him and have and understanding of time. or would it see the lower dimensions as a blurr and not be able to tell one momment from another, as someone with s keen interest but is not a scientist. your post is the first i have read that makes the other dimensions seem plausable. however im still not certain they are not higher dimensions but simply over looked ones. imagine a scocioty (stealing from douglas adams here) that lived in a world with no stars in the sky or whatever. basicaly a scocialy that had never had a reason to look up. everything they needed was on the ground. who acted like your 2 dimensional creatures on a sphere. then one day . something falls out of the sky and they look up. the extra dimension needed to make there sandles into shoes was always there. just over looked. also we need more tempral dimsion. so far i can move forward ( and in theory backwards. ) why cant i move up and down in time? and most importantly ( for science fction buffs) why not move sideways in time? please rebuff my silly ideas. but do it so we can go away and sah "ahhhh thats why" | |
| Shukmani | Saturday, 6th October 2007 1:05am - No.1847 |
| If you take a plane with perpendicular lines originating on its surface and extending into 3d space both below and above the plane and then you warp the x axis downward from the (0,0) point forming a hyperbola and then do the same for the y axis but only upward the plane becomes a saddle shape. What happens to the perpendicular lines though? They are no longer perpendicular from our three d point of view and in fact are no longer parallel to each other. Because the perpendicular lines are no longer parallel ... one would think that the lines must converge and actually cross each other or on the other hand diverge away from each other. I postulate this is not the case but that there is infinite space inwards for the lines not to converge. What this describes is warped space where you can imagine each perpendicular line coming off the warped plane ... which remains parallel but not i n three dimensions ... a model to represent a higher spatial dimension. Gravity warps space in such a manner but instead of leaving or 3 dimensional space which is stable to experience higher dimensions we choose to feel it as a force against or physical form. | |
| custennin | Sunday, 28th October 2007 12:58am - No.2068 |
| that is a fantastic consept and causes my mind no end of fun trying to imagine it. hoever is it not true that all infinite lines meet the on beginning in infinity? also you remember the old question. "if i stand 5 meters from a wall, and take a one meter step. then a .5 meter step and every step is half the distance of the one before. how many steps to reach the wall. answer, the journey is infinite." but at some point your gona bump your nose | |
| smartscience | Friday, 26th September 2008 12:51am - No.3138 |
| your retarded. time is not a dimesion. Also if a 2D creature lives on a sphere then it is 3d not 2D. A 2D creature would live on a 2D planet. It can go left or right and jump. If it lived on a sphere it would have no surface to walk on below it, only the sphere behind it. Be smart when you say stuff. This paper is almost completly wrong. Stop telling false information cause then those people pass it on. Then america just gets dumber and dumber. Next time please say that this is only your thoughts. Thanks! | |
| RMCybernetics | Friday, 26th September 2008 1:10am - No.3139 |
| I think you mean "You're retarded". Quite ironic and very amusing. You obviously missed the whole point of this series of articles. You shouldn't worry about America becoming dumber, it is just you. Cheers! | |
| varsha | Thursday, 23rd October 2008 9:34am - No.3216 |
| can we ever go back time? or will time ever move back in future? | |
| RMCybernetics | Monday, 27th October 2008 5:48am - No.3229 |
| If you went back in time you would go to an alternate reality that would be identical to the onbe of yor past except for the presence of your time traveling self. To go bck on your same time line you would just have to reerse your prsonala time and go back to a point in the past. you would therefore not be aware of it at all. | |
| varsha | Saturday, 1st November 2008 8:41am - No.3260 |
| so it can be that there is the so called fate and the obsever can see it all from the time frozen state.. | |
| RMCybernetics | Sunday, 2nd November 2008 2:08pm - No.3269 |
| Not a time frozen state but a time independant one. Problem is to function as a human you need personal time. You would have to exsist in some version of reality all on your own to observe it independantly. The fate idea depends on your opiniion really. It could be true, or we could all be unknowingly moving between very similar alternate realities continuously or every time we make a decision. This would elliminate the idea of having a predetermined fate. | |
© 2006. All Rights Reserved.
Just imagine one of those 2D creatures who cannot understand what is
height in the z direction and put him on the surface of a sphere. He
would walk round and round searching for an edge for ever, and finally
he may conclude and even prove that the path is infinite. Same applies
to a 1D creature going round a simple circle, and therefore same applies
to us 3D creatures living and travelling around in a 4D universe! In
general we can say that a creature with n*D observation capability,
will observe an (n+1)D dimension universe as infinite. We also learn
that for an n*D observer, the only way to observe a universe of a higher
dimension than himself is to 'walk around it' and memorise. 