Silus Posted March 18, 2011 #1 Share Posted March 18, 2011 I see it so often when looking at topics such as the ones on these forums. What is your opinion? For me it doesn't make sense, I just don't see how any other than the dimensions we exist in can be. The 3 spatial dimensions and time are the only options imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emma_Acid Posted March 18, 2011 #2 Share Posted March 18, 2011 I see it so often when looking at topics such as the ones on these forums. What is your opinion? For me it doesn't make sense, I just don't see how any other than the dimensions we exist in can be. The 3 spatial dimensions and time are the only options imo. They only make sense to you because they are the dimensions we exist in. Certain areas of physics only work when extra dimensions are added on top, but these dimensions are (very, very) tiny, curled up portions of space, not a sci-fi kind of dimension that we could travel to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milich Posted March 18, 2011 #3 Share Posted March 18, 2011 They only make sense to you because they are the dimensions we exist in. Certain areas of physics only work when extra dimensions are added on top, but these dimensions are (very, very) tiny, curled up portions of space, not a sci-fi kind of dimension that we could travel to. Yeah they think gravity may exist on another dimension because of it's ability to act through matter and over very very large distances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emma_Acid Posted March 20, 2011 #4 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Yeah they think gravity may exist on another dimension because of it's ability to act through matter and over very very large distances. Yeah, I think the general jist is that gravity may "leak" from one universe to another. Or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milich Posted March 20, 2011 #5 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Yeah, I think the general jist is that gravity may "leak" from one universe to another. Or something. Basically, I think what we're trying to say is that to understand multiple dimensions further, you're likely to have to either wait for the confirmation of Higgs and our knowledge on other dimensions will become clearer and easier to understand because we will find better ways to explain/demonstrate things on quantum levels or we don't find the Higgs and you're right. 3 spatial dimensions and 1 time dimension is all there is. I may be wrong, but that's the way I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silus Posted March 22, 2011 Author #6 Share Posted March 22, 2011 (edited) From what I have seen the need for extra dimensions comes from our inability to solve problems in the traditional dimensions. It seems massively more likely to me that given time people will solve these problems without the need for the extra dimensions. Concerning the Higgs, again it just seems wrong to me that one particle is thought to give all others mass. Given the amount spent it would be a shame if we learned nothing from the LHC. I posted this thread while listening to a podcast where they described something entering our time/space or whatever you wish to call it and then going back to its own. I probably didn't word it well, apologies. Edited March 22, 2011 by -Djinn- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
envis Posted March 24, 2011 #7 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Yeah they think gravity may exist on another dimension because of it's ability to act through matter and over very very large distances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
envis Posted March 24, 2011 #8 Share Posted March 24, 2011 also how we use these as unique individuals not ever being the same as anyone else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avant Posted March 25, 2011 #9 Share Posted March 25, 2011 My mind gets blown when I think about multiple dimentions, I've read somewhere that each of our decisions can lead to a new universe being created, with that in mind the amount of other dimentions must be more than we can comprehend surely with each person choosing multiple things each day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent. Mulder Posted March 30, 2011 #10 Share Posted March 30, 2011 My mind gets blown when I think about multiple dimentions, I've read somewhere that each of our decisions can lead to a new universe being created, with that in mind the amount of other dimentions must be more than we can comprehend surely with each person choosing multiple things each day? How would our decisions create a new universe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepulchrave Posted March 30, 2011 #11 Share Posted March 30, 2011 How would our decisions create a new universe? Avant is talking about the ``many worlds'' interpretation of Quantum mechanics. One of the contentious issues in understanding the philosophy of Quantum mechanics is that a wavefunction, when perturbed, can instantaneously ``collapse'' into one of it's component states (i.e. it goes from, say, 30% A + 30% B + 40% C to 100% A). The particular component state that it collapses into is randomly chosen. This randomness doesn't sit well with some physicists and philosophers. Hugh Everett postulated in the 1950's that when a wavefunction collapses, all of it's component states are selected, and the Universe ``splits up'' so that each component state now exists in a separate Universe. In my above example, perturbing the wavefunction (30% A + 30% B + 40% C) would create 3 new Universes, the only difference between them would be that one Universe would have a 100% A wavefunction, another a 100% B wavefunction, and the third 100% C wavefunction. The ``many worlds'' interpretation has fallen out of favour in recent times because it basically just dodges the question, and adds a mind-boggling amount of extra Universes every second. It's not just human decisions that can collapse a wavefunction, after all. The random thermal interactions of air would create trillions and trillions of extra Universes with trivial differences. Of course the technical debate about the short-comings of the ``many worlds'' interpretation has not stopped it from being very popular in the media and in pseudoscientists, mostly because of it's rather esoteric claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent. Mulder Posted March 30, 2011 #12 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Ah. So just theoretical now. Gotcha. I may read up on it later if i have some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Internationalmanof mystery Posted March 30, 2011 #13 Share Posted March 30, 2011 It is immpossible to travel to a new universe for the universe is currently expanding faster then light by the forces of gravity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent. Mulder Posted March 30, 2011 #14 Share Posted March 30, 2011 It is immpossible to travel to a new universe for the universe is currently expanding faster then light by the forces of gravity. Depends on how you plan on getting to that Other universe, outside ours, if there is one. http://www.astronomy.com/en/sitecore/content/Home/News-Observing/News/2006/08/How%20fast%20is%20the%20universe%20expanding.aspx Thats how fast its expanding. Light travels at 186,000 miles a second. The universe is expanding at 48miles a second (per 3.2 million light years though). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSearcher Posted March 31, 2011 #15 Share Posted March 31, 2011 (edited) Avant is talking about the ``many worlds'' interpretation of Quantum mechanics. One of the contentious issues in understanding the philosophy of Quantum mechanics is that a wavefunction, when perturbed, can instantaneously ``collapse'' into one of it's component states (i.e. it goes from, say, 30% A + 30% B + 40% C to 100% A). The particular component state that it collapses into is randomly chosen. This randomness doesn't sit well with some physicists and philosophers. Hugh Everett postulated in the 1950's that when a wavefunction collapses, all of it's component states are selected, and the Universe ``splits up'' so that each component state now exists in a separate Universe. In my above example, perturbing the wavefunction (30% A + 30% B + 40% C) would create 3 new Universes, the only difference between them would be that one Universe would have a 100% A wavefunction, another a 100% B wavefunction, and the third 100% C wavefunction. The ``many worlds'' interpretation has fallen out of favour in recent times because it basically just dodges the question, and adds a mind-boggling amount of extra Universes every second. It's not just human decisions that can collapse a wavefunction, after all. The random thermal interactions of air would create trillions and trillions of extra Universes with trivial differences. Of course the technical debate about the short-comings of the ``many worlds'' interpretation has not stopped it from being very popular in the media and in pseudoscientists, mostly because of it's rather esoteric claims. I read a nice example of the many worlds theory : The quantum-mechanical "Schrödinger's cat" paradox according to the many-worlds interpretation, is slightly different. In this interpretation, every event is a branch point. The cat is both alive and dead of course, even before the box is opened. However the "alive" and "dead" cats, are in different branches of the universe, both of which are equally real, but cannot interact with one another. Needless to say that this kind of things are enough to make your head go loopy. Edited March 31, 2011 by TheSearcher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now