If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Medium)   Tired of just three dimensions? Meet the man (you've never heard of) who took physics into the TWENTY-SIXTH dimension   (medium.com) divider line 28
    More: Interesting, strong forces, gluons, string theory, weak forces, Hadrons, Atomic Nucleus, physics, superstring theory  
•       •       •

2153 clicks; posted to Geek » on 05 Aug 2014 at 4:33 PM (11 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



28 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-05 02:02:28 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-08-05 02:16:35 PM  
26 dimensions...26 letters of the alphabet.  Coincidence?  I THINK NOT!
 
2014-08-05 02:36:41 PM  
Since this thread was done in one, here are some dimensions I'd love to study more closely:

c300221.r21.cf1.rackcdn.com
 
2014-08-05 04:13:23 PM  
done in one.
 
2014-08-05 04:37:24 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-08-05 04:40:04 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-08-05 04:42:43 PM  
Let me translate for you: "I am so stoned right now."
 
2014-08-05 05:13:41 PM  

DjangoStonereaver: Since this thread was done in one, here are some dimensions I'd love to study more closely:


I agree with both of these points.
 
2014-08-05 05:15:46 PM  

Snapper Carr:


Is it bad that's the first thing I thought of, too?
 
2014-08-05 05:18:50 PM  
Jesus, Medium is such a shiatty site :/
 
2014-08-05 05:33:15 PM  

ReverendJynxed: Jesus, Medium is such a shiatty site :/


This. Even io9 is better.
 
2014-08-05 05:37:09 PM  
explaining the powerful bonds between protons, nucleons, and other particles that experience the strong force, known in general as hadrons.

Neutrons? Otherwise that doesn't make sense.

It appeared in the prestigious Physical Review Letters

who was then at Princeton," recalled during a talk in 2000,


Spurious quotes.

Anyway, interesting story. I'd heard of this counter-intuitively high number of dimensions stuff before but had no idea the guy who invented it was relatively unknown. Not that surprising since he was an oddball even by university researcher standards.

Most of these guys have strange speech patterns and personal quirks that go on for miles. They'll wander down to the dorms to recruit undergrads to join them as research assistants. Despite most of those undergrads not even majoring in the same subject, and being undergrads they wouldn't understand any of it anyway. Then they wander over to the cafeteria and leave their dandruff everywhere while standing in line for a cookie. Before moseying back up to their offices.

Despite all that that, they still get along and have dinner over at friends' and stuff like that. And they all end up married, a lot of them several times with ex-wives who hate them. I'll never understand how anyone could hate a completely incomprehensible quirk machine but somehow it happens... So clearly this guy Lovelace must've been truly unhappy around people.

I mean hell they even put up with me when I tell them they're endangering rats' lives by misspelling the drugs they'll be shooting them up with for the 230492834th time.
 
2014-08-05 05:41:35 PM  

SurfaceTension: [img.fark.net image 850x360]


Would the last person in this thread please turn the lights off on their way out the door?
 
2014-08-05 05:45:47 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-08-05 05:49:37 PM  
I dunno... I don't want to pay for a dimension that I'm not going to use.

im-possible.info
 
2014-08-05 06:10:23 PM  
Of course there's more dimensions in this latest model of the universe than there were previously. The universe is expanding, isn't it?
 
2014-08-05 06:35:22 PM  

Snapper Carr: [i.imgur.com image 320x240]


i291.photobucket.com

/i dont think i could handle that
 
2014-08-05 07:50:42 PM  
Leech lattice sphere packing problem? Vaguely remember actually visualizing that one stoned night in the 80s when the SA article came out.

/drtfa, obviously.
 
2014-08-05 08:10:48 PM  

DjangoStonereaver: Since this thread was done in one, here are some dimensions I'd love to study more closely:

[c300221.r21.cf1.rackcdn.com image 479x700]


Do they have sammidges in that dimension?
 
2014-08-05 09:37:33 PM  
Can't just say "dimensions" and use them mathematically.
Each has to mean something, be something...something REAL.

Space...3
Time 1
What else???

And BTW...prove it...and show how it works with the others
...and they need to work here and now.

No punting allowed.  (ex: Oh, they all shrunk away billions of years ago...that doesn't explain what works now)
 
2014-08-05 09:38:52 PM  
They live in the spaces between the spaces.
 
2014-08-05 10:22:34 PM  

rogue49: Can't just say "dimensions" and use them mathematically.
Each has to mean something, be something...something REAL.

Space...3
Time 1
What else???

And BTW...prove it...and show how it works with the others
...and they need to work here and now.

No punting allowed.  (ex: Oh, they all shrunk away billions of years ago...that doesn't explain what works now)


Here's 10: Link.
 
2014-08-06 03:30:52 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: rogue49: Can't just say "dimensions" and use them mathematically.
Each has to mean something, be something...something REAL.

Space...3
Time 1
What else???

And BTW...prove it...and show how it works with the others
...and they need to work here and now.

No punting allowed.  (ex: Oh, they all shrunk away billions of years ago...that doesn't explain what works now)

Here's 10: Link.


There may be something other than just spatial dimensions...for example Time is not spatial.

Besides...the vid itself is saying that others are disputing it. Strange.
 
2014-08-06 03:33:36 AM  
What is this, hipstering theory?

You see, there's these dimensions. . .
 
2014-08-06 03:35:55 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: rogue49: Can't just say "dimensions" and use them mathematically.
Each has to mean something, be something...something REAL.

Space...3
Time 1
What else???

And BTW...prove it...and show how it works with the others
...and they need to work here and now.

No punting allowed.  (ex: Oh, they all shrunk away billions of years ago...that doesn't explain what works now)

Here's 10: Link.


Yeah... the problem with that is that time is not the 4th dimension.  Can you have space without time?  Can you have time without space?  Without time, space becomes non-existent, but you can have time without space, because time is its own collection of dimensions that space is connected to.  Time could be considered the 1st dimension, starting from a point and continuing out in one direction forever, but it is more like an infinite series of cones branching out from a single point, and the cones expand outward with space contained within them, every expanding to accommodate the constant dividing of the universes within into multiverses where every possibility of that universe is played out in.

Drink!
 
2014-08-06 03:51:47 AM  

real_headhoncho: Yeah... the problem with that is that time is not the 4th dimension. Can you have space without time? Can you have time without space? Without time, space becomes non-existent, but you can have time without space, because time is its own collection of dimensions that space is connected to. Time could be considered the 1st dimension, starting from a point and continuing out in one direction forever, but it is more like an infinite series of cones branching out from a single point, and the cones expand outward with space contained within them, every expanding to accommodate the constant dividing of the universes within into multiverses where every possibility of that universe is played out in.

Drink!


I don't have a problem with that. With time being D4, Ds 1-3 depend on it for their existence. Likewise, each higher dimension depends on the ones above it for their own existence. In short, you're not building up, you're dividing down.

rogue49: There may be something other than just spatial dimensions...for example Time is not spatial.

Besides...the vid itself is saying that others are disputing it. Strange.


The vid doesn't suggest time as being spatial ... well, not spatial as we 3Ders know it.

At any rate, I wasn't trying to answer some cosmic question or even reference the article; I was merely trying to expand rogue49's mind a little, since he requested something beyond just mathematics.
 
2014-08-06 10:57:44 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: real_headhoncho: Yeah... the problem with that is that time is not the 4th dimension. Can you have space without time? Can you have time without space? Without time, space becomes non-existent, but you can have time without space, because time is its own collection of dimensions that space is connected to. Time could be considered the 1st dimension, starting from a point and continuing out in one direction forever, but it is more like an infinite series of cones branching out from a single point, and the cones expand outward with space contained within them, every expanding to accommodate the constant dividing of the universes within into multiverses where every possibility of that universe is played out in.

Drink!

I don't have a problem with that. With time being D4, Ds 1-3 depend on it for their existence. Likewise, each higher dimension depends on the ones above it for their own existence. In short, you're not building up, you're dividing down.

rogue49: There may be something other than just spatial dimensions...for example Time is not spatial.

Besides...the vid itself is saying that others are disputing it. Strange.

The vid doesn't suggest time as being spatial ... well, not spatial as we 3Ders know it.

At any rate, I wasn't trying to answer some cosmic question or even reference the article; I was merely trying to expand rogue49's mind a little, since he requested something beyond just mathematics.


Whaa??

OK...first of all, both Space & Time are dimensions...ever hear of General Relativity?
They act as one...
Mass warps one, it warps all...which you see in Gravity...but it also alters time.

What I'm saying is that a dimension doesn't have to be spatial.
String Theory works mathematically with extra dimensions...and that's fine.
BUT
It doesn't have to be either just math based dimensions or extra spatial dimensions.

You can define it as another thing...
As long as that thing interacts with the rest of what we now know as Space-Time
AND it works Here & Now....why??
Because it's a model to describe the base of reality...the reality we live within.  (and that's here & now)

Soo...expand your mind a bit...think outside the box.
Can you define another dimension...one that is not just spatial.

Come on...I'm already "expanded"...I'm just trying to get you there.
Think about what I'm saying.

BTW....real_headhoncho ...what you said was just silly.
Study your dimensional physics more...get back to me.
At least Arcadian didn't confuse the whole thing...
 
2014-08-07 02:02:26 AM  
I'm not sure how any of that refutes anything I've said. Mostly, it just seems a complete misunderstanding (or ignoring) of what I've posted.

Can I define another dimension...one that is not just spatial? No, of course not. Just like a Flatlander cannot grasp a third dimension, us 3Ders really cannot truly grasp higher D's. We can postulate, guesstimate, simulate, but in the end it's kinda meaningless since we'll never really be able to perceive it in any way other than in mathematical constructs. The fact that you consider Time to be a dimension could very well be an illusion created by your inability to see higher dimensions from an appropriate point of view.

For instance, these images are of the same chair:

i.kinja-img.com

or, since we're talking of dimensional illusions, this Rubik's cube.

Our perception of time could easily be a result of a similar trick.

Also -- and this needs to be said again, but apparently your "expanded" mind has been stretched a bit thin :) -- I make no claim to understand (or, to be honest, give a fark) about anything posted in the video, higher spatial or non-spatial dimensions, or whatever. I was merely trying to provide you with something beyond numbers, since you asked for it; that video has very few numbers.
Perhaps I simply misunderstood your question.
 
Displayed 28 of 28 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report