Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
A Static Universe
    #15904409 - 03/05/12 03:58 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

So from what I understand, one of the leading theories in theoretical physics considers time to actually be another physical dimension. If this is the case, wouldn't it imply that the Universe is in effect static or unchanging?

That seems to be a logical inference imo, but it also seems to cause problems concerning quantum fluctuations. I suppose that there could be multiple play-outs of different scenarios existing simultaneously, but what would cause us to experience a single outcome? I guess something that we might identify as our self could exist and experience in each outcome present in space time?

I know a lot of you guys are more knowledgeable with physics than I, so any input or corrections would be appreciated.


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesaintphotios
Stranger
Male


Registered: 02/23/12
Posts: 448
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: A Static Universe [Re: 4896744] * 1
    #15904498 - 03/05/12 04:16 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

I personally like the holographic universe theory... it makes the most sense to me, and I like to think it accounts for the various anomalies. Physics isn't my area of expertise, but I think it would mesh a little better with the idea of a "static" universe.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: A Static Universe [Re: saintphotios] * 1
    #15904553 - 03/05/12 04:27 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Quote:

iThink said:
So from what I understand, one of the leading theories in theoretical physics considers time to actually be another physical dimension. If this is the case, wouldn't it imply that the Universe is in effect static or unchanging?




No, why would it?

Your position is just as much able to be expressed by dimensions as is time, yet your position changes, whether or not you consider time to be a dimension.  I suspect your trouble might be the way "dimension" is often used popularly solely to refer to spatial information, i.e. 3d movies actually still have a time dimensionality to them, obviously.



Quote:

saintphotios said:
I personally like the holographic universe theory... it makes the most sense to me, and I like to think it accounts for the various anomalies. Physics isn't my area of expertise, but I think it would mesh a little better with the idea of a "static" universe.





I here this and the fractal universe thing alot on this board, but I've never understood what the benefit of this construction would be in terms of our understanding, or why its a beter model.  At best, people seem to define things so that there is no practicle difference, i.e. they define the concept as something unobservable and metaphysicle. 

What's the benefit?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHagbardCeline
Student-Teacher-Student-Teacher
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/10/03
Posts: 10,028
Loc: Overjoyed, at the bottom ...
Last seen: 1 month, 11 days
Re: A Static Universe [Re: johnm214]
    #15904598 - 03/05/12 04:36 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Quote:

johnm214 said:

What's the benefit?




Context.


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesaintphotios
Stranger
Male


Registered: 02/23/12
Posts: 448
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: A Static Universe [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #15904691 - 03/05/12 04:55 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Quote:

I here this and the fractal universe thing alot on this board, but I've never understood what the benefit of this construction would be in terms of our understanding, or why its a beter model.  At best, people seem to define things so that there is no practicle difference, i.e. they define the concept as something unobservable and metaphysicle.




I don't think it's necessarily as much of a benefit as it is a pattern noticed independently in various fields. I won't lay the whole thing out here, you seem like you're somewhat familiar with it. But like quantum physics, it seemed to answer particular problems in different fields independently in the same type of way... whether neuroscience in the case of Bohm, or various problems presented in quantum physics. It would still be considered a fringe theory I'm sure. But the fact that these theories ultimately had to wait on holographic technology to find their answers seems promising to me.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: A Static Universe [Re: johnm214]
    #15905379 - 03/05/12 07:06 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Quote:

johnm214 said:

No, why would it?

Your position is just as much able to be expressed by dimensions as is time, yet your position changes, whether or not you consider time to be a dimension.  I suspect your trouble might be the way "dimension" is often used popularly solely to refer to spatial information, i.e. 3d movies actually still have a time dimensionality to them, obviously.





Wouldn't that past "you" still exist in the same spot spatially in the same spot in time? As soon as your spatial position changes so would your position in the dimension of time. It seemed to me that the theory suggested that there are many arrangements of matter which you identify as yourself that always exist, but we experience the dimension of time as a linear progression, so it feels like the past us no longer exists.


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A Static Universe [Re: 4896744]
    #15905535 - 03/05/12 07:29 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Quote:

...to actually be another physical dimension.




What do you mean by a "physical" dimension?  Im betting that is a confusion and may be leading to your questions.  Oddly enough being 'physical' or not isnt a technical or meaningful term in modern physics.  Dimensions do have a meaning though, and its more abstract than people often think.

Dimensions in physics often have much more to do with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension_(vector_space)
and this,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension_of_a_physical_quantity


The time dimension of space time is an example of the former.  I acutally wrote a lit bit about it in a recent thread in the science forum.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A Static Universe [Re: DieCommie]
    #15905552 - 03/05/12 07:32 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

These sorts of pictures are fairly popular,



I believe they have been made in pre industrial civilizations too IIRC.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: A Static Universe [Re: DieCommie]
    #15905624 - 03/05/12 07:42 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

I'm not sure man, I am a noob with science. Could you explain to me what I am misunderstanding in relation to this post?

Quote:

Wouldn't that past "you" still exist in the same spot spatially in the same spot in time? As soon as your spatial position changes so would your position in the dimension of time. It seemed to me that the theory suggested that there are many arrangements of matter which you identify as yourself that always exist, but we experience the dimension of time as a linear progression, so it feels like the past us no longer exists.




--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A Static Universe [Re: 4896744]
    #15905670 - 03/05/12 07:48 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Like the picture I posted above right?

Viewing the dimension of time graphically on a line and you get this long 'snake' with your baby self at one end and your old self at the other.  This 'snake' 'lives' in space-time.  It has an extent in each dimension, so its a 4D 'snake'.  A sort of 'hypersnake' (yes, I just made that up).


Have you ever read about visualizing dimensions by considering cross sections and the like?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: A Static Universe [Re: DieCommie]
    #15905693 - 03/05/12 07:51 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Ya, I watched a video that explained it like how that picture you posted did. Is that misleading, or is it a good explanation?

And no i haven't read about that, want to elaborate?


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A Static Universe [Re: 4896744]
    #15906201 - 03/05/12 09:15 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

X

Edited by DieCommie (11/06/13 05:48 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSleepwalker
Overshoes

Registered: 05/07/08
Posts: 5,503
Re: A Static Universe [Re: DieCommie]
    #15906463 - 03/05/12 10:03 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Thanks for typing that all out.  Very interesting stuff.

This seems relevant:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A Static Universe [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #15906535 - 03/05/12 10:18 PM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Actually... (sometimes I hate to be that guy, sometimes its OK though :tongue:)

Actually that video is not particularly relevant.  That video is the opinion of the person who made it, but its not really indicative of what higher dimensions are in math or physics.  Even the hypothetical higher dimensions of string theory are different than that video explains.  It starts out like what I explained above, but dives into some high conjecture pretty fast.

This one is a little better I think, he talks about Flatland,


Should really read the book if you are interested though!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSleepwalker
Overshoes

Registered: 05/07/08
Posts: 5,503
Re: A Static Universe [Re: DieCommie]
    #15907112 - 03/06/12 12:18 AM (12 years, 25 days ago)

Oh, whoops.  This stuff is fascinating,  but I'm mostly ignorant as to how these concepts fit into physics.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesaintphotios
Stranger
Male


Registered: 02/23/12
Posts: 448
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: A Static Universe [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #15907342 - 03/06/12 01:41 AM (12 years, 25 days ago)

And then there's also...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleZanthius
Mean Alien
Male

Registered: 02/05/09
Posts: 1,570
Re: A Static Universe [Re: 4896744]
    #15909754 - 03/06/12 04:16 PM (12 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

iThink said:
So from what I understand, one of the leading theories in theoretical physics considers time to actually be another physical dimension. If this is the case, wouldn't it imply that the Universe is in effect static or unchanging?




At the deepest level I believe the universe to be all possible configurations of the universe, so of course this would be static. As we move forward in time we merely move from a configuration of the universe with lower entropy to a configuration of the universe with higher entropy, but that doesn't mean that the past or the configuration with lower entropy ceases to exist...I also believe that there are many parallel realities which represent different configurations of the universe with the same level of entropy. All of these superpositions or different configurations of the universe are always existing in the eternal static universe.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: A Static Universe [Re: DieCommie]
    #15910831 - 03/06/12 07:33 PM (12 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

Is that misleading, or is it a good explanation?




Nah, its not misleading.  Its a 2D representation, or cross section of 4D space time. 


The popularization of visualizing spatial dimensions came about with the famous book 'Flatland' in the late 1800s.  Its a pretty easy read.  Its a fictional book with characters, but it also describes a zero dimension space, a one dimension, a two dimension and then uses the intuitive understanding of those to extrapolate into four dimensions. 

I got my first experience with considering higher dimensions in the kids fiction book 'The Boy Who Reversed Himself'.  The main character travels into a 4 dimensional space and the book explores what that is like and what it entails.

A cross section is basically a slice.  Like when you count the rings on a tree, you are looking at a cross section of the trunk.  Its a 2D picture that represents a slice of the 3D object.  When you look at medical images of brains and shit that is also what you see, a 2D cross section of a 3D object.

Humans can only see in 2D.  That is, you can only see lines that extend in the up/down direction and the left/right direction.  When you look out into the world your brain gets two 2D images that are cross sections of the 3D world.  Because you get two images, you have depth perception (which is different than 3D, unlike what theaters claim :wink:).  So, presumably, because we evolved a consciousness that only receives 2D images we can only intuitively conceptualize 2D images.  The way we conceptualize 3D images is with a series of cross sections.  Like this,
http://english.people.com.cn/200508/14/images/0812_D78.jpg

Now to quickly go through what 'Flatland' does.  Consider a zero dimension space.  It consists of not width, breadth nor height.  Thats it. 

Consider a one dimension space.  It is a line that extends in two directions off to infinity.  Any thing that exists in this space can only move forward or backward, thus the order of objects on this line can never change.  Now lets take a cross section of this zero dimension space.  Cut it at some point and look down it.  It looks like a pure point, with no width or height.  It looks like a zero dimension object. 

Now consider a two dimension space.  It is a plane that extends up/down and left/right.  Objects in this space occupy width and height.  They can move around each other, because they have access to the second dimension.  They cannot flip over though, they are bound to lie flat in their space.  Now lets take a cross section of this two dimensional space.  Cut it at some point and look against it.  It looks like a line, with only width and no height.  It looks like a one dimensional object.  Any of the 2D objects that occupy this space, if cut in this fashion, would appear to be a line.  The cross section of these 2D objects is a 1D object. 

You can see the pattern now.  Whatever space you are in, you can take a cross section slice out of it and represent that part of it with one less dimension.

Consider the three dimension space we intuitively live in.  It extends up/down, left/right and forward/back as we all know.  Objects in this space can move around each other like 2D objects can and we can also flip around unlike 2D objects.  We can face each other or put our back to each other.  If we cut a cross section of this three dimensional space we get a 2D plane or sheet, like the body slices I linked up above.

Now lets have a thought experiment.  I believe I remember this from Flatland specifically...  Consider that you are a 2D creature.  You live on a flat surface and as you look out you see a line where something exists and emptiness elsewhere.  (Remember a line is the cross section of 2D)  Now a 3D object invades your space and pops out from 'below', a direction you have never seen and cannot fathom.  If its a human's head moving into your field of view you will first see a small point, your 1D cross section of the top of the head.  As the head moves up, your point grows into a longer line until the chin passes your eyes then the line shrinks as as you look at the neck.  What the 1D creature sees during this is a line that is changing in size spontaneously in front of him! 

Now to consider a 4 dimensional space.  It extends in four directions, each at right angles to each other.  Objects in this space can move around each other like 2D objects, they can flip around like 3D objects but they can also turn around is a different way.  A flip like a mirror that would put your heart on the right side of your chest.  If we cut a cross section of this four dimensional space we get a 3 dimensional view.  This is how a 4D creature would see his space, in true 3D.  It would be like seeing the whole series of 3D cross sections at once.  Or seeing every frame of this progression at once,


Every frame in that animation is a cross section.  Its a 3D wire grid cross section of a 4D cube.  (To confuse it further, its actually a 2D cross section of a 3D cross section... Because you are viewing it on a 2D monitor.)

So that is the best we can do to visualize higher dimension space.  We can consider series of cross sections.  That picture I posted earlier, that is a cross section representation of space time.

But now take further care...  I have here only discussed normal, well behaved spaces.  So called euclidean or flat spaces.  Space time is not that way.  The time dimension in space time is distinctly different than the the space dimension.  This would take a bit more mental digestion to understand.




Awesome post man, thanks. So am I correct in assuming that this would imply a static universe?


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A Static Universe [Re: 4896744]
    #15910922 - 03/06/12 07:47 PM (12 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

So am I correct in assuming that this would imply a static universe?




Im not sure what you mean.

This is what I think of when I think of static universe, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_universe
The universe is one size at one coordinate of the time dimension and another size at a different coordinate.  That makes it dynamic, thats what dynamic is.  Dynamic is things changing with respect to time.

The picture I posted way up above has the 'hypersnake' of a persons existence.  The hypervolume that object occupies in 4D space-time doesn't change or move.  But the volume of a person in our 3D space does change and move, it changes with respect to the time dimension as plotted above. 

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: A Static Universe [Re: DieCommie]
    #15910956 - 03/06/12 07:52 PM (12 years, 24 days ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

So am I correct in assuming that this would imply a static universe?




Im not sure what you mean.

This is what I think of when I think of static universe, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_universe
The universe is one size at one coordinate of the time dimension and another size at a different coordinate.  That makes it dynamic, thats what dynamic is.  Dynamic is things changing with respect to time.

The picture I posted way up above has the 'hypersnake' of a persons existence.  The hypervolume that object occupies in 4D space-time doesn't change or move.  But the volume of a person in our 3D space does change and move, it changes with respect to the time dimension as plotted above. 




That's what I was trying to say. So is it correct to assume that the universe is an unchanging mass of matter even though their will obviously be different compositions of matter at different points in the dimensions?


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Analogies of Consciousness CosmicJokeM 2,301 10 05/30/01 08:15 PM
by fun_guy
* Implications of the Big Bang Origin and Fate of the Universe
( 1 2 3 all )
Source 6,630 41 09/07/04 11:01 PM
by gettinjiggywithit
* The Fourth Dimension
( 1 2 all )
Ravus 2,061 20 12/17/04 07:24 AM
by RiffSki
* thoughts on dimensions
( 1 2 all )
automanM 2,952 34 09/27/03 09:03 AM
by Psychogenik
* Dimensions Ravus 1,180 11 08/06/04 08:08 PM
by Simisu
* How many dimensions do we experience?
( 1 2 3 all )
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl 2,985 54 06/07/16 01:21 AM
by sudly
* Three Dimensions as a Crutch for Personal Perception Freezestate 595 5 12/26/07 04:32 AM
by BlueCoyote
* Singularity, Free Will, Infinite Dimensions...
( 1 2 all )
Joshua 6,388 30 04/12/02 03:47 PM
by skaMariaPastora

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,180 topic views. 0 members, 9 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.025 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 14 queries.