|
 automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
 thoughts on dimensions 
#1941236 - 09/22/03 03:06 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
(i previously posted this in the wrong forum. shroomism told me that it sould be here.)
*alone and blasted... just need to ramble*
the fourth dimension is space/time. that said, basically, to my understanding, a dimension is just the ability to move at an angle to previous dimensions. as in: the first dimension is the ability to move in a straight line. the second dimension is the ability to move at an angle to the first dimension (like an infinite sheet of paper). the third dimension is the ability to move at an angle to the fist two dimensions (like an infinite box). here is where it becomes more abstract. the forth dimension is the ability to move at an angle to the first 3 dimensions (take that box and move it through space).
so, time is marked as the differnce between moving said box from here there, whatever those places may be. granted the numbers that we place on that are purely human. under that logic, the 5th dimension would be the ability to mave at an angle to the first 4 dimensions (the ability to go from point a to point b without making the journey).
a question would be: how could something move from point a to point b without traveling? the answer is that it isnt restricted to 4 dimensional movement, just like a 3 dimensional figure isnt restricted to 2 dimensions (lengh and width).
my question is to the fact that space and time are somehow tied together. i dont think that they are.if something traveled from point a to point b on a 2 dimensional plane, wouldnt there be a difference in the moments between point a and point b? (i understand the concept of human quantifying of the principle known as time, so get over it for this discusion.) anyways, there has to be some "time" that has passed in that forementioned 2 dimensional voyeage. it is "below" us on the dimensional ladder. we are tied to that rule. it is only 5th dimensional objects that have the benefit of non 4 dimensional travel, in relation to us.
so, it is my arguement that "space" alone is the forth dimension. Time is a byproduct of linear movement that is tied not to the 4th dimension, but to the first four dimensions. i also think that it is optional for higher dimensions. not a rule. example: a 3 dimensional object, while existing in 3 dimensions, may elect to move in one way(dimension). therefore, a fifth dimensional object, while still existing in 5 dimensions may elect to move in just one dimension.
i could go on all night. i'd like to hear what you guys think.
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
 pattern
multiplayer
Registered: 07/19/02
Posts: 2,185
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
 Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1941790 - 09/22/03 05:34 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
the fourth dimension is space/time. that said, basically, to my understanding,
According to popular opinion, the fourth dimension is Time, but I understand what you mean.
Quote:
a dimension is just the ability to move at an angle to previous dimensions.
Thats a clever way of saying it. 
Quote:
so, time is marked as the differnce between moving said box from here there, whatever those places may be.
If time is just a marker, how did the box move?
Quote:
my question is to the fact that space and time are somehow tied together. i dont think that they are.
Me neither, but we're in the minority.
Quote:
if something traveled from point a to point b on a 2 dimensional plane, wouldnt there be a difference in the moments between point a and point b?
Yes.
Quote:
so, it is my arguement that "space" alone is the forth dimension.
How about: The fourth dimension is "space alone".
Quote:
Time is a byproduct of linear movement that is tied not to the 4th dimension, but to the first four dimensions.
Are you arguing that time is born from movement? If so, how does an object "start" moving? Does time stop when the object is at rest?
Quote:
i also think that it is optional for higher dimensions. not a rule. example: a 3 dimensional object, while existing in 3 dimensions, may elect to move in one way(dimension). therefore, a fifth dimensional object, while still existing in 5 dimensions may elect to move in just one dimension.
Exactly. Like on a 2 dimensional X/Y Plane, an object can move only along the Y axis and not move along the X axis.
Quote:
i could go on all night. i'd like to hear what you guys think.
I think time is not a dimension, and that we cant time travel into the past, because there is no longer a past to travel to. 
--------------------
man = monkey + mushroom
|
EvilGir
Im the on coming storm
Registered: 11/26/01
Posts: 1,301
Loc: Planet Irk
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: pattern]
#1941858 - 09/22/03 05:53 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I think they are 3 spacial dimentions such as lenght, width and depth.
But there is also one tempral dimention which is time. There are even other dimensions that we can not yet comprehend because we are traped in a 4d plane of existence.
--------------------
Fighting the man the best way I can.
|
EvilGir
Im the on coming storm
Registered: 11/26/01
Posts: 1,301
Loc: Planet Irk
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: EvilGir]
#1941875 - 09/22/03 05:58 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
But we should also see time as a place rather than something that has happened. This can easily be shown by the co-ordinates such as X:001 Y:002 Z:003 and T:12:00.
So this means 1999 does exist right now but its temproal position is behind us. So time travel is possible, but would only cause a branching off into diffrent universes if the temproal line was effected.
--------------------
Fighting the man the best way I can.
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
 Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1942920 - 09/22/03 10:58 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Density/Dimension Scale
as described in the book "Prism of Lyra" by Lyssa Royal.
7th Density
Awareness as the multidimensional experience, group-matrix identity, (social memory complex). This is the frequency of total oneness or integration and vibrations at this frequency are merged in identity and become a mass-conscious whole. They magnetize those in other frequencies and provide the current for the natural flow toward integration. Once the seventh density beings reach critical mass, they will progress thru the Prism of Lyra (from our point of view it will then be a black hole exit point) and reach the next octave where another adventure awaits.
6th Density
Awareness as the dimension itself. This has often been called the "Christ Consciousness" in that it displays a frequency level equal to that of the the Christ or Buddha. >From this frequency a total remembrance occurs, and the one begins taking responsibility for the Whole rather then the Self. The process of progressing the Self and progressing the Whole becomes one and the same.
5th Density
Experiental awareness of "I" as a group identity, not bound by linear time. In this density sentient consciousness begins to awaken to its heritage. this is the density of wisdom. As one awakens the wisdom within, they very often want to share it with those who are still focused in the lower densities. many from this realm choose to become guides for others. A 5th density being merges with its family of consciousness ("oversoul" or "higher self" if you will) and begins to remember. This is the first density in which a nonphysical orientation is experienced. Note: there is no clear-cut distinction when transiting from 5th to 7th densities. Because these densities are not physically oriented, there is much blending in these transitions.
4th Density
Containment of volumetric awareness, superconsciousness, reintegration of group identity without loss of ego identity; as vibration increases, perception of past, present, and future become more fluid along with the ability to interface with multidimensional and multidensity realities, negatively oriented consciousness becomes more difficult to maintain. Presently on Earth, 4th density reality is overlapping third. In humanity's case, this can account for the increased desire for unity, peace and unconditional love as opposed to the illusion of separation that characterizes third density. The vibrationary rate of one's reality is stepped up, and therefore one may be faced with personal issues in a much more rapid and intense way.
3rd Density
Volumetric awareness, ego, loss of group identity, development of individual identity, ability to remember past and cognize the future while retaining present awareness. This is the density where human beings emerge. It is a vibration that creates the illusion of separation and thus a challenge toward awakening. Presently humanity is going thru a transition period into 4th dnesity reality which can account for the many rapid changes the human race is undergoing. This is the frequency that expresses the most separation from the Whole. It is from here that many lessons about integration are learned. This is the most intense of all levels in its cultivation of growth with the Self. Cetaceans (dolphins and whales) presently exist simultaneously in 3rd and 4th densities and are transiting out of 3rd along with humanity.
2nd Density
Awareness as a line, biological matter, development of species identity. The consciousness expressed by 2nd density vibration does not possess self-awareness (or ego). Most species within the plant and animal kingdoms exist here, however their placement in density depends upon many additional factors, including the presence of absence of ego.
1st Density
Awareness as a point, physical matter. This frequency level is the most basic. It provides the matter and energy for the creation of atoms and molecules. The basic life forms of mineral and water, for example, are all operating from 1st density. Humans possess this frequency within themselves as well. It makes up the basic genetic codes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terminology:
Density: Density denotes a vibrational frequency and not a location, which the term "dimension" implies. The density structure of this reality is primarily expressed in seven levels, though each level has sub-levels within it. The density scale is a model used to communicate one's perception of orientation in relation to other realities.
Dimension: Dimension refers to one's location in space/time rather then a person's vibrational frequency (density). Webster defines "dimension" as "Magnitude measured in a particular direction, specifically length, breadth, thickness or time." There are an infinite number of dimensions existing with a given density or vibrational frequency.
Frequency: Matter is vibrating energy. Different vibrationary rates denote the properties. Frequency is the rate at which molecules or consciousness vibrate.
Prism of Lyra: A prism is a transparent body with a triangular base used to polarize or decompose light or energy into its spectrum. The prism of Lyra is the archetypal idea of the entrance of consciousness into this reality. For Earth's galactic family the entrance point exists within the Lyran system. As consciousness/energy emerged, it fragmented into seven density frequencies, much as a prism would fragment light in seven colors.
--------------------
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Shroomism]
#1942959 - 09/22/03 11:17 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Question: How do we know there aren't more than seven densities? And how can we know anything about the higher densities if we've only reached the 4th(unless you count Christ and Buddha)?
--------------------
 
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 3 days
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1943376 - 09/23/03 02:10 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
You don't really need to think in terms of motion to understand dimensions. Just think of a number of identical objects that only differ from each other through their locations in space. These objects can be thought of as instances of an imagined abstract prototype object that has an indeterminate location in space. This indeterminate location has what is known as "degrees of freedom", which is the minimum number of independent values that need to be specified in order to fix the location of any of the real objects. These degrees of freedom are the mathematical dimensions.
If the objects can differ from each other in other respects than just location, like for example size, orientation, color, etc, this adds more degrees of freedom. These are also dimensions, but only in an abstract mathematical sense. The true dimensions of space only refer to degrees of freedom that affect spatial separation (distance) regardless of the type of object.
The idea of time as a fourth dimension comes from Einstein's theory of relativity. Einstein found that the spatial distance between two objects is not agreed upon by all observers. Distance depends on an observer's state of motion. But there is another distance measure called the "interval" which is absolute. In order to calculate it, the time between events needs to be taken into account, and this time is treated somewhat like a fourth geometric dimension.
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
 Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: pattern]
#1943796 - 09/23/03 09:26 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
patter, in response to, "If time is just a marker, how did the box move?" it doesn't matter for this argument, but what does matter is that time is not just a marker. we mark the intervals, but the intervals arent time.
there is no such thing as a moment in time. the very fact that an object is in motion reasons that fact. take for example: if you throw me a ball, and it takes 5 seconds to get to me, where is it at exactly 3 seconds? the answer: not a valid question. if you could say that at exactly 3 seconds the ball was exactly at point x, then the ball is frozen there....not moving. we know that the ball is moving, so it can never be at anyplace at any given point in time, because there is no such thing as a moment of time. time just is. just like the first dimension just is. and because there is no progression of moments of time, there is no "fluidity" of time. time doesnt move forwards or backwards or sideways or any other "direction". it just is.
when i said: "Time is a byproduct of linear movement that is tied not to the 4th dimension, but to the first four dimensions." i must have ate 1 gram too many, because i knew it was counter intuitive to my arguement. 
by the way, if you guys haven't read peter lynds yet, it is a must.
here is a good article describing his findings
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1943878 - 09/23/03 10:05 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
i found a link to his site, directly.
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 3 days
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1943934 - 09/23/03 10:33 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
if you could say that at exactly 3 seconds the ball was exactly at point x, then the ball is frozen there....not moving
This is the well-known Zeno's Paradox. It was resolved with the invention of differential calculus more than 300 years ago.
The root of the paradox is this: what we identify as a ball at a particular moment in time is not the same thing as the entire life history from creation to destruction of a certain inflatable piece of rubber. They are different (but related) abstractions, in the same way as the human being that I was last tuesday isn't quite the same thing as the human life-process that spans my whole life from my birth until now.
A ball frozen at a moment of time has no motion. But when this ball is replicated at another moment of time, now frozen in a different location in space, we deduce that there is a ball-process that has the property of motion. No paradox.
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Rhizoid]
#1943999 - 09/23/03 11:04 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
the summation of an infinite series here works as a helpful mathematical tool that produces the correct numerical answer by getting rid of the infinities, but it doesn't actually solve the paradoxes and show how the body's motion is actually possible.
The same fault applies to the Arrow paradoxes proposed solution via Weierstrass' "at-at theory of motion", as a continuous function is a static and completed indivisible mathematical entity, so by invoking this model we are essentially agreeing that physical motion does not truly exist, and is just some sort of strange subjective illusion.
- Lynds
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
trendal
Jâ™
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada 
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1944076 - 09/23/03 11:27 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Saying that the 4th dimension is "space" doesn't reall make any sense. "Space" is the collection of n-dimesions. In our case "space" consists of 3 large-circumference spatial dimensions. I say spatial, because they are physical movement dimensions. The fourth dimension then can only be time. What four numbers are required to pinpoint an object/event in our universe? You need three spatial coordinates as well as a time coordinate.
my question is to the fact that space and time are somehow tied together.
If Einstein is to be believed (and I think he was at least close to the point) then space and time ARE intimately interconnected. A product of this idea is that if something effects space, it must also effect time. This has been shown experimentally. Gravity is a warping of spacetime, we feel it's effects directly on "space" but because we are "stuck" in the temporal direction (without the freedom to move at will) we cannot feel gravity's temporal effects.
But the truth is, there ARE temporal effects. Time travels slightly slower on the surface of the earth than it does in orbit or even at the top of a tall building. This is because the force of gravity is slightly stronger on the surface of the earth than higher up. Very accurate atomic clocks have been placed in the basement and top of highrise buildings and have recorded this effect.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: trendal]
#1944106 - 09/23/03 11:39 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
hey trendal, what are your thoughts on whether or not there is such a thing as a static moment in time, where an object in motion's exact location in space can be determined?
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
trendal
Jâ™
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1944127 - 09/23/03 11:45 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
No, I believe that time is entirely relative to the observer, just as space and motion are.
Even the phrase "moment in time" may be misleading. Does time pass in moments? Is there a limit to divisions of time?
Also, determining the "exact" location of anything may not be possibly due to the effects of quantum uncertainty. You can know where the object is MOST LIKELY to be, but you can not be 100% exact.
Although quantum uncertainty itself may only be an effect of not having accurate enough tools of measure.
Is that what you were asking?
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1944130 - 09/23/03 11:46 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
i will rost this question as a new thread
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: trendal]
#1944242 - 09/23/03 12:12 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
trendal said:
No, I believe that time is entirely relative to the observer, just as space and motion are.
Everything is subjective, I do so believe.
Peace.
--------------------
 
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
  
 
|
entiformatie
EvolutionaryMovements
Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 1,043
Loc: miami, florida
Last seen: 15 years, 10 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: pattern]
#1948127 - 09/24/03 01:37 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
pattern said:
Are you arguing that time is born from movement? If so, how does an object "start" moving? Does time stop when the object is at rest?
i just wanted to make a comment on this:
its not so much the movement of the object, as all of the atoms that happen to make it up. what would happen if these atoms were completely motionless? we have yet to see an atom that is motionless (i believe so at least), and so it is quite possible that time does "stop" when all of an object's atoms are at rest, which i believe would require all atoms to be at rest, since they interact with each other and pull on each other and whatnot. i think. do they? can somebody tell me if i said something ridiculously stupid please? lol
--------------------
/opinion
.sean
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: entiformatie]
#1948742 - 09/24/03 04:46 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
according to einsteins e=mc(2), if you stop molecular motion (e), then mass would have to be reduced to 0, or 0=0c(2).
in other words, the object wouldnt exist.
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
EvilGir
Im the on coming storm
Registered: 11/26/01
Posts: 1,301
Loc: Planet Irk
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1949262 - 09/24/03 07:13 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
"Although quantum uncertainty itself may only be an effect of not having accurate enough tools of measure."
But i thought just measuring something at that level changes thngs anyway. As an atom can be in two positions at once until we observe.
--------------------
Fighting the man the best way I can.
|
entiformatie
EvolutionaryMovements
Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 1,043
Loc: miami, florida
Last seen: 15 years, 10 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1949707 - 09/24/03 09:20 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
heh, that makes sense. but just out of complete speculation, does 0 mass really mean that the object doesn't exist? of course, i'm sure it would mean something completely significant to our perception of the object... but maybe it would exist, in spirit form or some random crap? or maybe i'm making no sense with this speculation, lol. just random thoughts, yes?
--------------------
/opinion
.sean
|
Hooty
Reality isRelative
Registered: 02/24/03
Posts: 2,467
Last seen: 13 years, 4 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: entiformatie]
#1949851 - 09/24/03 10:15 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
really time is relative to the way your perceive it, just as everything else. Time itself is no more concrete than space. A moment can be a life time and a life time a moment, the counting we use in clocks is simply a counting of electrical impulses, which don't really determine time at all.... also in responce to automan's comment on where the ball was at three seconds and that it wasn't a valid question because the ball wasn't frozen it was in motion,well really everythign is in constant motion, absolute rest doesn't exist thus the consept of where things are in time is never really a valid question. In this way time doesn't really exist. It's merely an illusion of the mind used to keep one from having to embrace the concept of infinity, which no mind has been able to grasp, unless you would say that maybe the divinity of christ and buddha was based on their understanding of infinity. Like aldous huxley said, if the doors of perception were cleansed all things would be viewed as the truley are: infinite.
--------------------
Without love in the dream
It will never come true
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Hooty]
#1950060 - 09/24/03 11:47 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
as i have come to know it in the last few days, time does exist as a temporal dimension, just as length, width, and height exist as spacial dimensions. the way humans relate to the temporal dimension is to break it up into segments (as the tics of a clock).
in the same way, though, that is how we handle the first 3 spacial dimensions. we break the first dimension into inches or millimeters, the second and first dimension into area (square feet), and the first 3 dimensions into volume (cubic feet). we do this so we have a way to relate to our universe.
in reality, though, time is a real dimension. there is no forward or backwards movement of time. time isnt liquid. it just is. as the first three dimensions just are.
in response to:
Quote:
entiformatie said:
heh, that makes sense. but just out of complete speculation, does 0 mass really mean that the object doesn't exist? of course, i'm sure it would mean something completely significant to our perception of the object... but maybe it would exist, in spirit form or some random crap? or maybe i'm making no sense with this speculation, lol. just random thoughts, yes?
according to einstein: energy (e)= mass (m) times the speed of light (c) squared.
if you make mass equal to 0, then energy has no choice but to be 0, in order to mainttain a balanced equation.
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 3 days
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1950337 - 09/25/03 03:06 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
according to einstein: energy (e)= mass (m) times the speed of light (c) squared.
if you make mass equal to 0, then energy has no choice but to be 0, in order to mainttain a balanced equation.
E=mc^2 is correct only for immobile objects. That equation describes the inherent energy in a non-moving mass. The full equation is:
E^2 = m^2 c^4 + p^2 c^2
where "p" is the object's momentum. For an immobile object the momentum is zero, which reduces the above equation to E^2 = m^2 c^4, which turns into the famous E=mc^2 when you take the square root of both sides.
So in the general case you get E^2 = p^2 c^2 if you set m=0. This gives us p=E/c which is the energy-momentum relation for massless stuff like for example electromagnetic radiation.
|
trendal
Jâ™
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1950681 - 09/25/03 09:16 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
It is not always the case that when mass=0 energy=0.
Force-carrier particles (energy) ALL have ZERO MASS (which is the reason they can move at the speed of light) but quite obviously carry some energy with them.
I think what Einstein was getting at with E=mc2 is that energy and mass are interchangable. Think of mass as condensed energy. If you pile energy into a confined area of space, the total mass of that area of space will go up. I think at some point (with enough energy density) the energy will collapse in on itself to form matter (remeniscent of a black hole?).
The best theory (I think) currently for why mass exists in the first place is the Higgs Boson. The theory states that ALL of space sits in a "Higgs Field" (with the Higgs boson as it's force-carrier) and that particles gain mass by interacting with this field. The field, when interacting with a particle, wants to hold the particle where it is (momentum). In order to move the particle, you have to overcome the force of the Higgs field which is trying to keep it from accelerating (mass). The more strongly a particle interacts with the Higgs field, the more "mass" it gains.
Think of a room FULL of people, I mean shoulder to shoulder. These people are the Higgs field. Now you (a particle) are on one side of the room and want to get to the other side. You start moving, but all the people standing shoulder-to-shoulder hold you back and give resistance to your movement. You have to push your way through the room.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: trendal]
#1951183 - 09/25/03 01:26 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
trendal said:
Think of a room FULL of people, I mean shoulder to shoulder. These people are the Higgs field. Now you (a particle) are on one side of the room and want to get to the other side. You start moving, but all the people standing shoulder-to-shoulder hold you back and give resistance to your movement. You have to push your way through the room.
You should have used a concert reference, instead of just a plain room...
Unless it is a Linkin Park concert. If they have fans there at all, they are all pussies and you can inevitably plow them all under.
Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
|
Hooty
Reality isRelative
Registered: 02/24/03
Posts: 2,467
Last seen: 13 years, 4 months
|
|
I would like to see some undeniable proof that time exists.
--------------------
Without love in the dream
It will never come true
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Hooty]
#1951318 - 09/25/03 02:17 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Hooty said:
I would like to see some undeniable proof that time exists.
Well, as your title states, "Reality is relative".
Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Hooty]
#1951628 - 09/25/03 03:51 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Hooty said:
I would like to see some undeniable proof that time exists.
peter lynds argues that motion itself is is the proof of time. you should read his paper. (it takes a second to download. it's a pdf)
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
Joshua
Holoman
Registered: 10/27/98
Posts: 5,398
Loc: The Matrix
|
 Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1952691 - 09/25/03 09:58 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Here are my thoughts on dimensions.
There are an infinite number of dimensions. A dimension is to me a way of organising objects. When givin an infinite number of objects, one can organise those in an infinite number of ways. What is a one dimensional line in one perspective may be a spiral in another dimension. What may seem like a random grouping of points to one perspective may be a plane or a line in another dimension.
I truely believe that this dimensionality is an illusion or better put a construction of ourselves. I believe that there is only one, that I am that one experiencing myself in many different perspectives and that you are the same as me.
My construction of dimensions is a reflection of a single thing that repeats and lasts forever and that it is a trick of my existence not to comprehend the whole.
Joshua
--------------------
The Shroomery Bookstore
Great books for inquiring minds!
"Life After Death is Saprophytic!"
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 23 days, 6 hours
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Joshua]
#1953752 - 09/26/03 08:00 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
> There are an infinite number of dimensions.
I used to study an area of mathmatics called psi calculus, which deals with dimensional equations. The idea of the calculus is that you can represent problems, such as heat transfer, independent of dimensionality. If you wanted to express a dimensionally-independent equation within a given dimension, you would apply the psi operator (similiar to the = operator in normal math) with the 'shape' of the dimension that you wanted the answer to be expressed.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 3 days
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Seuss]
#1954072 - 09/26/03 11:03 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Interesting. I was just going to recommend Fourier Analysis as a good introduction to infinite-dimensional vector spaces.
|
Psychogenik
CerebellumDamage<--
Registered: 09/22/03
Posts: 32
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Rhizoid]
#1955558 - 09/26/03 07:26 PM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Is anyone here familiar with david bhom's theory of quantum mechanics? the implicate and explicate orders?..
--------------------
I'll eat myself if i have to!
|
Rhizoid
carbon unit
Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 7 months, 3 days
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Psychogenik]
#1956386 - 09/27/03 02:10 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I know the basic idea behind Bohm's pilot-wave theory, but I haven't read much about his metaphysics (the explicate and implicate orders). The pilot-wave theory is derived from the Schr?dinger equation by factoring out the square root of the probability density from the wave function and using it to define a global "force" that determines the trajectories of all individual particles.
The only problem with this theory is that it is non-relativistic. As far as I know there is still no bohmian treatment of the relativistic counterparts of the Schr?dinger equation.
|
automan
blasted chipmunk
Registered: 09/18/03
Posts: 8,272
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: Rhizoid]
#1956472 - 09/27/03 03:22 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
i just wanted to tell phluk that i love your website.
(this is my thread, i can go off topic if i want.  )
--------------------
No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. ~ Niels Bohr
|
Psychogenik
CerebellumDamage<--
Registered: 09/22/03
Posts: 32
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
|
Re: thoughts on dimensions [Re: automan]
#1956802 - 09/27/03 09:03 AM (20 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
The Implicate and Explicate Orders
Some phrases in this excerpt from David Bohm's "A New Theory of Mind and Matter" sound like the mystical literature of the East.
The question of the relationship of mind and matter has already been explored to some extent in some of my earlier work in physics. In this work, which was originally aimed at understanding relativity and quantum theory on a basis common to both, I developed the notion of the enfolded or implicate order. The essential feature of this idea was that the whole universe is in some way enfolded in everything and that each thing is enfolded in the whole. From this it follows that in some way, and to some degree everything enfolds or implicates everything, but in such a manner that under typical conditions of ordinary experience, there is a great deal of relative independence of things.
The basic proposal is then that this enfoldment relationship is not merely passive or superficial. Rather, it is active and essential to what each thing is. It follows that each thing is internally related to the whole, and therefore, to everything else. The external relationships are then displayed in the unfolded or explicate order in which each thing is seen, as has already indeed been indicated, as relatively separate and extended, and related only externally to other things. The explicate order, which dominates ordinary experience as well as classical physics, thus appears to stand by itself. But actually, it cannot be understood properly apart from its ground in the primary reality of the implicate order.
Because the implicate order is not static but basically dynamic in nature, in a constant process of change and development, I called its most general form the holomovement. All things found in the unfolded, explicate order emerge from the holomovement in which they are enfolded as potentialities and ultimately they fall back into it. They endure only for some time, and while they last, their existence is sustained in a constant process of unfoldment and re-enfoldment, which gives rise to their relatively stable and independent forms in the explicate order.
The above description then gives, as I have shown in more detail elsewhere, a valid intuitively graspable account of the meaning of the properties of matter, as implied by the quantum theory. It takes only a little reflection to see that a similar sort of description will apply even more directly and obviously to mind, with its constant flow of evanescent thoughts, feelings, desires, and impulses, which flow into and out of each other, and which, in a certain sense, enfold each other (as, for example, we may say that one thought is implicit in another, noting that this word literally means 'enfolded').
Or to put it differently, the general implicate process of ordering is common both to mind and to matter. This means that ultimately mind and matter are at least closely analogous and not nearly so different as they appear on superficial examination. Therefore, it seems reasonable to go further and suggest that the implicate order may serve as a means of expressing consistently the actual relationship between mind and matter, without introducing something like the Cartesian duality between them.
--------------------
I'll eat myself if i have to!
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 4 all )
Anonymous
CleverName
fireworks_god
Kremlin
ArisEve