Can YOU imagine the Tenth Dimension? Stupid people need not click here

Bullshit. I even doubt time is the "4th dimension", since you can't move forth and back in time like you can do in space.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Soluzar

Is a three-dimensional object possible? Not really. A three dimensional cube would have width, depth, and height, but no duration. It wouldn't exist for any lenght of time. All objects need to have a measurable extension along the fourth dimension in order to exist for more than zero time.

That means nothing.

Since time can't be measured in the same unit than space, it cannot be a dimension, since any comparison done is inconsistent.
I see time as "a continuum where 3 dimensional objects exist".

But some sciencists (and pseudosciencists) overcomplicate things with theories that try to explain what they actually don't understand well. Then, those theories get "established"...so they hinder "thinking outside the box" around another ideas.

Think, for example, about the good old explaination of orbits by Ptolemy (which prevailed until Copernicus' days), based on complicated "epicycles" where the Moon and Mars' orbits were monkeying in a funny way around the Earth - complexity that was gone when Copernicus realized that it was the center was the Sun, not the Earth...

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Lurker

Interesting. It's pretty easy to follow his argument, though I'm a bit disappointed at the treatment of time as another dimension. I was expecting 10 spatial dimension (10 lines perpendicular to each other).

Yeah, time as a dimension is even less of a dimension than money. :doh:

I've been speculating...since each of the spatial axis (x, y, z) is orthogonal with the other two axis, why don't we take into account the imaginary (sqrt -1) axis associated with their real counterparts, which are orthogonal to them? Euler's equation involved the numbers e, pi, and a imaginary and real axis [ e^(pi*i)+1=0 ]

Extrapolating that idea to each one of the axis...it'd give six dimensions (x, xi, y, yi, z, zi) or, well, three complex dimensions (X, Y, Z or whatever notation could be used)


PD: Oh well, money may be a dimension, since it's a degree of freedom. (Theoretically) it can go up and down infinitely! :dealer:

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by PS2

One more thing (x,xi,y,yi,z,zi) is incorrect.

To express this in complex domain, it is simply the following:

Assume that x,y,and z are elements in the complex number system. Then anything in {The set of complex numbers}^3 is the ordered triple (x,y,z), where x=a+bi, y=c+di, z= e+fi. So, that six dimensional ordered pair is essentially (a+bi,c+di,e+fi), which is in essence, reduces a six dimensional problem into a 3D one. WHile it is true that the ordered pair of real numbers(g,h) expresses the number g+hi, (g,h) is not an element in the 1d case of the set of complex numbers. g+hi, on the otherhand, is in that set.

Sorry, I messed up the details - I was just trying to illustrate a "non-dimensional time, Complex 3D space" idea :biggrin:

How ya doing, buddy?