Imagining the Tenth Dimension

[Piranha]

And you thought a fourth dimension would make no sense.

http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php

This video is really driving me insane.

[Athox]

ooh... intriguing :tongue:

[Narek]

WOW. That is all I can say. I'm definitley gonna get this book. Thanks!!

[-=AnatomiC=-]

Hey.... I think I understand it :biggrin:

But this "bend" thing does not seem possible to me... :rolleyes:

[Grey Loki]

I was alright up until the seventh dimension, then my head imploded.

[quartaumentata]

Stephen Hawking himself wrote in one of his articles/books (can't recall precisely, I'm not quoting, only reporting the sense) that all this concepts about fourth (and over) dimensions are more easy to mathematically describe than imagine. He admitted that he had trouble trying to mentally figure to himself a 3d object!

[Piranha]

But this "bend" thing does not seem possible to me... :rolleyes:

It doesn't to me, either. But I don't think this is supposed to represent absolute reality. More like a mathematical way of representing dimensions.. I dunno.

[Staccato]

Well, this gets my head spinning even more the Jordan does on stage with his rotating stand!:P It is interesting, but the problem for me is to visualies it.. I just can´t!:P

[twg88]

I get stuck around dimension 6.... crazy stuff. What's that fold through the 6th dimension all about? :confused:

[HammondToby]

What's that fold through the 6th dimension all about? :confused:

It's about timetravel to all possible points in timespace and all propabilities of the way, the universe (and others) could have developed. AND Stephen Hawking is right: it's easier to describe it mathematically, but the human brain isn't ment do imagine four or five spacedimensions. It gets really interesting, when you flip to another theory with 26 space- and timedimensions... Stringtheory is the easy part, you know? :)

Best regards
HammondToby

[Piranha]

Don't even get started on string theory! I already have a hard time visualizing the 3rd dimension.

This is interesting too:

http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/83031/Time_Travel_Einstein_s_Big_Idea_Very_Thought_Provo king_.html

[twg88]

Mmm... I kind of get it now. But I thought string theory had 11 dimensions, so the first video stops at 10 - I'm not entirely sure it's very useful. Something interesting to think about though.

The second video is alright, explains special relativity pretty well considering. It should probably mention that each viewpoint of each person moving away from each other is equally valid, so that each person sees the other person's clock slowing down. It's only the acceleration that distinguishes two moving frames (say if a rocket moves away from earth and then returns). Nice to see a video of the light clock though.

...only on a keyboard forum would we have this discussion :wink:

[Sandro]

It's about timetravel to all possible points in timespace and all propabilities of the way, the universe (and others) could have developed. AND Stephen Hawking is right: it's easier to describe it mathematically, but the human brain isn't ment do imagine four or five spacedimensions. It gets really interesting, when you flip to another theory with 26 space- and timedimensions... Stringtheory is the easy part, you know? :)

Best regards
HammondToby

Stephen Hawking can say that, because he is not human!!

[Airspeed]

My brain hurts!!!! :) (: !!!!struh niarb yM

[whitelightening]

If you are interested in this stuff, try a book titled "Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions" by Edwin A. Abbott or the short story "And be built a crooked house" by Robert Heinlein.

It should be interesting to note that while Flatland is pretty straight forward (though it does give a unique perspective on the first three dimensions from the perspective of each) Heinlein's story has proven to have some 4-dimensional flaws. I worked on a project to disprove some of Heinlien's statements, so I'll have to go back and revisit my notes to remember the exact errors.

Both are rather short reads and quite interesting.

[xenomorph]

my God, this is insane!

I just want to say ONE thing:
there is no time. time exists because of our fisical world. and the only explanation for the existence of God is the inexistence of time! because all things in the universe came from other things which came before these new things. There must have been a FISRT thing ever! and the only reason for a thing to exist out of nowhere being the FIRST thing ever, is that there is not time beyond our fisical world!
it is that simple!
=)

[Piranha]

But if there is a beginning, there must be an end. For what is, is, and what is not, is not.


...useless philosophy classes.

[kwstakhs]

hmmm...
his approach is too simplistic and arbitrary for my taste. But anyway...

(oh, and as for 4, 10 or 11 dimensions, in quantum mechanics, Hilbert space operators are infinite dimensional matrices. how's that for size?)
k.

[Gustavo]

As this is very attractive, and ,honestly to me, isn't very hard to understand what they think they discovered, that might actually be nothing but a crazy theory that means nothing on our "real" world... for me quantum mechanics are something very stupid and nonsense (no offense for those who believe it) since in the real world, they cannot be applied, they are therefore useless and make no sense at all when really thought about for the real world, they also leave a lot of blank spaces. also if u mean to make a theory ( yea i only consider it a theory, dont know if it is offially) that explains how our world functions, then why when you try to apply them to objects bigger than atoms, or well the size of a grain +, they actually dont make much sense? also they leave a lot of questions, therefore not only explaining and clearing questions, but also creating some "unanswerable" questions.
I think that they cant explain relativity in quantum becaus of one thing: quantum mechanics arent real, though they may be not very, very, very far from truth, i think they are very, very far from truth. also when you think of relativity, they make perfect sense in the atomic and in the much bigger "real" world, so if relativity theory ( which is considered one of the most accurate, i think) sounds good in both worlds, why does quantum doesnt?

PS. yep, i think this can only be explained by musicians :wink:

Gustavo

[Gustavo]

Also i think that the universe, is actually a cycle, without begginng, without end..... the big bang may be a "begginng" but what excactly exploded, and how did it come to be all together? well i belive a theory to be true, though i dont know its name:
Alll universe is expanding, but at the same time, galaxys, which are believed to have black holes in their centers (black holes are, not to be confused with worm holes, chunks of matter, incredibly compressed, in need of energy) so galaxys consume themselves, leavin just a huge, monstrous black hole, and when those galaxys collide with others, their massive black holes fuse, creating a more monstrous black hole, then when almost all galaxys have collided and a, relatively, few massively monstrous black holes remain, they "big bang" destroying any leftover galaxy and again spreading all the matter they had, so elements start to form again, makin some thing that resembles the past universe, and so it goes, takin billions of billions of years or more, between each cycle, some havin less matter (like 0.01%-1%), and more energy, and some having more matter and less raw energy released in the bang

Yep, I dont have nothing else to do but play and play guild wars, so i wrote all that LOL :tongue:

Gustavo

[twg88]

As this is very attractive, and ,honestly to me, isn't very hard to understand what they think they discovered, that might actually be nothing but a crazy theory that means nothing on our "real" world... for me quantum mechanics are something very stupid and nonsense (no offense for those who believe it) since in the real world, they cannot be applied, they are therefore useless and make no sense at all when really thought about for the real world, they also leave a lot of blank spaces. also if u mean to make a theory ( yea i only consider it a theory, dont know if it is offially) that explains how our world functions, then why when you try to apply them to objects bigger than atoms, or well the size of a grain +, they actually dont make much sense? also they leave a lot of questions, therefore not only explaining and clearing questions, but also creating some "unanswerable" questions.
I think that they cant explain relativity in quantum becaus of one thing: quantum mechanics arent real, though they may be not very, very, very far from truth, i think they are very, very far from truth. also when you think of relativity, they make perfect sense in the atomic and in the much bigger "real" world, so if relativity theory ( which is considered one of the most accurate, i think) sounds good in both worlds, why does quantum doesnt?

The point is, quantum theory is a good theory, because it explains the results of experiments to amazing accuracy. Take quantum electrodynamics - the experimental results agree with the theory almost exactly. It's nonsense to say that the theories can't be applied in the "real world", since that's exactly what the theory is trying to explain - the results of experiments in the "real world".

Relativity is slightly easier to understand for us than quantum mechanics, since it applies on very large distance scales, which are easier for us to visualise than very small ones. True, uniting quantum mechanics and general relativity is currently beyond the scope of today's physics, but there are various theories around such as many different types of string theory, loop quantum gravity etc. all waiting for the results of experiments that we currently don't have the capability to do in order to test their predictions.

You seem to have decided that relativity is a "good" theory and quantum mechanics is a "bad" theory with no real justification - the point is, they both work well on their own different distance scales. They are obviously both incomplete, since they cannot currently be unified, but in my opinion quantum mechanics is definatly not "something very stupid and nonsense". :wink:

Just my 2c.

[attic-keys]

Fucking awesome. I like this why are we here and how does it work stuff

©

[Gustavo]

The point is, quantum theory is a good theory, because it explains the results of experiments to amazing accuracy.

You seem to have decided that relativity is a "good" theory and quantum mechanics is a "bad" theory with no real justification - the point is, they both work well on their own different distance scales. They are obviously both incomplete, since they cannot currently be unified, but in my opinion quantum mechanics is definatly not "something very stupid and nonsense". :wink:

Just my 2c.

Well i didnt mean (sorry if i seemed) that quantum is a "bad" theory, I just meant it seems that although some things make a lot oh sense, some dont really make any sense at all to me, those are the parts that are "something very stupid and nonsense". :wink: , sorry just that sometimes when i write i put things that i dont mean, or forget to put things. :confused: Also have in mind english isnt my language, its spanish, somethin very different.

Either way, i think that, as you said, both are incomplete, RT-qM, but it seems that cm are most incomplete, while rt is very complete. Besides cm is very complex (not so much as to not understandable, i happen to understand it fairly good) for my taste, some things have a much simpler way to say them (look at RT or Special RT)' like u can say 4+4+4+4+4+4+4 OR 4x7. Thats one of the points i think qm needs to polish the most.

Yeah this is something only us musicians would discuss LOL ( i liked that joke)

Gustavo

[twg88]

Well i didnt mean (sorry if i seemed) that quantum is a "bad" theory, I just meant it seems that although some things make a lot oh sense, some dont really make any sense at all to me, those are the parts that are "something very stupid and nonsense". :wink: , sorry just that sometimes when i write i put things that i dont mean, or forget to put things. :confused: Also have in mind english isnt my language, its spanish, somethin very different.

Either way, i think that, as you said, both are incomplete, RT-qM, but it seems that cm are most incomplete, while rt is very complete. Besides cm is very complex (not so much as to not understandable, i happen to understand it fairly good) for my taste, some things have a much simpler way to say them (look at RT or Special RT)' like u can say 4+4+4+4+4+4+4 OR 4x7. Thats one of the points i think qm needs to polish the most.

Yeah this is something only us musicians would discuss LOL ( i liked that joke)

Gustavo
Yeah, I get your point about QM, that it's definatly not as complete as relativity. Quantum mechanics seems to be pretty complex, and it'd be nice if there was a really beautiful simple solution... but we might just have to accept that the world is not a simple place and there is no simple solution to everything. Doesn't mean we should stop looking!

(I want to keep this topic bumped... it's cool stuff :wink: )

[Taurus]

What I never understood is why humans are so egocentric to think they can find an answer to everything. God knows (no pun), perhaps the entire system is something that is not meant to be understood by any human brain or explained with any science/human reasoning.

[FRETPICK]

http://widget.slide.com/rdr/1/1/3/W/50000000507cdad/1/47/lQ2gw_KlOFNEbLNEKs542TYMq_4tp2DF.jpg (http://www.slide.com/item_finder?referrer=hlnk&pciid=ghnljZvm9IPzkm5BtLV8QCtCmkr56rDxpcHSngDyXP34 SaRopV_8pDWA9NdQk_ot&dir=0&view=image)
^
It takes 3hr to perform.

It has 30 sound cues (me soundman) & I did 9 shows.

[Narek]

I ordered the book last week and I just got it. Can't wait to start reading!!

[FRETPICK]

I ordered the book last week and I just got it. Can't wait to start reading!!

I know it inside out. I had to know the text as the reading was happening. Music for the seating...intro's.Act's.emotion...etc. A couple of eyebrow moments to say the least.

Hard.Fun.Rewarding. My ear helped in timeing of cue's & levels. Everything you read in that book environment & character wise has a sound.

By the end of every play I'm beat. Never again now.
The narrator did however go to the states & carried on. I declined. I did marry the lighting girl though.:biggrin:

Stephen Hawkings with all his theory should know.
Behind every great man is an even better woman.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking
Biography.
Last phargraph.

[kwstakhs]

Yeah, I get your point about QM, that it's definatly not as complete as relativity. Quantum mechanics seems to be pretty complex, and it'd be nice if there was a really beautiful simple solution... but we might just have to accept that the world is not a simple place and there is no simple solution to everything. Doesn't mean we should stop looking!

(I want to keep this topic bumped... it's cool stuff :wink: )

funny thing is...
some people (and especially physicists) consider QM to be a 'beautiful simple solution'. If you just think of the range of phenomena it predicts compared to the relatively few assumptions that go into its formulation, I'd say QM is one of the most 'beautiful' theories out there...

Besides cm is very complex for my taste, some things have a much simpler way to say them (look at RT or Special RT)' like u can say 4+4+4+4+4+4+4 OR 4x7. Thats one of the points i think qm needs to polish the most.

Have you been introduced to Dirac notation? I don't believe you could ever make QM any 'simpler to say' than that. Besides, have you ever seen the Field Equations in GR? They're not something I'd call simple for sure! :)
k.

[Gustavo]

Have you been introduced to Dirac notation? I don't believe you could ever make QM any 'simpler to say' than that. Besides, have you ever seen the Field Equations in GR? They're not something I'd call simple for sure! :)
k.
ok i admit i havent gone through all that, but what i went through, i think theres better ways to put it..... but hey i;m just 15! not even gone into prep school.......... though i like physics a lot... specially eintein. i mean a tru genius doesnt make complicated things, but simple ones.....


(I want to keep this topic bumped... it's cool stuff :wink: )

Definitively :wink: .... ill just have to read some more books about qm... i dont really know all there is... although i do know almost all about einstein's famous girls. Right now i just have like 2 book about einstein, also explaining his famous girls, and some very good books and magazines about the theorys (well i really havent seen many good ones as the ones i have).

Gustavo

Lets go all together to a library some time :biggrin:

[chipotlemonkey]

I feel inferior. :(

[Piranha]

I feel inferior. :(
No need to feel bad. I'm not 100% sure that this whole quantum physics and string theory stuff is very important to know.

Is it?

[FRETPICK]

If anything I think this thread show that musicians are more intelligent than the average citizen.:smile:

I never heard of Sting Theory before. Both have been an intriguing read.
Some I was aware of while others not. Like the different area of QM(so many.wow)...I call it Q physics though. Don't know why,just comes off the tongue better.:biggrin:

Cheers guys. Who'd of thought that such a LARGE subject matter<(no pun intended) could turn up here.

JR Forum rules.:cool:

[kingkostas]

LOL my physics teacher was telling us about this thing today. About super strings and all that things ...WOW!!! :D

that was good...

[April]

I have a hard enough time just getting my shoes on in the morning.

[kwstakhs]

No need to feel bad. I'm not 100% sure that this whole quantum physics and string theory stuff is very important to know.

Is it?

as long as it keeps paying my bills, yes!

is music theory important to know? haha :)
k.

[Piranha]

as long as it keeps paying my bills, yes!

is music theory important to know? haha :)
k.

You're not the one feeling inferior

[Taurus]

Wow, I've haven't seen anyone yet that thinks like me.
I must be the only one.

[kwstakhs]

You're not the one feeling inferior

when it comes to music theory, yes I do feel quite inferior (especially compared to some of the people in this forum) :wink:
k.

[Bert]

What I never understood is why humans are so egocentric to think they can find an answer to everything. God knows (no pun), perhaps the entire system is something that is not meant to be understood by any human brain or explained with any science/human reasoning.

You have now found someone who thinks essentially the same as you do.

I recently read Hawking's A Brief History of Time, which is probably about the most basic introductory-level book about all this modern, advanced physics stuff. I just found it amusing that, given the fact that humans know probably less than 5% of what really goes on in the greater universe, our modern scientists still feel confident describing the beginnings and ends of time via mathematical equations and physical principles. I see it kinda like a five-year-old explaining how an automobile works.

We obviously do not exist in a large way in all the various aspects, dimensions, phases, planes, whatever of what exists out there. We don't really understand it now, and I figure we likely never will.

Enjoy your weekend. :)

-- B

[Piranha]

when it comes to music theory, yes I do feel quite inferior (especially compared to some of the people in this forum) :wink:
k.
Me too, actually.

[kwstakhs]

Me too, actually.

haha
then ok, just to even the table,
i probably feel vastly inferior with respect to whatever it is you do in your life.

k.

[Piranha]

Stop it lol