It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

11 dimensions?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 06:41 AM
link   

img46.exs.cx...
i was just wondering wat u guys thought...

[edit on 11/24/2004 by cheeser]




posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 06:48 AM
link   
I dont think you can direct link to you PC. Host your image at imageshack.com or give us a link we can use to see the original page.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Actually, I'm having a hard seeing, understanding, what your pic is about.

What I think you have attempted to draw here is 10 demensions but still its only 3. We live in a 3 demensional world, 4 if your include time. The extra demensions come from the M-theory or formerly string theory.

I not going to pretend that I know anything at all about string theory. String theory was not even taught when I was in school. I had a quatum mechanics class as an upper level elective , but that was it.

I've tried to look since and see how string theory has attempted to unify physics since, but I know just enough to be dangerous.

I do know, that it's alfully hard to represent 10 dimensions in a cartesian system.

I'd like a little more explanation as to what your trying to convey.

Pardon my stupidity.
Thanks.............



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 07:15 PM
link   
info on string theory can be found here
www.superstringtheory.com...



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 07:37 PM
link   
yeah, bin said. time is the 4th, not 11. if you can even grasp that (which is hard given a 3d mind) try to visualize 11. in fact, there are an infinite number of dimensions, we're just not on most of em. there can 'easily' be multiple universes exploding right now, and we wouldnt know it.

after the 3rd dimension, they stop functiong as the brain normally thinks about dimensions. they still work in (relatively) the same way.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
in fact, there are an infinite number of dimensions, we're just not on most of em. there can 'easily' be multiple universes exploding right now, and we wouldnt know it.


What?

There are infinite dimensions? Never heard of that one before.

Could you expand on that?

Surf



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 07:54 PM
link   
String theory is fascinating. I truly believe that there are eleven dimensions and that the big bang was caused when two of them collided into each other.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 08:57 PM
link   
the picture you show only has 3 spacial dimensions... x,y,z. Its incorrect to number each end of a line you drew on x,y,z as a different dimension. You might want to read "The Elegant Universe" by Brian Greene before you start posting stuff like this.

[edit on 29-11-2004 by beyondSciFi]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by surfup
What?

There are infinite dimensions? Never heard of that one before.

Could you expand on that?

Surf


surely.

the big bang happened, assumedly (a word?) from the higgs boson. when it did, it spread out on the however many dimensions we have, lets for simplicity's sake say 3. we live and exist on these three dimensions, everything we really see happen happens on them.

what would happen if instead our third dimension was something different than it is know? we wouldnt notice the difference, it would be exactly the same. however, that original dimension would be lost to us, we can never exist on it or detect on it or have any relation to it. because you can 'go' an infinite number of 'ways' you have infinite dimensions.

hence, a universe can be created right here in my lap, and i'll never be the wiser, because none of our dimensions coincide. its not very likely, however, its real hard to get the higgs field that high.

hope that helps.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 09:06 PM
link   
I came up with this wierd thing the other day.

Ok Let's say there are 11 dimensions and we physically live in three of them. The theory says that our subatomic particles don't exist in one given space. They sort of vibrate between various positions, dissapearing and reappearing in different locations so they assume that our atoms are bouncing between these dimensions.

Now light is one of the most powerful forces of the universe, it is needed for most life on our planet to exist, it is the fastest known. Going it's speed you can mathematically equate future time travel, even past, which in theory, if you travel to the past it is not your past but parallel universe. A completly different universe then you normally reside in. So isn't that touching on another dimension..

And there is the whole believe of people dying and seeing a light pulling them towards heaven or whatever in there out of body experiences.

That deep feeling of our soul or spirituality may really b our atoms being a part of the other 7 dimensions. And your death when everyone sees "the light" is the strong power of the light pulling your conscienceness to exist in the other dimensions as we were built to know it as "heaven"

but "seeing the light" may not even b relevant because it's just a figment of ones imagination as they are adapted and trained and all there hope is on this idea that they have heard about.....

WHOooO KNOWSSSss mannn
jus a random thoughtt ne feedback, spare the negativity



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Gravitons can travel accross multiple universes that is why gravity is so weak and unable to defeat magnetism.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by n02ndthought
Now light is one of the most powerful forces of the universe, it is needed for most life on our planet to exist, it is the fastest known.


You know, I've never quite thought of this like this before, but your right. There is gravity, the absence of space, and then light. Light is the most perceptable thing in the universe.

I like the way you paraphrased this concept.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 09:19 PM
link   
yeah thats true, we have the entireee planet pulling a safety pin, yet a tiny fridge magnet defeats it no problem



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 09:21 PM
link   
i hate to refer ideas from a work of fiction, but have you guys ever read Timeline by Michael Crichton? the beginning few chapters had one section how they explained the interactions between alternate universes in the multiverse.


(interpherence pattern)
When you set up several gratings you may form an interference pattern like this. Back when light was though of as a wave they thought the pattern wasnt lit up in some areas becase the waves canceled each other out. one of the characters said that the interpherence was caused by forces outside of "our" dimension and in a neighboring parallel one.

please correct me if i'm wrong plz.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Zeta: Destructive interference. what cookie monster said is true, if we assume its true. its a leading theory on why gravity is the weakest of all the forces, but its hard to prove. namely because we cant do gravity with quantum mechanics yet.

personally, i like the strong force. the further the objects get, the stronger the pull on them.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 04:40 PM
link   


What?

There are infinite dimensions? Never heard of that one before.

Could you expand on that?

Surf

I think this is because the once you get into dimensoins like 11 there start to be lots of diifferent time dimensions, but no scientist has figured out these time dimensions could be.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 08:50 PM
link   
For a good paralell to extra dimensions, I reccomend the book "Flatland"... I can't remember the author at the moment, but it's the story of a 2-dimensional world, and how this particular character (a rather curious equilateral triangle) gets lifted up and taught about the 3rd dimension by a sphere. He originally things it's just a magic circle that can change size at will... and hilarity ensues, if you're as much of a geek as I am.

As for the 11-dimensional thing, I'll try and explain where the original idea came from. The string theory (and brane theory, which is much much cooler) crowds have extended this to other areas, specifically the vibrational modes of those strings, but I don't know too much about those.

Now, I'm sure pretty much everyone has heard of the "Zero Point Energy" that permeates spaced due to fluctuations in the quantum state of empty space. The problem with this (much like the problem of infinite-energy light from stars back in Maxwell's day...) is that if you have an infinite amount of energy permeating space, and energy is really just matter, and matter bends spacetime, why isn't spacetime curled up on itself really tight? The answer they came up with this is that the energy is, in a manner of speaking, cancled out by that in other dimmensions, thanks to any number of convenient mathemagical tricks.

If you want to visualize something analougous to more dimensions, think about a tightrope. A person walking on it is restricted to forward/back, so he only "sees" one dimension. An ant, however, can move around the perimeter of the rope, because he's small compared to the size of the dimension. That's how it works, except in 11 or (iirc, in m-theory) 27 dimensions.


Nox

posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Oh my God.

He beat me to the mentioning of Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions.

The author is Edwin A. Abbott (the unofficial author is A SQUARE...
get it?!).

Superstring theory assumes that there are several hidden dimensions that we can't see because they're about as small as the Planck Distance (I think that's what it is) past which point we'd have no information because Uncertainty would get in our way.

It's like, if we look at a rope from far away, we'd only see a point, a 1 dimensional object. We walk closer and we see a line, a 2 dimensional object. If we looked even closer, we'd see that the rope has width, it's a 3 dimensional object. If we looked even close, we'd see that particles in the rope are moving at a quantum mechanical level (moving in time), so it's a 4 dimensional object.

11D SuperString Theory assumes that if we looked close enough, we'd find AT LEAST 11 dimensions.

That diagram you drew is ridiculously inadequate to describe 11 dimensions. Nothing you draw in a static 3 dimensional world can represent even a tesseract (4 dimensional), not to mention an 11 dimensional string.


Nox

posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
Zeta: Destructive interference. what cookie monster said is true, if we assume its true. its a leading theory on why gravity is the weakest of all the forces, but its hard to prove. namely because we cant do gravity with quantum mechanics yet.

personally, i like the strong force. the further the objects get, the stronger the pull on them.


What?

I thought strong force was the exact opposite. The closer the objects get the stronger the force between them. I thought gravity had the longest range (mainly because there's no interference).



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 04:31 PM
link   
In these theories, which were advanced in 1984, the basic elements of the universe are not particles, which occupy a single point in Space Time but yet things that length but no other measurable dimension, like a thin piece of string.

Basically think of a particle and its entire journey through time as the represented by the string. Thus its history can be represented by a string.

The curious thing about String theories is that the only way for them to work is in a 10 or 26 dimension universe minus the dimension of time.

Why don't we notice all these extra dimensions, if they are really there? Why do we see only three space dimensions and one time dimension? The suggestion is that the other dimensions are curved up into a space of very small size, something like a million million million million millionth of an inch. This is so small that we just don't notice it.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join