The human brain sees the world as an 11-dimensional multiverse

a reply to: Arbitrageur


Actually its this commentary of yours is what is irrelevant.

I not certain why you would claim that because, some theory was incorrect String theory falls into the same category.


The point of the op's is clear. MRI's results do not produce enough information to account for Consciousness.

What do you think is going on?


As far as the rest of you commentary it sounds like you need a vacation.

a reply to: TzarChasm


Source of screen shot: MathIsFun.com

That is what a "physical dimension" has been agreed to starting with Euclid.

Thought Exercise

Lay your hand flat on a table. With your other hand, draw an imaginary line from you thumb to your index finger. Now draw one from you thumb to your middle finger. Let's call that "Paul".

How many different "Paul"s does it take to draw flat lines to connect your thumb with each finger? That would be "4-Paul". Now extend that to "Paul"s over the top of your hand (still flat). How about going through the table?

Flat has a certain number of "Paul"s, extended to other paths above and below result in other "Paul"s

A "clique" is extending flat "Paul" to other above/below paths. Counting all those cliques are "dimensions" in algebraic topology. It is the same as computer coding, Dim Array A(11). You did not create new "physical dimensions" they are a math construct. As for "Paul" it can be an operation, a value, a measurement. a rule, etc., which is in whatever order the theory that is being worked in uses.

This math should work with MRIs to see where in the brain locations are working together to perform a task. But MRIs are not fine grained enough... yet.

You had it right from your earlier post. Same term ("dimension") but different meanings and usage.

Hoped this helped!

originally posted by: DarkvsLight29
Very fascinating, I always fought the human brain was more advanced then we knew of, not sure if it will be fully understood at this time, probably will in the future when our technology catches up to the same level.

Some things we understand. Discrete Information is stored and indexed as semantic networks. These define relations like [living things] -> [mammals] -> [cats] -> [big cats] | [domestic cats] -> [neighbors cats] | [my pets] -> [tiddles]
where -> is defined as "is a specialisation of". Then you have other bits of information that link to these like species, relationships like "looks like", "feeds on", "lifespan years", "can swim", "native country".

You can use semantic networks to represent local maps of shops, houses, fields and villages with relationships like "has name", "sells items", "next to", "opposite of" ,"is located on street". Streets and countries can be linked together as well.
Representing this kind of information can have infinite dimensionality due to the number of links you can attach to each item. We find that retrieving more detailed information takes longer as all the connection paths need to be explored. This extends into route planning and path finding.

Then you have recognition systems that can automatically categorize stimuli like sound and vision. Breaking down sound into type of source, pitch, timbre, beat, rhythm, composition and then composer, writer, group, band, era, style.

We used to have talent shows where we had people like mechanics who claimed to be able to diagnose a problem with a car engine simply by the sound it would make, even recognising the make of the engine simply by the sound it made.