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.
There could be more to the universe than the three dimensions we are familiar with. They are hidden from us in some way, perhaps because they're tiny or warped. But even if they're invisible, they could affect what we actually observe in the universe. There are lots of things we cannot see with the naked eye that turn out to be based in reality.
“Light can evolve in up to seven dimensions on our specially designed circuits, which is mind boggling when you realize that the space around us is three-dimensional,”
“Making use of higher dimensions on optical chips could support a variety of future technologies that involve machine learning and performing complex tasks autonomously,”
“This takes us into the realm of science fiction, which I think is really exciting. The sky is the limit in terms of potential future applications that could build on our discovery.”
originally posted by: jamespond
a reply to: shawmanfromny
The whole "interdimensional" thing has never really sat well with me. With so much universe out there, why do we need to overcomplicate things by adding extra dimensions? I'm not saying that it isn't possible but i think we should keep looking in places that we can understand.
Merry Christmas to you and everyone else too.
originally posted by: Cravens
The ‘extra’ dimensions may exist, but it’s (string theory/M theory/some other new-fangled derivative) more sizzle than steak: Kaku Loses ‘Extra’ Dimensions Bet
Not to mention, the theorized dimensions are infinitesimally small and are grossly misrepresented in the press...this leads to wild, fantastical ‘thought experiments’ from armchair scientists. But hey, time is a flat circle and fractal geometry is real — so who knows?
The path of least resistance would suggest that, if visitation ever occurred, these aren’t new visitors but ones who came and stayed — since time immemorial.
Merry Christmas 🎁 to all you other Christmas-less dimensions.
#DailyQuotaOfNon-sequitorFulfilled
That's true unless the other dimensions never interact with ours, and if that's the case, then the non-interacting other dimensions are a useless hypothesis to explain interdimensional UFOs which nobody would see if they didn't interact somehow.
Pseudoscientists lean heavily on the assumption that their readers will know absolutely nothing about science or math. This is a pretty safe assumption, alas. And it requires no effort on the part of the pseudoscientist, because he also invariably knows no science or math either.
It is worth summarizing the ways in which the various concepts of "higher dimensions'' gradually diffused out from legitimate math and science, through hundreds of increasingly distorted, confused and muddled journalistic presentations and sensationalizations, into late 19th Century science fiction and 20th Century pseudoscience.
In the late 19th Century mathematicians became increasingly interested in the foundations of geometry. Our own universe has 3 space dimensions. But what would geometry be like if there were 4 space dimensions? Or 5? Or 10? Or an arbitrary number? Or an infinite number? Mathematicians worked a great deal on geometries with arbitrary numbers of space dimensions.
Mathematicians also worked a great deal on "non-Euclidian'' geometries that violate one or more of the postulates of Euclid. In Euclidian geometry, parallel lines remain the same distance apart. One can imagine a geometry in which parallel lines eventually intersect, and a geometry in which parallel lines gradually separate further and further. Such spaces are usually described as "curved''— an example is the 2-dimensional surface of a sphere, on which lines initially parallel at the equator of the sphere intersect at the poles of the sphere.
Mathematicians had no idea that their work would ever prove useful to physicists, but some of it did have application in the real world. For hundreds of years physicists had worked in a 4-dimensional framework, because it takes a minimum of 4 numbers to specify an event: 3 to specify its space location and 1 to specify when it happened. In 1905 Einstein found that, to be correct, laws of physics must be written in a 4-dimensional form that physicists call "Lorentz Invariant,'' or "Manifestly Covariant.'' The reason is that different observers will disagree as to how much of an event "projects'' onto the space axes and how much "projects'' onto the time axis. That is, different observers can disagree as to how long a process takes, or on the size of the physical space that the process occupies. Only the full four-dimensional aspects of the process remain the same for all observers.
In 1915, Einstein found a more general description of gravitational phenomena, in which the density of matter directly determines the "curvature'' of 4-dimensional space-time. That is, his theory of gravity was purely geometrical. The amount of matter determines the type of geometry that exists in the surrounding space. Other matter travels along the straightest possible trajectory in this curved space-time...
The structure of all known physical laws demands that our universe have only 3 extended space dimensions. For example, the fact— established and confirmed by experiment consistently for nearly 400 years— that all long-range interactions, such as gravity and the radiation field of the electromagnetic force, fall off like the inverse square of the distance, demands that space be precisely 3 dimensional.
So those extra dimensions in string or M theory are useless for the interdimensional UFO hypothesis.
More confusion about higher dimensions was generated in the press beginning in 1984, when physicists became excited about so-called "string theory.'' Physicists have never been able to work out a theory of gravitation that is consistent with quantum mechanics and also has some feature that indicates it might be uniquely correct! String theory provided a geometrical description of quantum processes that incorporated gravity very naturally. But three other forces besides gravity are known. Borrowing the idea of Kaluza and Klein, physicists incorporated the other three forces and their "couplings" by adding space dimensions— the only thing you can do in a theory that is purely geometric. A typical string theory had 9 or 10 space dimensions and 1 time dimension. The extra space dimensions had to be there to incorporate phenomena other than gravity geometrically, but they could not "actually'' be there or the theory would not have worked. The solution was to curl these extra dimensions up mathematically into tight "wads'' no more than 10^-35 meters in length, a process called "compaction." The extra dimensions would thus be "compact," and indetectable.
So those extra dimensions in string or M theory are useless for the interdimensional UFO hypothesis.
That's a good way to think about it. One could hypothesize types of "cloaking technologies" some of which are actively being researched which might make UFOs or aliens appear to fade in and out of existence, which would be a more sound idea than "interdimensional pseudoscience".
originally posted by: jamespond
originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: jamespond
Because a lot of supposed contactees talk about beings being inter dimensional.
And how would said contactees know the difference between interdimensional and some fancy technology that we don't understand?
As far as I'm aware, they've never provided any provable predictions about anything, ever, at least not anything that can be proven true. There have been numerous predictions proven false as explained by Peter Woit:
originally posted by: Phage
Do string (or M) theory provide any provable predictions which would contradict Einsteinian (or even Newtownian) theory?
Experimental results from the Large Hadron Collider show no evidence of the extra dimensions or supersymmetry that string theorists had argued for as "predictions" of string theory. The internal problems of the theory are even more serious after another decade of research. These include the complexity, ugliness and lack of explanatory power of models designed to connect string theory with known phenomena, as well as the continuing failure to come up with a consistent formulation of the theory.
Yes, there are copious numbers experiments consistent with Einstein's 4 dimensional model, and if there were 5 or more dimensions, as the article I linked in my previous post says, one can demonstrate that experiments would not be consistent with a 4 dimensional model. So in that sense we do have copious amounts of evidence of 4 dimensions and lack of additional dimensions as explained in the link.
If not, what's the point? Newton is fully functional for all practical applications. Beyond that, Einstein fits the bill.