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.

 

Dimensional physics for dummies

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:24 AM
link   
hi , here is an animated presentation

its very good [ IMHO ] and starts off very easy to understand .

though , by his discription of the 7th dimension , the concept of " multiple , independant infinities took some graping , but when compared to his resprentation of time [ 4th ] it does make sense , trust me


using the concept of the mobious strip and its twist , as an allegory of how it may be possible to go from one dimension to another - without even noticing any 1st person change was very clever




posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:43 AM
link   
What an intriguing lesson! Thanks for posting that, It's very interesting to put 4th, 5th etc dimensions into a basic perspective...

7A

[edit on 21-12-2006 by 7Ayreon]



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:51 AM
link   
I really enjoyed that video, it was easy to understand Thank you for posting it, now I'm off to show it to my friends.



posted on Dec, 23 2006 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Waste of my time.


This person doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about. He basically made up everything after the fourth dimension. It doesn’t even mention d-branes and manifolds, which any description of the extra dimensions of string theory would include.

The person who made this has no experience in physics, and the book he’s trying to sell talks about the “philosophical implications” and “spirituality” of these extra dimensions. Check the preamble, he even admits that his theory isn’t accepted by physicists.



posted on Dec, 23 2006 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Nice find, Ignorant!

I watched it several times, and especially enjoyed his description of the 6th dimension.



Originally posted by Lethys
Waste of my time.

Well that's pretty ironic, ain't it?



posted on Dec, 23 2006 @ 07:52 AM
link   
He stops at 10 dimensions, ignoring the fact that the different string theories may have 11 or 26 dimensions. M-theory, which unifies the string theories, uses 11, so his decision to stop at 10 dimensions is arbitrary considering the other choices and completely ignores M-theory.

He offers nothing to support his theory, no equations, nothing. That whole site is worthless, although some would argue that that word applies to all of string theory.



posted on Dec, 23 2006 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Lethys, He is giving an introductory explanation on dimensions.
You cannot possibly demand for him to give an indepth explanation in less than 15 minutes.




Originally posted by Lethys
This person doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about. He basically made up everything after the fourth dimension.

What exactly did he make up? I challenge you to give a better explanation that is just as short and easy for the Average Joe to understand.



Originally posted by Lethys
It doesn’t even mention d-branes and manifolds, which any description of the extra dimensions of string theory would include.

He is going to do all that in less than 15 minutes? Get real. He didn't design it for that. He is trying to sell a book. Make an honest living for himself. By criticizing him for not talking about branes and such you are basically criticizing him for not giving his book away to the public for free!



Originally posted by Lethys
The book he’s trying to sell talks about the “philosophical implications” and “spirituality” of these extra dimensions.

So? What is your point? Seriously. I don't see where your going with this.



Originally posted by Lethys
Check the preamble, he even admits that his theory isn’t accepted by physicists.

'His' theory? You understand that string theory itself isn't accepted by most physicists, don't you? It is even considered a philosophy rather than a theory due to the lack of ability to test it.



Originally posted by Lethys
He stops at 10 dimensions, ignoring the fact that the different string theories may have 11 or 26 dimensions.

Exactly. By memory, there are about 16 variations on the String theory. It is so conflicted that regardless of where he stopped, you would have had a problem with it.



Originally posted by Lethys
M-theory, which unifies the string theories, uses 11, so his decision to stop at 10 dimensions is arbitrary considering the other choices and completely ignores M-theory.


In string theory, physicists tell us that the subatomic particles that make up our universe are created within ten spatial dimensions (plus an additional dimension of time) by the vibrations of exquisitely small "superstrings".

How exactly is he ignoring it?
Why don't you buy the book instead of complaining. Then maybe you will understand that it is you who doesn't know what your talking about. Not him.


Originally posted by Lethys
He offers nothing to support his theory, no equations, nothing.

Why do you keep referring to it as 'his' theory?
As I said before. It is an introduction. He is not going to go into useless equations right at the start. In doingso, he would only eliminate his target market.



posted on Dec, 23 2006 @ 01:40 PM
link   


What exactly did he make up? I challenge you to give a better explanation that is just as short and easy for the Average Joe to understand.


By better do you mean clearer or do you mean more accurate. If it’s the 2nd, then that should be quite easy. Though if you mean the former, then he has the advantage, because when you make things up, you can make them as simple as you want.

Here is a little bit for you. The extra dimensions are either compacted and can only be detected at microscopic levels, or we are stuck in a 4 dimensional subspace, or D-brane. This is about as far as we presently can go concerning the nature of the other dimensions since string theory is incomplete and not fully understood. We can’t even decide between compacted dimensions, D-branes, or some combination of them.



He is going to do all that in less than 15 minutes? Get real. He didn't design it for that. He is trying to sell a book. Make an honest living for himself. By criticizing him for not talking about branes and such you are basically criticizing him for not giving his book away to the public for free!


Well both are pretty basic parts of the extra dimensions of string theory. If they aren’t mentioned, then he is defiantly missing something. His description of the other dimensions don’t even fit with them.



So? What is your point? Seriously. I don't see where your going with this.


There are all sorts of book dealing with the “spiritual” and “philosophical” aspects of quantum mechanics and beyond. Yet they always end up misinterpreting it and throwing in their own new age beliefs into it and completely departing from the true theories. The people who write these books are not physicists or scientists or even have an understanding of the theories any further then the simplified versions found in books like The Elegant Universe or the wikipedia articles. And considering his description of the other dimensions is unique and inconsistent with such sources, and since the man doesn’t have any scientific background, it is reasonable to assume he is making this stuff up.



His' theory? You understand that string theory itself isn't accepted by most physicists, don't you? It is even considered a philosophy rather than a theory due to the lack of ability to test it.


His preamble is basically stating that other scientists would consider him a crackpot. String theory, while not being accepted by a noticeable amount of scientists, is hardly crackpot. Saying that it isn’t accepted by most physicists is hardly true. It gets almost exclusive funding when compared to the other developing quantum theories of gravity.



In string theory, physicists tell us that the subatomic particles that make up our universe are created within ten spatial dimensions (plus an additional dimension of time) by the vibrations of exquisitely small "superstrings".


Yet when you watch his animation, he clearly treats time as one of the ten dimensions. Looks like we have some inconsistency on his own site



Why do you keep referring to it as 'his' theory?


Well he claims to be advancing a theory called the "theory of reality" on his site and book so I’d say that it should be considered his theory. His description of the other dimensions isn’t like the descriptions usually used for string theory so I would say that it is his place to provide the evidence. And considering how much string theory is based on mathematics he would certainly need equations to support his descriptions. Course, since he is just going for the layman who wouldn’t understand any such equations, it is certainly reasonable to doubt that he has any. Thus all we have is him showing off his “theory” and his description of the other dimensions without actually having any evidence to base it off of.

But for now, I need sleep.
*Passes out on his chair*



posted on Dec, 24 2006 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Let me ask you something Lethys...
Do you ever watch a trailer to a movie, and then complain that they didn't show the whole movie? Or have you ever watched a trailer to a movie and then complained that it didn't make sense? Because that is exactly what you are doing here. As I have said several times already, the site is an introduction to something bigger; not unlike a movie trailer.



Originally posted by Lethys
By better do you mean clearer or do you mean more accurate.

By 'better' I mean for you to create something that is easier to understand for the Average Joe in the same amount of time, while retaining it's accuracy. Bryanton's explanation seemed pretty accurate to me, and it is obvious that it is presented clearly. (Even as seen by the by the posts in this thread prior to your comments.)


Originally posted by Lethys
He has the advantage, because when you make things up, you can make them as simple as you want.

I asked you this before. I don't see where your coming from. What exactly did he "make up"?


Originally posted by Lethys
The extra dimensions are either compacted and can only be detected at microscopic levels, or we are stuck in a 4 dimensional subspace, or D-brane. This is about as far as we presently can go concerning the nature of the other dimensions since string theory is incomplete and not fully understood. We can’t even decide between compacted dimensions, D-branes, or some combination of them.

The average person to stummble on that site won't understand any of that. At all. If he said that in his introduction people would just exit the site confused. This would eliminate his target market. Besides, as I said before. If he was to explain it all, he might as well hand his book out to the public for free.
The site was not designed to further educate people who already understand the concept. Rather:

The average person has barely gotten used to the idea of there being four dimensions: how can we possibly imagine the tenth?

Your description is obviously laid out as a simplistic summary for those who already know the string theory.
Anyway, by the way the site is presented, it looks to be an attempt to help people Imagine the Ten Dimensions, clearly using strings as a basis. It is not an attempt to help people understand the string theory, and including dimensions.



Originally posted by Lethys
There are all sorts of book dealing with the “spiritual” and “philosophical” aspects of quantum mechanics and beyond. Yet they always end up misinterpreting it and throwing in their own new age beliefs into it and completely departing from the true theories.

Okay... I am not trying to offend you, but you have unknowingly offended me with that statement. What books have you read? Would you mind giving at least one example of a current book, dealing with quantum physics yet has clearly obscured the theory to deal with the spiritual aspects involved? I would truely appreciate it. Otherwise, I am considering your statement obsolete.



Originally posted by Lethys
The people who write these books are not physicists or scientists or even have an understanding of the theories any further then the simplified versions...

All of them? I don't think so. I am not denying that there are random people who publish books that may involve quantum physics. I am, however highly doubtful that random people publish books about quantum physics. Big difference.



Originally posted by Lethys
Considering his description of the other dimensions is unique and inconsistent...

It seemed pretty accurate and universal to me.
Also, as I said before. There are about 16 variations of the string theory. He cannot possibly remain 100% consistent to them all. It seems that you would have had a problem with him, regardless.



Originally posted by Lethys
The man doesn’t have any scientific background, it is reasonable to assume he is making this stuff up.

How do you know that he doesn't have a scientific background? He owns an internationally reknowned company. He has enough assests to take courses, and obviously has an interest in the matter. Saying that he has no scientific background with no basis is not exactly feasible.

Evenso, your logic, say someone was to publish a book on evolution, yet has no scientific background. Does that automatically mean that he is making things up? Ofcourse not. It's quite ridiculous to think so. This is no different.


Originally posted by Lethys
His preamble is basically stating that other scientists would consider him a crackpot.

No.

"Imagining the Tenth Dimension" is not the one that is commonly accepted by today's physicists.

Is in no way an acknowledgment that he is 'crackpot.'



Originally posted by Lethys
Saying that it isn’t accepted by most physicists is hardly true. It gets almost exclusive funding when compared to the other developing quantum theories of gravity.

The latter part of this statement is true. Only because it differs from the norm, and has potential. It does not recieve the funding it does, because it is widely accepted.
Besides, Have a look at this... Read your statement again. I have put the text in bold for you. Now look at a prior statement you made.

Originally posted by Lethys
String theory, while not being accepted by a noticeable amount of scientists, is hardly crackpot.

Agh...Quite contradictory, and not exactly sound, is it?



Originally posted by Lethys
When you watch his animation, he clearly treats time as one of the ten dimensions. Looks like we have some inconsistency on his own site.

The book is called 'Imagining the Tenth Dimension'. It is not called 'Imagining the Eleventh Dimension'. It is not an inconsistency. It is acknowledging that M theory accepts that there are 11 dimensions. It is not trying to hide this fact and making the information publicly available.


Originally posted by Lethys
Well he claims to be advancing a theory called the "theory of reality" on his site and book so I’d say that it should be considered his theory.

Excuse me? Theory of Reality is not a set or individual theory. It is a category of theories trying to unite classic science with quantum science. The string theory falls into this category. As he is using Strings as a basis, it is not inconceivable for him to refer to the term.

...:shk:...



posted on Dec, 24 2006 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Very good for the layman IMO.


I'd be interested to know what his theories are on how exactly you "simply fold the dimension".

Navigation from point to point in an infinite reality of layered dimensions. hmmm. Identification of those points from within dimensions 7 or 9, let alone 3, then what is the executable command/action to make it so? You can physically move between dimensions to a point. Maybe. ha.

Maybe the missus has bought me a dimension folding kit for Christmas, she did mention that she was having difficulty wrapping something!



posted on Dec, 24 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Lethys:


There are all sorts of book dealing with the “spiritual” and “philosophical” aspects of quantum mechanics and beyond. Yet they always end up misinterpreting it and throwing in their own new age beliefs into it and completely departing from the true theories. The people who write these books are not physicists or scientists


That is either a very ignorant statement or a purposeful lie.

Dr. Fred Allen Wolf:


Fred Alan Wolf is a physicist, writer, and lecturer who earned his Ph.D. in theoretical physics at UCLA in 1963.



Author of many books including Taking the Quantum Leap, Parallel Universes, The Dreaming Universe, The Eagle's Quest, The Spiritual Universe, Mind into Matter, Matter into Feeling ,The Yoga of Time Travel: How the Mind Can Defeat Time, and his latest book Dr. Quantum Presents, A Little Book of Big Ideas. .


www.fredalanwolf.com...

I have read several of his books and he makes a very clear connection between spirituality and quantum physics.

Dr. Bernard Haisch:


Dr. Bernard Haisch is an astrophysicist and author of over 130 scientific publications. He served as a scientific editor of the Astrophysical Journal for ten years, and was Principal Investigator on several NASA research projects. His professional positions include Staff Scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory and Deputy Director of the Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley. In addition, he was also Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.


www.thegodtheory.com...

Notice the title of Dr. Haisch's book..The God Theory.
Although he is an astrophysicist he comes to many of the same conclusions as Dr. Wolf does in his books.

I could find some more PH.D's that all have similar conclusions about physics and spirituality and have written books about the subject.

If you truly want to learn something and not just spout off some ill informed opinion I suggest you read some of these books.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join