How do you count dimensions?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 02:53 AM
link   
I'm not, I'm not, I'm not pleased with the names of dimensions. Can't they just name them as what they are instead of giving them a number. Never mind, it made me think of this.

The first and second are together the third.
The third and second together are the fifth, which is the fourth.

God will fill in the gaps





The third dimension is the first. The fourth is the second. God is none. eh?
edit on 2-2-2013 by Angle because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 02:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Angle
 


Why would it be assumed that there is more than one?



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 02:58 AM
link   
One dimension ah ah ah...
Two dimensions ah ah ah...



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Angle
 


I might help if we understand what you mean by 'dimensions' before counting.
What is a dimension?
edit on 2-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:05 AM
link   
Generally speaking, the dimension of something is the number if independent things that form a basis for it. If one thing can be expressed in terms of another, those two things are not independent, so they cannot form a bases for more than one dimension.

In Linear Algebra, if you have a set of vectors, only the linearly independent vectors (those that are not linear combinations of any of the others) in that set constitute a basis for a linear space, and those vectors make up the span, the size of which is the dimension of the space.

i, j, and k form a bases for 3-space, but i, j, and 2j only form a basis for 2-space.

edit on 2-2-2013 by SilentKoala because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Angle
 


Where would you look to start counting the dimensions?



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


That's something, that.

We have our dimension, and, to never forget, we have the One above it all.

Awesome itisnowagain!


The thread in one word, Unity.

United in this unity, we are one. All one in this united, we are 'united'.
edit on 2-2-2013 by Angle because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Angle
 


Can't they just name them as what they are instead of giving them a number.

You mean like point, line, plane and "every where at once"?

I was thinking about this today. Points, lines and planes don't actually exist in the real world, just in mathematics.

So why do we name them as the first three? Then you got where we are and this other place that our eyes don't see but is all around us too... the "third" and "fourth" dimensions are in the same place... everywhere. So why do we divide them up? Because we can't see the fourth with our "3D" senses?

Doesn't make sense.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angle
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 



United in this unity, we are one. All one in this united, we are 'united'.
edit on 2-2-2013 by Angle because: (no reason given)


'We' is plural. 'We' can never be one.

'It' is one.
'This' is one.
There is only oneness.

When the two become one the kingdom shall be revealed.
edit on 2-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:30 AM
link   
United you stand - divided, you have fallen.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


You're right, but you must understand me too.

Silly eh, you figure?
edit on 2-2-2013 by Angle because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angle
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


You're right, but you must understand me too.

Silly eh, you figure?
edit on 2-2-2013 by Angle because: (no reason given)


No. I don' t understand. Would you care to elaborate?
edit on 2-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Angle
 


there are infinite dumber of dimensions,,

no point in counting them..
edit on 2-2-2013 by solve because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


Sorry, I was somehow confused. I didn't meant to confuse you on purpose. You were right.

tsjeers.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:58 AM
link   
reply to post by solve
 


You're completely right, see. yeeaaaah.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angle
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


Sorry, I was somehow confused. I didn't meant to confuse you on purpose. You were right.

tsjeers.


I would like you to elaborate on the thread you have posted about dimensions and answer some of the questions i have asked here so i can understand you because you say that i 'must' understand you and i am not sure i do..


Originally posted by Angle
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


You're right, but you must understand me too.

edit on 2-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Angle
 


Dimension 1: A point
Dimension 2: A line
Dimension 3: A box, the solid
Dimension 4: Time, motion
Dimension 5: Choice

Then there are 5 more.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by Angle
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 



United in this unity, we are one. All one in this united, we are 'united'.
edit on 2-2-2013 by Angle because: (no reason given)


'We' is plural. 'We' can never be one.

'It' is one.
'This' is one.
There is only oneness.

When the two become one the kingdom shall be revealed.
edit on 2-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



To elaborate;

when some of us are one, some of us are united. Then we can say 'we are one'. It's an issue of perspective we have here since you said '"we" can never be one'. But I see what you mean, and I thought you could also see what I meant, therefore I said you needed to understand me too.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angle

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by Angle
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 



United in this unity, we are one. All one in this united, we are 'united'.
edit on 2-2-2013 by Angle because: (no reason given)


'We' is plural. 'We' can never be one.

'It' is one.
'This' is one.
There is only oneness.

When the two become one the kingdom shall be revealed.
edit on 2-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



To elaborate;

when some of us are one, some of us are united. Then we can say 'we are one'. It's an issue of perspective we have here since you said '"we" can never be one'. But I see what you mean, and I thought you could also see what I meant, therefore I said you needed to understand me too.



'Some' and 'we' are just thoughts, words appearing presently that make one believe there is more.

I don't think you do know what i mean.
You speak of one and then then go all plural as if there is more than one.
edit on 2-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


yes, but a point is a line. So the first dimension then is also the second, and vice versa.


No, it might be not, for a line is eternal. Thx for making me think here.

edit on 2-2-2013 by Angle because: (no reason given)





 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join