Understanding the fourth dimension (And some other stuff thrown in just for fun)

Mar 11, 2017 7:38 PM

FamousGayRubik

Views

309950

Likes

8207

Dislikes

309

Visual representation of the 4th dimension

Howdy, Imgur!

So, yesterday I came across this post http://imgur.com/gallery/lwTEC which claimed to explain how the fourth, fifth, sixth etc dimensions work. (There are eleven, by the way). It was a very interesting post- however, it was incorrect. I made a comment saying so, and I got an overwhelming amount of people in the comments and even in private messages asking me to explain how it DOES work**, if that wasn't it. I agreed, saying I'd post it today. I love physics, so with so many people asking me to, I couldn't refuse!

Okay, so the first thing you need to understand before understanding the fourth dimension is the first three, the ones we're familiar with. The good old X, Y and Z axis. Well, those and the Zero-th dimension. So let's get started.

So we'll start with the zero-th dimension. Yes, it exists. Think of it as a dot that's infinitely small. It has no size, no up or down, no anything, but it exists. (If you're familiar with the Big Bang theory, the universe was zero dimensions before the big bang happened). With me so far? Okay,

Now, the first dimension. The first dimension is a line, just a line that extends on forever. The line has no width or thickness, only length. And this first-dimensional line is made up of an infinite number of zero-dimensional points lined up side by side.

Now, the second dimension. You're probably familiar with how this one works- Think "Tetris" or "Super Mario Bros". The pieces and characters on the screen can move left and right, up and down, but that's it. They cannot move towards or away from us. If the third dimension is made up of an X, Y and Z axis, then the second dimension only has an X and a Y. This is the second dimension, and it is a "Plane" made up of an infinite number of one-dimensional lines stacked up on top of each other.

Before I go on to the third dimension, I'd like to throw in a little bit of extra info on the second dimension, a sort of disclaimer if you will. If you've ever read or seen "Flatland", you may think that a theoretical two-dimensional being can only see the "Edge" of objects in front of it, like a line segment. This is NOT true! A two-dimensional being cannot see anything, because there exists no "Edge" for it to see. Remember, this objects aren't just extremely thin, they are INFINITELY thin. There IS no thickness!

Alright, moving on. Three dimensions. I should hope you're familiar with this one, it's the one you live in! As stated earlier, the third dimension has three axis, an X, Y and a Z. If you can move left and right, and then forward and back, and then up and down- Congratulations! You're a three-dimensional being (or higher)! This third dimension is made up of an infinite number of two-dimensional planes stacked up on top of each other- Anyone noticing a pattern yet? I hope so, because understanding the relationship between the dimensions I've described so far will help you wrap your mind around the ones coming up... kind of.

So before I begin explaining the fourth dimension, I've got to say... the fourth dimension is NOT time. Say it with me. The fourth dimension is not time. The fourth dimension is not time. THE FOURTH DIMENSION IS NOT TIME. Got it? Good. So then, where did that idea come from? Why do people think the fourth dimension is time? Well, in 1908, a man named Hermann Minkowski presented a paper suggesting the idea that time could act as the fourth dimension of spacetime (Which I might do a post about later on). However, the geometry of spacetime is profoundly different from this idea. Like I said, I might get into it in a later post, but all you need to remember for now is that this guy was wrong.

Now, a square is two dimensions. A cube is the three-dimensional version of a square. But what is the fourth dimensional equivalent? It's called a hypercube, or a tesseract, and it's that thing in the gif at the top of this post- well, kind of. It's more the "Shadow" that a fourth-dimensional cube (or Hypercube) would leave, similar to how http://i.imgur.com/JsOAyod.jpg is like the shadow that a three-dimensional cube would leave.

If two dimensions is a plane, then three dimensions is a "Space". Now, space is made up of infinite planes- so think of fourth-dimensional space being made up of infinite "Space", stacked on top of each other just like all of the previous ones. Kind of hard to picture, but stay with me. Fourth-dimensional space would be made up of a W, X, Y and Z axis. That's all it is. You can name ANY point in three dimensions by quoting a X, Y and a Z. In order to pinpoint a spot in four-dimensional space, you'd need to quote a W, X, Y and a Z.

There's a fifth dimension, as well. Think V, W, X, Y and Z. If we lived in a fifth-dimensional space and you asked me for coordinates that told you where I was, I'd need to give you five numbers, just like how if we were in one-dimensional space I'd need to give you one number (Think: Number line), or if we were in two-dimensional space I'd need to give you two numbers (Think: Graph).

Imgur user @Preincarnage left this gif in the comments, I thought it was worth sharing:
http://i.imgur.com/1AVySho.gif

So how many dimensions are there, then? There are eleven, according to string theorists (String theory is another topic I might do a post on, if you guys end up liking this one). Each one is created the same way, by taking an infinite amount of whatever the previous dimension was made up of and stacking them on top of each other, and adding an axis (So an 11-dimensional space would have a P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z axis). Hopefully this post has helped out a bit if you were struggling to picture the fourth dimension. Anyhow, that's about all I've got to say on the matter. Cheers, Imgur!

**Disclaimer: While I DO have a pretty decent understanding of the fourth+ dimensions, the reader should bear in mind I am only 18 years old and far from a genius. If somebody qualified (Say, a physics professor or somebody with a degree in physics) notices that I have made an error, and I'll edit my post to fix it. Cheers!

Oh, and for those of you who are interested, here's a fourth-dimensional Rubik's cube you can download! http://superliminal.com/cube/cube.htm

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

But Doc Brown taught me that time was the 4th dimension!

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Live from Dimension X v

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I'm busy trying to terraform dimension x

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

The empty set spans the zero vector and every vector space has the zero vector

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

1/x "They are INFINITELY thin. There IS no thickness". -- The first statement here is false. Thickness being nonexistent as a property...

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

2/x ...in two dimensions, objects are not infinitely thin; they simply are not thin or thick to any degree, infinite or not.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Great post, but you might want to clarify: time is not a *spatial* dimension, but it is one of four dimensions making up spacetime

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

As a physicist, I'll say that in general relativity we do treat time as a dimension, but on a different footing from the usual spatial ones

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

It's a bit misleading to say Minkowski was wrong. He never said spacetime was a 4D Euclidean space. Heck, we still use his work today.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

When you get to college for physics, you will learn the value of citing sources. You will also learn how little you understand the subject.

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 3

Source: in final semester of an astronomy degree.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

So the 0th dimension is time because you can measure the "dot's" existence.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

interesting..

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Saying the square from flatland can't see because he is infinitely thin in the third dimension is like saying that you can't see because 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

you are infinitely thin in the fourth dimension. Just because a line segment has no thickness does not mean it has no content.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

My thoughts too. I hate that people don't get that.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So, why is there a limit to the number of dimensions and why is it 11? Why can't you have a 12th dimension. Surely this goes on infinitely.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

The short answer is string theory

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 13

String theory has not been proven and many scientist have left it in search of something better

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The 11 dimensions is just the number of dimensions in M-theory, as far as pure math is concerned you can have all the dimensions you want.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

You lost me at Howdy

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Sorry, but you are wrong. And your first 7 paragraphs are exactly what the previous post said, just without visual aids.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

The previous post was correct up until that point

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

And beyond, or is the you-now a completely different entity than the you-then? There is a you shaped 4d tube extending backwards.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Tldr: you should try psychedelics sometime

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 5

This is important.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

This is wrong. For one, this is assuming string theory is correct however one of the indicative theories known as SUSY has been shown... 1/

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

... to fail every test we've thrown at it in high energy physics. Moreover if this was based on string theory this is not AT ALL how... 2/

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

... the dimensions work. Most of them, besides the directly measurable (the three you are familiar with), are either too small, too... 3/

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

... large, or behave strangely so that we cant observe them at our scale. For example, there are dimensions folded or rotated into... 4/

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

... other dimensions. Either way, this guy is very wrong; he is discussing (correctly) mathematical dimensions rather than physical ones.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Me trying to understand these comments

9 years ago | Likes 248 Dislikes 1

Phew, I'm glad i'm not the only one

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Get it, because its with dimensions and stuff

9 years ago | Likes 42 Dislikes 0

and here i thought it meant that you understand the theory, if not the practice. ^.^-b

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

I love how he then stares at the red circle as if it were the ball and goes like "Oh, the ball got stuck there now. Kay, fine."

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Eh... while time may not function mathematically as the Euc. spatial fourth dimension, it is nevertheless undeniably *a* fourth dimension.

9 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 0

It is a dimension of measurement for sure. But not THE dimensions we are discussing

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

That's what I said.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

eh, not really. time is just the statistical evolution of a thing. it's doesn't go forward AND back like a dimension should.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 7

Space doesn't go anywhere either.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I meant things in space but space itself is also ever expanding.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not to us anyway... That doesn't mean that it doesn't.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Thermodynamics, entropy always increases regardless of the direction time flows.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

To be precise, it is just convenient to model time as a dimension.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"Understanding the fourth dimension." Here is a long-ass post, where 95% of it doesn't talk about the fourth dimension at all.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

When you were learning to talk, did your parents just read the dictionary to you?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

I feel like @op got most of this from popular science articles, and not from any actual learning or understanding. A lot of this is wrong.

9 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 1

And doesn't understand that a measurement dimension is not a plane of existence.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

That's the myth I hate the most. "Well if there's a 4th dimension then how do we get there?" It's not a different fucking universe!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Incorrect, but I appreciate your thoughts

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 22

Yeah time is definitely a 4th dimension friend

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Saying "here's a 4d object" and then saying "string theory says there are only 11 dimensions" sounds like you got this out of a magazine.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Well, again, you're wrong

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

Okay, wherever you got your info, it's wrong. Please understand that it takes a lot more research to speak correctly about this.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then re-read your books. Minkowski's idea is in use today in relativity, where space is seen as a 4d manifold with one imaginary dimension.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Oh! A 4d object visualized in 3D on a 2d screen!

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Your screen isn't really 2d.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

I don't believe you're right here as when things are displayed on the screen they are done so via an x and y axis...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The information on the screen is 2d

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 746 Dislikes 5

Bro, dude.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, that gif fucked me up

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

This actually makes sense now. Thanks!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Carl Sagan to the rescue! https://youtu.be/UnURElCzGc0

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's an amazing video, for anyone who wants to understand the 4th demension concept and LSD experience.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I hope people realize that we can't actually see 4 dimensions, only its expected projections on 3d.

9 years ago | Likes 82 Dislikes 1

Next you'll have me believe that the fifth dimension is barely even conceivable beyond giving it a name!

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

You know what the fifth element is. Just imagine what the fifth dimension is...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The fifth dimension is sex? No wonder they have no interest in us lame 3Ds

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 174 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

,

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 47 Dislikes 0

I've found it kind of necessary to put some things in my own gallery for quick reference, not a lot of posts are well tagged.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

That's really pretty

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Just so you guys know, this is just a representation of what we kinda know of the fourth dimension. Our minds cannot comprehend what the1/2

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Fourth dimension would look like. 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

FUCKING WHAT

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

All the lines are the same length too.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

same...lol

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

These gif shows up to 5 dimensions, correct?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

No, only 4

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

This makes way more sense than the first gif

9 years ago | Likes 80 Dislikes 2

50% of this post is garbage, and the other 50% doesn't explain the interesting things. Very scary it's front page. - (i have physics degree)

9 years ago | Likes 85 Dislikes 6

I also have a physics degree, but i left the quantum physics and fancy maths behind in 3rd year and have no clue on the validity.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If Im correct he doesn't understand that the concept of a dimension isn't purely restricted to physical objects.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Plus, I have no clue how the gif is supposed to represent the fourth dimension...

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Thank you for restoring a small bit of faith in humanity for me. As a mathematician, this bullshit is really scary.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Can you explain? Please and thank you.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What exactly is garbage? My minor is physics, and I agree it isn't explained well but nothing seems necessarily wrong

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

explain a right angle that remains orthogonal to x, y, and z dimensions, without folding space or "tightly coiling."

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well yeah exactly that's the way I like to think of it, as another axis perpendicular to x y and z. But we can't really explain it, as

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

because you're fucking making it up. "Imagine the smell of a unicorn fart"

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

We are 3 beings. But he's not exactly wrong with what he says either. And he's definitely right about the 4d cube being a tessaract

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Idk I guess I took a credit where credits due route

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I would be delighted to have it explained. Think you're up to it?

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

If you think he's telling the truth you're really gullible

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Who, @wtfukochucko? I don't understand this as well as I would like, so I can't distinguish between what's right and what isn't.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Read Brian Greene's An Elegant Universe. It'll do a great job at a Layman's level.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I just ordered three of his books, and one other. Mmm, books. Thanks for the recommendation!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Because I recommended them?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yep. I had a look at the reviews, it looks good.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Can confirm. Very good read. Got confused in the last few chapters though.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He convinced me that me and my dead grandfather both exist in the spacetime. If I could teleport, I could see him again.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

not in 140 characters

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Oct 21, 2024 11:32 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Alright!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Now, *that* is an explanation. Props!

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Visualising an eleven-dimensional space is easy. First you visualise an n-dimensional space, then you set n equal to 11.

9 years ago | Likes 425 Dislikes 2

To bad string theory has a more flaws than a couple others, so it's less likely to be true.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

but these go up to eleven

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

That's what my math prof used to say xD

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

n=√(-1) your move, physics

9 years ago | Likes 108 Dislikes 1

Just need to use your imagination for that one.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

"i" see what you did there!

9 years ago | Likes 85 Dislikes 0

n=Ï€+i^e

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

This discussion is getting a bit irrational.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

NI!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

n has to be in N

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

stop trying to make sense damn it

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I AM the sense!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

*screeches and does a 1080*

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Mottafookin this

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But it wouldn't exist.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

so what you're saying is

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

it would be

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

imaginary

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

and after doing that you'll find you've accidentally installed Matlab again.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

maxima 4 lyfe

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

no one can visualize any other dimension...its impossible. What is possible is to understand what it is you cant visualize and why

9 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 4

I'm up to six. I have a 5D mind palace I use to help me remember things.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

just because you can't doesn't mean no one can

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The amount of theory of mind in here is too damn low!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

naw...im pretty sure no one can

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

im pretty sure you're wrong

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm pretty sure you're wrong

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Lies, it's possible to visualize 4 dimensions at least.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

No yo ucan't, it would be the same as trying to Explain a Cube to a 2 Dimensional Being. It would stare at a Slice of you can Call you Crazy

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Similar to how we can only live in the present and can't visualize the future?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Tomorrow, unicorns, and a flying spaghetti deity don't exist yet we can visualize them all. End the stereotype. Humans aren't cubes.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

We can visualize them because they are based on things in our Existance. unlike a Higher Dimensional Object. we never saw one, how (1/2)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

But can't you process the zeroth first second and third dimentions? Meaning you can visualize 4 dimentions

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I can look at a 3d object shown on a 2d screen and understand it fine.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Because you are a 3 Dimensional Being. A 2 Dimensional being wouldn't understand the Concept of a Y Axis.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It isn't though

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Why not? The brain is a modelling machine, it doesn'

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

Because our brains can literally only comprehend visualising the 3 dimensions we can move around in

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Why do they beleive there are only 11 dimensions max? (Genuinely curious)

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 1

This video does a good job of explaining it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4Gotl9vRGs (note that it does not count the point as the 0th)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's why the video says only 10 dimensions. The 0th is not specifically included in the list, which would make it 11 total.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

String theory is a term for many theories. Some require 23 dimensionsand upwards

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Simple explanation is that there have to be exactly 11 for the math behind string theory to make sense :)

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 8

Would it theoretically be possible for a 12th though? If not in string theory then is it possible for something to be "beyond string"?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

But if string theory is bullshit, then.....?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

interesting, ok

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Well 11 dimensions is M-theory, turns out that by adding a dimension to 10 dimensional string theory the different versions end up being...

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

different ways of stating the same thing as opposed to independent frameworks.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

It is one of many different string theories. Saying "there are only 11" is absurd, because you aren't talking about physics, but math.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

In math there are as many dimensions as you want there to be.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Hey just question you said 11 dimensions and reading Dr. Michio Kaku's book on quantum theory he says that 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That there are either 8 or 10 or 24 dimensions he says that because the strings need to exist in those types of dimensions to existat all 2/

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So I'm wondering where you are getting 11 dimensions.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Which one of his books? He's written a few over several years and the science updates with each one.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Will wait for your post about why time is not the 4th Dimension. Not withstanding that a three dimensional object has to exist...

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

... for moments in space-time. IE it's here now... now it's there otherwise it isn't there if it doesn't exist in space time. Although ...

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I don't see how that is the 4th dimension.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah, he just kind of flat asserts that the 4th dimension isn't time, then goes on to explain how time is represented dimensionally...

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Time is present regardless of dimension. So it can't be a dimension itself.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

Time isn't a thing. It's just a statistical evolution of a thing. it's a descriptor but it has no bearing on what a thing is.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Lets say time is a W axis. If something is measured at zero W, it doesn't exist.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Regardless of whether you consider time a dimension this doesn't work.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

If something has zero height it doesn't exist. Same goes for width, depth, and duration.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I understood him to mean "in the context of the 11 dimensions mentioned in string theory, time isn't the 4th dimension."

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

In pure theory there's infinite dimensions. The definition of a dimension is basically a basis of normed vectors that are orthogonal

9 years ago | Likes 215 Dislikes 6

Our space time can be considered as three geometric dimensions and one time dimension. Lumping together as four of the same makes no sense.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

but as we learn in general relativity, generalized unit vectors are not necessarily orthogonal

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

In math yes, but in physical world theory there is a limit that some scientists currently believe in, as mentioned in the post

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Didn't we come up with the concept of dimensions to describe the real world? What does the fourth dimension describe?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Inertia into another. This is what you call a "boost". Fun fact: you don't actually accelerate anything so calling it boost is wrong tbh

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Depends on what you're working with. Also equations for 3 dimensions can get all sorts of crazy when rewritten for more dimensions which...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

itself can show connections to other things and also show gaps in understanding.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I read that if you 'translate' equations for things like the strong force and electromagnetism into a higher dimension it becomes elegant.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

As OP mentioned: Timespace. The minkowski space is used in special relativity to calculate the Lorentz transformations of one system of 1/

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Quantum superpositions?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

They only have to be linearly independent. There doesn't have to be a notion of orthogonality to define dimensionality.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

There don't even have to be vectors. "Dimensions" is a concept of topology not geometry.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I.e. (1,0,0),(0,1,0),(0,0,1) which are both independent and orthogonal, making R3 an orthogonal basis, which is also normed to length of 1

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

In order to have a basis though you need your vectors to be orthogonal to one another. Just like in R3 space you have your e vectors 1/

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

A basis absolutely does NOT need to be orthogonal. (1,0,0), (0,1,1), (0,0,1) is a perfectly fine basis for the space you mentioned.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A vector space does not need to have in inner product. So you generally don't have the notion of orthogonality.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"There are 11 dimensions" oh... He bought into string theory...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Impossible there are only 26

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hehe

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There's a method to construct such vectors called "Gram-Schmidt". It basically constructs orthonormal bases using previous vectors

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 2

#shotfired

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 7

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No one is impressed by first year linear algebra. Buddy above is obviously talking about physics.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

TL,DR: the forth dimension is real, also its size, not time

9 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 4

?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

However in our world we don't have a fourth dimension of space but a fourth dimension of time making our space hyperbolic

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Yes but time is metaphysical meaning it only exists when you do

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's really a question for the border between physics and philosophy, in reality time functions like a real dimension and has consequences

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Didn't read. Watched the gif. Totally makes sense. Cleared everything up. I got this. But how do I get there?

9 years ago | Likes 940 Dislikes 7

Its because the 4th dimension is time. Didnt read either but everyone knows that

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

If you can percieve time, it is either not the 4th dimensiom, or you are 4th dimensional

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Lol i was being sarcastoc

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

2,17,5,12

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The place you're looking for is Kamantash

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Matthew McConaughey can drive you there in a Lincoln

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

IN THE MAGIC SCHOOL BUS

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

How else people get anywhere? Uber of course!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

John Rhys-Davies can build you a machine.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Watch Buckaroo Banzai for pointers.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't ask, just go!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You know that old paradox 'if you eat yourself would you disappear or double in size'? Try that.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Saw Gif, posted:

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

What he said.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Call John Titor. Might be difficult unless you can bend light and stuff.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The right combination of drugs and willpower

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You are there. If 4th dimension is a consolidation of stacked 3rd dimensions, then you are part of a 4th dimensional stack.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So then could the other 3 dimensional layers be alternate realities?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

From a strictly scientific perspective, I would assume it's the same reality. It's the old "if a tree falls and no one is around to -

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

- hear it, does it make a sound?" argument. Of course it does. So if a 3rd dimensional layer exists outside of our own, it exists -

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

- simultaneously and within the same 4D space. There's nothing alternate about it really. Now, if you're asking if it could be a different -

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

More importantly, how do I fuck it?

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

His gift is a curse, forget the Earth, he's got the urge To pull his dick from the dirt, and fuck the whole universe...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

With a zero dimension dick? Unlikely.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

little bit of vaseline...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Take a right at Jupiter then look for the wormhole behind Saturn. If you fall into an infinite library, you've gone too far.

9 years ago | Likes 269 Dislikes 0

muuuuurph!

9 years ago | Likes 69 Dislikes 0

*ugly crying* don't let me leave murph!!!

9 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 37 Dislikes 3

I got that reference reference

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

I remember that movie, but not the name! ;_;

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Interstellar

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Goddamn it, YES! THANK YOU!

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Isn't the fifth dimension a band from the 60s?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Don't eat the brown acid man.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

DMT

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I agree, just beat you to it :)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You're correct. Deems doesn't see to be referenced often here. Side note You want to come over? I have something you might enjoy.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 111 Dislikes 0

I think OP said it was time

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 6

Stack all the space.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

DMT

9 years ago | Likes 52 Dislikes 0

Agreed

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Divine moment of truth

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Ahahahahahahahahaha

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Well, we need to find a wormhole, then get to a black hole, and ask Matthew McConaughey if he's willing to jump into an infinite library.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Alright alright alright

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Someone beat you to it

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

OMG IT WAS YOU! hahaha

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Aw dammit

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Just like all the previous examples, you ARE ALREADY there. You just can't perceive beyond the 3rd.

9 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 0

Well done sir. If the fourth dimension does indeed exist, light only propagates in three dimensions so we can only perceive them.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Lights bent by time. How'd you fail to mention that.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm dumb but I want an explanation of this. For dumb ppl please

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You want an explanation of the 4D spacetime manifold? Read a conceptual book on relativity. They dont require any math often.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That depends on what definition of time you use. You are correct with Einstein's definition but this isnt necessarily correct.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

1/ I have several problems with this post. You claim that there are 11 dimensions, but that is not necessarily true; the most popular

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

@op sorry if you got spammed with notifications, imgur said there was an error when I tried to post comments, even though it did post them.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

2/ theory at the moments requires 11 dimensions, but we have not confirmed that theory. You claim that the original post is wrong about the

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

pective

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 8

It's true that 11 dimensions have not been PROVEN- However, most credible physicists believe it, and I'm arguing from a string theory pers

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 8

3/ fourth dimension being time, but that is a straw man; the post never said that the fourth dimension is time, it just used time as an

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

That post went into great detail on multiple timelines and universes. Even without explicit statements, it asserted time as a dimension.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

4/ analogy for understanding the fourth dimension. You talk about "the zero-th dimension," but that doesn't exist; there is 0-dimensional

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

5/ space, but no "0th dimension." You say that 2-dimensional beings wouldn't be able to see anything, but that is likely not true; if

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

6/ physics allowed for 2-dimensional beings to exist, it is possible that they would be able to "see" using two-dimensional photons, or

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

String theory is a very in satisfying answer to a lot of questions. Too long for a comment. Message me if you want to know why.

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 4

Yes please!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's an elegant idea, but currently no better than God made it all.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I planned on doing a post on string theory later on, but I'd love to hear what you have to say!

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 4

Please leave that to an expert. You are just spreading confusion.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Please do. It was brought up by my alevel teacher but all she said was that the people who came up with it dont even understand it.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hell no one actually understands quantum mechanics. I mean sure we have all sorts of math but that doesn't mean we really understand it.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Id love to know more

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'd have to read up quite a bit on it first, but I'd love to!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Maybe include some references if you want to look better

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I did my undergraduate thesis on String Theory and it's an amazingly interesting subject, with a lot of different aspects

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0