how many dimensions are there, really?

Netme

So we exist within a 4 dimension+ universe? How can this be if we can only function viewing the universe in 3d. Wouldnt functioning be impossible?

techwonder

Talking dimensions like this, i.e. as if the number of dimensions might be (locally?) variable. Is there anybody who have analysed the possibility of this? It seems that our nice inverse square laws puts strict limits to such schemes, no?

sol2

If inverse square law in regards to gravity is being considered, how would we contain the wave equivalants to gravitons and not call them representation of dimensions? There had to be a energy value considered, and as in the quantum harmonic oscillator, zero point vibration limitation to all points of view?

If we can change the way we see the nature of all particles as in their windings, then what signatures could we have given any element? Is it not universal then?

Olias

how many dimensions are there, really?

There are only Three Dimensions, any more and Proton Decay would make everybody's life a nightmare!

One can see that dimensional make-up follows in three-fold steps.

Third Dimension.
The proton occupies the most stable Dimension, the third, this is why every combination of Quark interactions and existence occurs in THREE'S, and why all matter is in Phase across this dimensional domain.

Second Dimension.
Preceeds the first in all aspects Proton(MATTER) construction, and is by definition a Field. Matter can exist within a Field, but a field cannot exist within a Particle(Proton for instance), so theoretically 2-D fields surround matter at all times. Try and think of any field that is internal/inside matter?..you will arrive at a duality.

First Dimension.
The singularity where all 2-D componants are seperated into base 'mono-space', 'everything' is everything else. Anti-Matter is Matter and Matter is Anti-Matter, everything is ONE.

sol2

There is no doubt about the ultimate question where everything is one. Pierre Ramond place this out there, front and centre in his graphed analyst for introspection. Yet on this realization, it points us in a direction about the early universe and its formation, even at the quantum level. So the classical discription of GR has revealled in the cosmo, needs a frame work at the supersymmetrical levels of this universe where such ideas spoken too, as you speak, also to two facets of reality that shoud become joined.

There are a couple of images that are immediately triggered in my mind to support my post above yours, yet something in what you said also triggerred another image.


http://www.auriga.lnl.infn.it/auriga/guy_wave.jpg

http://physicsforums.com/showpost.ph...83&postcount=6

Think of the graviton as the fellow? How would your assessment in dimenison speak to this unfolding?


http://www.cerncourier.com/objects/2...desy1_4-03.jpg

Your attempts at such a model discrption is something that I have also done from a "string persepctive" ( an attempt to geometrical map the movement of each particle) in regards to the "immediate" morphing of the circle into the length of the string. From a energy standpoint this has to identify the partciles nature and the only way that I know to do this is identify its energy counterpart. I should be corrected here if this is wrong?

agnostikos

String theory has afforded mankind an incalculable benefit. It has been such a brashly sexy field that it has doubtless kept stringmeisters off of Wall Street. Can you imagine some mathwhiz inventing an "exotic financial instrument" to suck liquidity out of parallel universes? And such a thing succeding, causing inflation so astronomical that the Planckdollar is the new currency---

chrispb

What you and I observe on a day-to-day basis is described as a (3+1=4)d universe. When people were first doing (bosonic (i.e. no fermions)) string theory, they discovered that there had to be extra dimensions that were compactified (curled up on themselves) with a small radius. In order to prevent a technical problem (known as anomalies) from happening in the theory, it was discovered that there had to be exactly 26 dimensions. When the same calculations were repeated with superstring theory (which DOES allow for a description of fermions), that number was found to be 10. It was later discovered that the various kinds of string theory were a particular limit of what's come to be known as M-theory, which is still ill-defined and poorly understood. However, it IS known that M-theory lives in a 11d spacetime. I don't know what the status of anomaly cancellation in 11d is.

Now, the extra dimension that's added in M-theory is (I think) taken to be decently larger than the other 6 added for string theory. Thus, in energy scales where you can't probe the 6 of string theory but you CAN probe the extra one of M-theory, you'd end up doing well for yourself with an approximately 5d description of the universe. Sometimes you see models like that around as well.

czes

Yes, how many dimensions are in a CD containing a Star Treck video or another game ?
If the Holographic Universe is right our dimensions are the illusion.

Gokul43201

Since this old thread has been revived, I suppose it wouldn't be inappropriate to insert a little humor that appeared elsewhere recently:



http://xkcd.com/848/

PhilKravitz

Physical experimental data says 3 spacial dimensions and 1 time dimension. There are folks exploring math ideas about higher dimension universes. There is currently no experimental data to back any of them up.

Dr_Zinj

I think Paul Davies was actually begging the question. If there is order, then it can be mathematically described. But due to the randomness of nature, you can't always say that something exists here and now.

Netme: "So we exist within a 4 dimension+ universe? How can this be if we can only function viewing the universe in 3d. Wouldnt functioning be impossible?"

I function quite nicely viewing the universe in 4 dimensions. While my ability to interact is limited to the present, and to a limited extent, the future; I can view the entire past that intersects with my 4 dimensional personal space within the space-time continuum. It's called memory.

Referring back to meteor's comment, a particle would not be able to "leap" to another dimension if it exists in all dimensions simultaneously. Which would also pose a problem with Heim Theory conjecture that an object could phase into a higher dimension to travel faster than light. I'm not sure of the math, but I think what it would look like on paper is a drop in all 3 physical dimensions to zero, becoming a "dimensionless" point; but to balance the equation, the other, "non-physical" dimensions would have to change. Can a dimensionless point move within our space-time continuum at faster than light speeds? I suppose it could if it has zero mass. But if an object's dimensions approached zero, it's density would approach infinity. At some point, it would become a black hole, with an event horizon. Can a black hole shrink in size? And can an event horizon move at FLT speeds?

raynicolle

there has to be some kind of "friction point" where 'stuff' from other dimensions interact with our 3 dimesional Observable Universe. If there is no "friction point" then why do we care about these mathematical creations called dimensions? They don't have an effect on us. If they do have an effect on us...where is that "friction point". A simple example to me would be showing me how the 4th dimension called time actually interfaces with my 3D world. I see the results of "time" but never observe it itself. That makes it very easy to say that dimensions are imaginary, vaguely useful, and easily ignored. Trodding down the multi-dimensional path could lead to madness....lol.