Register to reply

The Powers of a Fourth-Dimensional Being.

by Mentat
Tags: fourthdimensional, powers
Share this thread:
Mentat
#1
Sep6-03, 11:48 AM
P: 3,715
I think the thing I've enjoyed the most about Prof. Kaku's lectures and books is the references to higher-dimensional beings, and their abilities. Michio Kaku has often said that they would be like "gods", and that is not an overstatement in any way.

For example, a "god" is said to be omniscient. Well, if you were in a higher dimension, you would also be omniscient. To see why, I like the illustration of "Flatland", wherein the beings are all two-dimensional. In this two-dimensional world, there is no concept of the third dimension. Now, obviously skin evolved in order to protect the "insides" of a person's body, but there would be no reason for skin to have evolved in the third dimension, and so a third-dimensional person could "look down" on any Flatlander and see his/her insides as clearly as their outsides. A third-dimensional being would be able to perform delicate surgery on the heart of some Flatlander without ever piercing any skin. As far as the third-dimensional "god" is concerned, the skin of the Flatlander is but an outline.

Now, this ability for omniscience has more applications than just dealing with people. Take for example, the houses of a Flatlander. As far as the Flatlander is concerned, the house is covered "all around" (except for the doors), but, to a third-dimensional person, the insides are as clearly visible as the outside.

A jail, in Flatland, would be like a large circle, and thus would suffice, since it would cover the Flatlander "all around", and they would be unable to escape. However, if a third-dimensional being wished to assist this Flatlander, they could easily "lift" the Flatlander right out of the Jail. It would appear to any other Flatlander that their companion just "disappeared", and then "reappeared" on the outside.

Of course, this third-dimensional "god" needn't be a kind being, and could just easily use his "powers" to punish a helpless Flatlander. After all, if a being were able to reach into your body, without your knowing about it, they could find any number of ways to kill you, before you ever had a chance to run away.

Now, all of this talk about the third-dimensional being, and the Flatlanders, is really just an analogy. It may be that there are fourth-dimensional beings, that posses exactly the qualities that I've described above (along with many others), but they are able to do such things to us.

You could be walking down the street one day, minding your own business, and see a sphere of flesh appear in front of you. So, you turn around, only to realize that there is another such "ball" of flesh behind you. The two balls of flesh close in on you, and then you feel an odd pressure on every part of your body (inside and out, and from all directions). As far as everybody else is concerned, you just disappeared. But, in reality, you have been lifted onto a higher dimension.

Just in case you're wondering, none of this is really useful in your day-to-day life, but it's still fascinating to think of what powers a person would have, if they could just "rise above" the three usual dimensions.
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Three's a charm: NIST detectors reveal entangled photon triplets
How did evolution optimize circadian clocks?
New webcast series brings cutting-edge physics talks to the world
Sonty
#2
Sep7-03, 03:17 AM
Sonty's Avatar
P: 96
Being carried into the fourth dimension by a big hand... I was thinking about that disappearing stuff. the manifestation of "me" in 3D+time will have to still be there. The 3D+time me would not be seen because I would be moving faster than light and I couldn't reflect it (speculation...speculation). So would I be able to pass through walls?
On the other hand I can try to think geometrically. Let's think of 2 1D objects ( lines or geodesics) on a 2D object (a surface). Can I move one of the lines on the other side of the second? I guess so. Two translations inside the 3rd dimension and one translation in the direction orthogonal to the one of the line in the 2D space. I all the time the line is making its extradimensional travel no other line in the 2D space can cross it so it doesn't exist / can't be seen there. So I wouldn't exist in my 3D form and I could pass through walls.
So now the question. What would we see during this travel? What kind of "light" does flow outside our 3D environment? What does that 4th dimension of objects reflect that a 4th dimension of the eye could catch?
selfAdjoint
#3
Sep7-03, 10:36 AM
Emeritus
PF Gold
P: 8,147
Of course this is an analogy so we can make up the rules that seem good to us. But I would expect that our two dimensional perceptions would travel with us as we are lifted into the third dimension. Thus we would "see" along various planes in the 3-space, accidental and maybe rapidly changing planes as our sponsor moved us around and turned us in completely unknown (to 2-D people) 3-D rotations. This would likely be visual gibberish to us.

wuliheron
#4
Sep7-03, 05:26 PM
P: 1,967
The Powers of a Fourth-Dimensional Being.

To complicate matters further, a real four dimensional being might perceive us as living a lie. One of our three dimensions we perceive could be illusory. Hence the question of what exactly is and isn't a dimension may simply depend upon a pragmatic interpretation of the word. This is also supported by the findings of Chaos theory. Just exactly what the heck is a "fractional" dimension? How does it matter?

Problems such as this have left string theory in the ambiguous and vague realm of the philosophical where it has been as hotly debated as it is pursued. Certainly it produces results, but what do they mean? Is it really physics, mathematics, or philosophy? Until it can be catagorized clearly its future remains uncertain as does the definition of dimension.
werner
#5
Sep8-03, 03:33 PM
P: 1
How can we sure we are not already residing in a fourth dimension at least as large as the entire universe? How would one know whether or not they were traveling at a perpendicular to the three dimensions since his own 3D form travels with him? Could it be that we may have deduced scientific explanations of 3D objects embedded or poking through the surface of fourth dimension by the apparent movements of these objects within their 3D framework alone.
sol
#6
Sep8-03, 03:39 PM
P: n/a
Meaning of Dimension Links at this site.


Lanecove,

Dickt's <a href="http://www.superstringtheory.com/forum/philboard/messages14/9.html">comment</a> in regards to the Higg's field

<a href="http://www.superstringtheory.com/forum/cosmoboard/messages18/194.html">Big Bang</a>, unification at such levels, and why is there not unification in our thought constructions?

If a physicist crosses the room? <a href="http://www.exploratorium.edu/origins/cern/ideas/higgs.html">Click on Cartoon</a>


From <a href="http://superstringtheory.com/forum/dualboard/messages14/112.html">gravity to supergravity</a>.

We understand the complexity of gravity, and we undertand how complex it can become. What is the dimensional significance of this in our talks? What is the relevance of scale here. Table top experiments? Distance? Length? Metric functions and the analogies(quark to quark measure)?

The determination for me is how we use energy even at the scale we do, and inthe world reality the weakness of the measure of gravity, and there is a direct correlation to energy at both the high energy levels and the low? Scale has to be a factor here inorde for us to understand how we move from euclidean geometries, very weak, to the higher gemeotires(plasma) very strong.

I am definitily open to corrections here as I would like to push forward. The string's length and the measure of distance is very important in my developing understanding, as it represents not only the strong measure of planck length, but also the weak measure.

In this respect to have unified the strong with the weak there would then be consistancy in thought construction because this then becomes a viable model for consciousness.

You see?

Sol
Mentat
#7
Sep9-03, 10:28 AM
P: 3,715
Originally posted by Sonty
Being carried into the fourth dimension by a big hand... I was thinking about that disappearing stuff. the manifestation of "me" in 3D+time will have to still be there. The 3D+time me would not be seen because I would be moving faster than light and I couldn't reflect it (speculation...speculation).
Why should you be moving faster than light?

So would I be able to pass through walls?
Actually, you wouldn't need to. In the two-dimensional analogy, the being that is "lifted up" into the third dimension, can "drop" back in wherever s/he pleases. Thus, I could "drop" drop into the middle of the Oval Office, but I wouldn't need to walk through any walls.

Basically, there is no wall that faces the fourth dimension.

On the other hand I can try to think geometrically. Let's think of 2 1D objects ( lines or geodesics) on a 2D object (a surface). Can I move one of the lines on the other side of the second? I guess so. Two translations inside the 3rd dimension and one translation in the direction orthogonal to the one of the line in the 2D space. I all the time the line is making its extradimensional travel no other line in the 2D space can cross it so it doesn't exist / can't be seen there. So I wouldn't exist in my 3D form and I could pass through walls.
I think I see what you are saying. However, as you can see, you are not really "passing through the wall", it's more like "disappearing" and "reappearing" on the other side.

So now the question. What would we see during this travel? What kind of "light" does flow outside our 3D environment? What does that 4th dimension of objects reflect that a 4th dimension of the eye could catch?
IIRC, string theory uses the higher dimensions to explain all of the "forces" in the style of General Relativity's explanation of Gravity. Thus, the electromagnetic force is explained as a warping of the fourth spacial dimension. If this is so, then there would be no "light" in our "extradimensional travel", since light is a result of a curvature of the dimension that we are now entering. Feel free to correct me (anyone) if I'm wrong on this particular point.
Mentat
#8
Sep9-03, 10:41 AM
P: 3,715
Originally posted by wuliheron
To complicate matters further, a real four dimensional being might perceive us as living a lie. One of our three dimensions we perceive could be illusory.
How so?

Problems such as this have left string theory in the ambiguous and vague realm of the philosophical where it has been as hotly debated as it is pursued. Certainly it produces results, but what do they mean? Is it really physics, mathematics, or philosophy? Until it can be catagorized clearly its future remains uncertain as does the definition of dimension.
Where exactly is the uncertainty as to the definition of a "dimension"? It has always been explained to me that a "dimension" is a spacial or temporal "coordinate". Where's the mystery there?
Sonty
#9
Sep9-03, 12:52 PM
Sonty's Avatar
P: 96
Originally posted by Mentat
Why should you be moving faster than light?

I think I see what you are saying. However, as you can see, you are not really "passing through the wall", it's more like "disappearing" and "reappearing" on the other side.

IIRC, string theory uses the higher dimensions to explain all of the "forces" in the style of General Relativity's explanation of Gravity. Thus, the electromagnetic force is explained as a warping of the fourth spacial dimension. If this is so, then there would be no "light" in our "extradimensional travel", since light is a result of a curvature of the dimension that we are now entering. Feel free to correct me (anyone) if I'm wrong on this particular point.
I would appear as moving faster than light to those left behind. I'm actually taking a shortcut by comparison to the way light must take, but not even I can know that as I suddenly see black in front of my eyes (you're right about there being no light unless there would be a fifth curved dimension. but what if light as we see it would be the manifestation of the curvature of this fifth dimension and not the fourth. how would 4D light look like? As wuliheron said, we probably won't know the difference).
I'm beginning to be very upset with myself when I strugle with concepts like "pulled up" and I immediately think of the third spatial coordinate. I'll get over it. I need those Kaku's books and the time to read them. So I would need the books and a 0.75c capable ship to lengthen my day a little. I'm going off-topic. Please ignore this.
wuliheron
#10
Sep9-03, 01:21 PM
P: 1,967
Originally posted by Mentat
How so?
Because the entropy of information is proportional to the surface area it could be one of dimensions is a holographic projection.


Where exactly is the uncertainty as to the definition of a "dimension"? It has always been explained to me that a "dimension" is a spacial or temporal "coordinate". Where's the mystery there?
The compactified dimensions and mirror world scenario of string theory resemble the fractional dimensions of fractal geometry more than traditional euclidean geometry. As accomodating and sweepingly descriptive as these theories are, they are also more vague and indeterminate in their basic axioms. What is a spacial-temporal coordinate that you cannot observe or point to as in the mirror world scenario? How can a spacial-temporal coordinate, a geometric point, be divided up?

Such are apparent contradictions that remain unresolved and support the growing consensus among physicists that their definitions of spacetime must become more fuzzy if they are to make further progress.
phoenixthoth
#11
Sep10-03, 01:31 AM
phoenixthoth's Avatar
P: 1,572
i'm considering the possibility that we already have a higher dimensional awareness. how do you explain it when our brains come up with ways of connecting three dimensional concepts and things in brilliant ways? it may be that we already have a higher dimensional awareness that we haven't fully tapped into yet. this would take the TOE into a philosophical/psychological direction that scientists may be unwilling to go. why be unwilling to go there if that's what the research indicates? (not that the research indicates that, yet)

cheers,
phoenix
Mentat
#12
Sep12-03, 02:46 PM
P: 3,715
Originally posted by wuliheron
Because the entropy of information is proportional to the surface area it could be one of dimensions is a holographic projection.
But how could a two-dimensional being be conscious of such a projection?
sol
#13
Sep12-03, 03:11 PM
P: n/a
The Function of the Metric

The fourth dimenison is one of curvature. Is gravity and is time. To get to gravity, euclidean dimensions stop working. Minkowski takes over, and we are lead into non-euclidean geometries. Some of the early forbearers of this conception, were peole like Sacherri, the Jesuit priest and Gauss Riemann, Einstein, Kaluza and Klein. It is very important to take in the whole gammut, of the geometries, right from euclidean to topological formations.

This is all correlated to the physics. Never mind four dimensions think about five if it is possible and we are dealing with the future?

Sol
Mentat
#14
Sep14-03, 06:02 PM
P: 3,715
Originally posted by sol
The Function of the Metric

The fourth dimenison is one of curvature. Is gravity and is time. To get to gravity, euclidean dimensions stop working. Minkowski takes over, and we are lead into non-euclidean geometries. Some of the early forbearers of this conception, were peole like Sacherri, the Jesuit priest and Gauss Riemann, Einstein, Kaluza and Klein. It is very important to take in the whole gammut, of the geometries, right from euclidean to topological formations.

This is all correlated to the physics. Never mind four dimensions think about five if it is possible and we are dealing with the future?

Sol
Actually, sol, the temporal dimension is not called "fourth" because of any intrinsic property of it. It's number is just to set it apart from the other three that were known at the time. In the M-Theory paradigm (where there are 10 spacial dimensions) the temporal dimension is called the 11th.
wuliheron
#15
Sep16-03, 01:48 AM
P: 1,967
Originally posted by Mentat
But how could a two-dimensional being be conscious of such a projection?
Relativity presents a good analogy. At extremes of acceleration and gravity, the illusion of a universal steady flow of time breaks down. Now that we know this ratio exists, it may be possible to figure out extremes in which the illusion breaks down. In fact, we may already be witnessing these extremes and just not realize it just as it was realized what the implications of the Michealson-Morely experiment meant or the strange orbit of mercury.

The nonlocal effects of QM already imply this kind of illusory holographic projection. Somehow things appear to move faster than light, yet we cannot send information or energy faster than light. The trick is to be able to predict such effects from a simple formula similar to e=mcc that does away with all the troublesome infinities of QFT, and would predict new things such as all the masses we observe.
oscar
#16
Apr21-04, 06:21 PM
P: 163
This is all very interesting as math theory and imagination. If we talk about dreams, which is an everyday objective experience shared by all humans, the fact is since we can't duplicate the oniric experience in a lab, is very subjective. Don't tell me about the RME as measured by electrodes and seen through closed eyelids cos we know the experience of time meanwhile we are dreaming is very objective as an experience but has a different ticking measuring mini-cycles that complete about 2 hours of dream per night. So, that is just an example of our ignorance regarding other facts that are making many theorist to explain the whole universe just as an hollographic illusion created out from bites! So, if a reality like oniric experience hasn't been solved neither well explained and is something shared by millions of people, who cares or who investigates the fewer observed phenomena messing around with parapsicology to say something? That approach is needed to investigate if Sai Baba can go through physical dimension like Christ appearing from nowhere passing through closed doors and presenting himself among disciples. That is spiritism realms although we can make the math calculations of the probability. Abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscense.
oscar
#17
Apr21-04, 06:23 PM
P: 163
....something like Mercurial twins in Matrix II...
Phi For All
#18
Apr24-04, 10:16 PM
P: 34
Quote Quote by Mentat
Actually, sol, the temporal dimension is not called "fourth" because of any intrinsic property of it. It's number is just to set it apart from the other three that were known at the time. In the M-Theory paradigm (where there are 10 spacial dimensions) the temporal dimension is called the 11th.
This brings up something that's always bothered me (which means it may be common knowledge I just haven't run across). We have multiple spatial dimensions, three of which we can all sense with our current biological forms, and at least one more we can kinda sort of imagine, and six more that puzzle me like the fascination with TV reality shows. Then we have TIME. We view it as the temporal dimension but there is only one (I know there are theories of multiple temporal dimensions but I don't see them with a big following either). What if TIME is the dimension needed to access the higher seven spatial dimensions? I know there are many paradoxes when we start messing with time, but what if that is what some of the higher dimensions are for, for controlling time? Or could it be possible for a 4-D person to curve time around himself in such a way as to control its effects? When we think of controlling time we always think of simply going backward or forward and that's what causes the paradoxes. What if it is more akin to having a "bubble" of time around you and using it to do things that would make you seem God-like because you could slow time down with respect to yourself only, speed it up or even suppress it completely? In fact, could the total suppression of time be what would make the higher dimensions accessible to us? If only I had more time...


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Difference between Identical , Equal , Equivalent Calculus & Beyond Homework 9
Probability and Statistic on Infinite-Dimensional spaces Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 4
Need help in some inter-dimensional isomorphisms Linear & Abstract Algebra 2