Recent content by sym_

This was my concern about the whole thing. 1d and 2d structures appear to me as purely logical, not physical.

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks An array would still actually be 3d though, correct?

You're on the right path, and yes, your concern is very valid. The commonly accepted definition of time is horrible. It is seriously a Nobel worthy thing, just waiting for someone to come and do the math.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle This, except for all of the 3-dimensional stuff. Time is spacial, thus, we are at least 4 dimensional. 3+1 is a misconception.

Time can be loosely defined as "the distance that something travels through 4d space". It is a vector quantity. Clocks do not measure time, they measure cycles (the frequency of a given repeating event over a certain distance). However, you can derive time from a clock's measurement...

What if you were to consider the orbital of an electron around the nucleus? Still irrelevant? Are you saying the orbital is only relevant in 2 dimensions, as if the electron somehow does not move in 3 dimensions? What I mean is: imagine you put an atom in a box. Now, shrink the box until it's...

Why is a single layer of atoms referred to as "2d"? I commonly hear a single layer of atoms referred to as being a "2-dimensional structure", when it so clearly is not 2-dimensional. Why do people make that obvious mistake? The same exact folks will also tell you that spacetime is a...