I think the OP had read Isacc Asimov's Book : Flatland, and is looking for repetition in the general populace for those ideas as to whether he accepts these ideas as holding weight.
If he reads this: Flatland was a fictional book based off of 1940s ideas of physics. Now obviously we have...
actually if it was learning at a geometric rate the program would find ways to hide itself as software in the internet, not just as a metal skeleton, but also as a base program that could adapt itself to any electronic environment even power lines. Its environment would be specifecly broad. We...
If you take energy from an energy system at a local point, such as the casmir effect, shouldn't energy be converted from the system?
Could you then find the place in the system that the energy was taken from, and use equations to find the path of the loss of energy. Almost like you would figure...
Energy can not be created or destroyed, only converted.
Is that the one?
This would cause a very hard dilema. We might be able to find where the casmir effect originates if the device was ever created, or destroy our veiw of physics all together.
could it be that the casmir effect is present due to the strong cohesive properties of metal? Could cohesive properties be pulling the metal sheets together? Does anyone think we could harvest this energy in any other way than already stated, and what would be the first law?
To defend myself I would need to know the mistake I made. Would you please be so kind to tell me?
Here is a link to what I am talking abouthttp://www.urticator.net/maze/note-tess.html
In fact I was referring to the properties of the tesseract (the 4-d model). plus the wordage is irelivant in...
Time travel is only based on reletivity. That may be useful in normal situations, but is this a normal situation? We are talking about reversing all of the reletivistic veiws to point in the opposite direction of what they were before. This is what I call 'total time dialation.'
Another way to...
For some very odd reason my intutition says that this is not true
This is a very good point and my intutition has no problem with it.
BUT, this ius also the main problem with string theory
Have you considered the possibility of lower dimentions being made from higher dimmensional ripples?
that was said almost perfectly, but my point still remains: That higher dimensions are still based on a 3-d shape called the cube.
EXAMPLES:
Tesseract is 2 cubes with corresponding verteces connected
The hyper tesseract is 2 or more tesseracts that can exist in one or more planes of...
Impossile by our minds, because what we know is all that is put in front of our eyes. But, if we calculate it into a computer we might be a ble to see what simple 3-d shapes would turn out to be in the 4th dimmension.
Simply put Moetasim
But to really visualize something in another dimension you would need multipe angles in the 3-d. Example to see a 4-d immage you would need 2 veiws of 3-d and put them together in a complex computer that can handle this kind of thing. Then we can study a tesseract the way we...
No I am thinking about my consious mind. I can visuallize the 3-d cube; then the tesseract from that cube; and The hyper-tesseract from the 3-d and 4-d models. To clarify I am not talking about 4-d, 5-d time dimentions, but the spatial dimensions.
I think he is trying to say:
How many dimensions can one visualize?
I am able to visualize 4-d, but only on a 3-d basis, and 5-d only on a 3 and/or 4-d basis. It is quite easy you just have to understand the properties.
yes, that is the point Time is seprate from space, but time makes space and without space there is no time. They are co-dependant.
Now:
A hyper tesseract with the properties of
'In front of' and 'behind'
Here is an example: crossing between mediums(universes). Although you would not know...
THe way I understand it: a solid shape can be divided infinately into smaller shapes of a lower dimension.
ex: cube/square= INFINITY
I do not understand the reasoning behind this.
So you are saying that everything has its own area that corresponds spherically from the center point of the object.
And this area is filled with energy after it is created?
Please explain a little more.
The only reason we see 3-d is that we have two eyes, but if we had one wew would only see 2-d. Better yet, if we had three eyes we would probably see 4-d.
Positive and negative is only relevant in the initial cause. I am talking about the effect.
The Initial Cause
Gravity is very weak, but it shows great power over long distances.
Space fabric is so weak it is almost non existent.
Therefore Gravity overides spacefabric. Ultimately pushing...
First, gravity is a property in and of itself. It is the interaction of gravity and space fabric that i am theorizing.
Second, Gravity has to have much more mass-energy force than space time, therefore it can only act in places of low gravity density.
Like between galaxies, where the density...
First, volume is the basically width, length, and height added together to make a consept. Which is what we call volume.
As of the fourth spatial dimension, its properties ar the directions 'in' and 'out.' It consists of the properties of phase.
To explain this we need to look at the...
I have been able to visuallize what a tesseract and its propperties look like. I then applied the same principal to a tesseract and came up with a hyper-tesseract with phase properties (the ability to access other planes of existence).
Is this a possible model for mathematical explanation of...
I had a thought about a year ago when the theory of anti-energy became public.
It was about how gravity works. It went like this.
Gravity cannot have a pull, it is impossible to describe a pull of a force, even with the dictionaries of a thousand languages. So, maybey it is not a pull, but a...
I am amazed at where my question has gone.
Now may I add (or to point out) one of my questions.
"Does the 5TH spatial dimension have anything to do with the tunneling properties of high-energy particles?"
Now if I may add a thought?
Mayby by taking a tesseract and visualizing the...
I mean to ask what the physical properties of the 5th spatial dimension.
Like I said I understand the tesseract. Which is the 4th dimensonal base shape.
The other question I am asking is if time would act differently in the 4th spatial dimmension or would it have the same one directional...
I understand the Tesseract, but What would be the fifth dimensional property? Does it have to do with tunneling properties of particles? And how would time act in the fourth dimension?
I do understand a little about physics, but in consideration that I know very little, please IN LAMENS TERMS!