Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A new DIMENSION?

  1. Jul 23, 2007 #1
    A new DIMENSION??

    To Support the Theory of going into another dimension by travelling through a Black Hole.
    Since Scientists say you can go to another dimension through a Black Hole, why not you go to another dimension by just going pass a Black Hole?:confused:
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 23, 2007 #2

    cristo

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Who says you can go into another dimension if you enter a black hole? Even if someone did say this, what do passing a black hole have anything to do with this?

    I think you need to read the PF guidelines regarding over speculative posts. The guidelines can be found here
     
  4. Jul 23, 2007 #3
    Well, can you tell me how to get to another dimension in any other way??:confused:
     
  5. Jul 23, 2007 #4

    cristo

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    I'm not the one who's about to start wildly speculating! You made a statement which clearly has no reputable source to back it up, and therefore is not right for discussion here.
     
  6. Jul 23, 2007 #5
    Well, ok i'll stop. Please stop using offensive words.
    I'm just being curious!
     
  7. Jul 23, 2007 #6
    And... scientists proved that it is possible to travel into another dimension by going into a black hole
     
  8. Jul 23, 2007 #7

    cristo

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    I wasn't aware that any of the words I said were offensive; they definitely weren't meant in an offensive manner.
    There's nothing wrong with curiosity, but your post started in a way that was easily taken to be a crackpot post.

    If you're interested in what happens when one falls into a black hole, then you may find the following useful: [As a rule of thumb, websites ending .edu can usually be trusted, as they are university webpages]

    http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/BlackHoles/fall_in.html
    http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html#q3

    Please provide a source for this comment: i.e. a webpage or a book, or journal article where a "scientist" has said such a thing.
     
  9. Jul 23, 2007 #8
    Well, alright
    Thanks for your advice and tips
    where do you think I should be posting my threads?
     
  10. Jul 23, 2007 #9
    Man, I need to start reading New Scientist again.
     
  11. Jul 23, 2007 #10

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    For starts, raccoon, you're not even using the word 'dimension' in the way that any scientist would use it. Therefore, no scientist has ever said anything like "going into a black hole allows you to travel to another dimension." In fact, there's nothing in existing physical theory which describes "other dimensions," nor anything at all in the physics of black holes that would suggest such a thing would happen.

    You are misinterpreting statements regarding "worm holes," which are a particularly fragile solution of spacetime geometry which could allow travel from one place in the the universe to another very distant place. They do not involve any "other dimensions," and are so fragile that they almost certainly do not occur spontaneously in nature.

    Most scientists would tell you that if you fell into a black hole, you'd simply wind up trapped inside it, and become part of its mass.

    - Warren
     
  12. Jul 23, 2007 #11
    Isn't the term crackpot post offensive, can't we call it a fuzzy physics post, or an educated guess post =)
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2007
  13. Jul 23, 2007 #12

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    We have standard here -- mollycoddling crackpots isn't part of them.

    - Warren
     
  14. Jul 23, 2007 #13

    cristo

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Plus (since I presume this was aimed at me) I never laid into the OP saying he was a crackpot, just that his post was easily taken to be a crackpot post. It's a lot more productive to take this stance first, rather than get lured into discussing this by a potential crackpot (as chroot hints at above).
     
  15. Jul 24, 2007 #14
    words have different meanings in different contexts and fields- in science and mathematics dimensions are degrees of freedom- but there isn't a scientist that doesn't also know the more common colloquial term 'dimension' refers to different space-time regions-

    it is a little harsh to simply criticize the poster for using the informal pop-culture term 'dimension' when you know what they mean and when you also know that most people would only have heard space-time regions called 'other dimensions' in the first place- it's not an appropriate reason to vent one's frustrations of imprecise usage of terms by the masses-

    also- there are many published ideas by scientists which posit that black-holes either generate new space-time regions Smolin CNS or connect to different space-time regions Kerr et al-

    so the poster's question wasn't wrong at all- he is only guilty of using the vernacular terminology that one SHOULD expect from a layperson- so I don’t understand the rebuke
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2007
  16. Jul 24, 2007 #15

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    setAI, in my opinion you are mistaken on several points. It seems to me you may have posted without reading the thread carefully.

    Also I don't know where you get the notion that "the masses" use the word dimension to mean region.

    In my pop-sci and sci-fi days when someone disappeared into the fifth dimension or emerged ghostlike from a different dimension they were definitely coming out of some orthogonal reality. Not merely a different region of our familiar world, but a whole other DIMENSION.

    I seriously question your assertion about "what every scientist knows" regarding popular usage.

    setAI, you are misrepresenting Chroot's post, or you just didn't read it very well. Chroot was the first to object to poster's use of the word "dimension" and he did not "vent" criticism at the poster. he just ADVISED poster that he was using the word wrongly.

    Chroot said
    that is correct. Raccoon needs to be told that. And we all benefit from having some modest standards regarding the use of language. If we start equating "dimension" = "region" we'll get all screwed up and be forever talking at cross purposes.
    ====================
    So what? Raccoon wasnt talking about that, he was talking about you or me 'going through' a black hole. Surely the first thing he needs to be told is that this is a bad idea. He should better try to go thru a coffee grinder.

    I just find this absurd, setAI. As I told you in my experience of sci-fi and popularized science, dimension never meant region. I strongly doubt what you claim about "all scientists" (or words to that effect.)

    Poster's question was based on several mistakes. He didnt get rebuked so much as simply stopped cold in his tracks.

    A. Don't say dimension when you mean region.
    B. Don't claim that any qualified scientist believes you can go thru black holes, to anywhere.
    C. Back up such questionable claims with a link, or don't make them.

    I think the only person in this thread who is "venting" inappropriate criticism is you, setAI. On the other hand, I could be mistaken. If you think I am being inappropriately critical of your post, would you please let me know?

    thanks
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2007
  17. Jul 24, 2007 #16
    whatever marcus- I am not going to argue with you- but you should be aware that you are wrong about the folk use of 'dimension' - it is often used in non-scientific culture when refering to other 'universes' or spactime regions- in pop culture [not pop science literature- just pop literature and fantasy/sci-fi] 'other dimensions'='another universe'='other realms'=etc- in fact I just saw an old episode of Blake 7 on DVD [dawn of the gods] where that terminology was used- [it was even in Disney's "the Black Hole which is still the most commonly known source of ANY information about black holes that society has had]

    the problem here is not science- but cultural divide- because of nitpicking everyone is too worried about the poster's sloppy terminology- fine to correct him on that- but what about answering/correcting the actual question? anyone reading the original post realizes that he is refering to the ideas from Kerr/Smolin/etc about wormholes from rotating black holes-

    no you cannot send a monkey alive through a black hole [probably]- but there are plenty of ideas and solutions to rotating/charged [physical] black holes that suggest information/ even certain types of matter can survive a journey through Kerr/etc ring singularities [don't know if there are any ideas about information survivng a Bojowald Bounce]- etc-etc- all quite speculative but based on various types of black holes with rotation and charge-


    we are talking about the most extreme speculative theoretical objects here- condescending arrogance has no legitimacy in such a discussion- especially toward laypeople and children
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2007
  18. Jul 24, 2007 #17

    cristo

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Huh? :confused: I'm with marcus on this one. Dimension does not mean "another region of spacetime," and I have never heard this description used anywhere in sci-fi or other places. I'm not saying that there is no-one who uses this terminology, just that if there are, they are small in comparison with the number of people that use the word dimension properly. Besides, this is a science forum, and I would assume people using common, scientific definitions as opposed to obscure sci-fi related ones.

    edit (since you've edited the above post)
    Do they? Well, I'm afraid I didn't. I read the opening post as it was written.

    Who is this comment aimed at? Who is being condescending or arrogant? I suggest if you suspect such a thing, then you report the post to the moderators immediately.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2007
  19. Jul 24, 2007 #18
    so Cristo you are saying you have never seen The Black Hole/ Space 1999/ Dr Who/ Sliders? all of these featured episodes where BHs and wormholes lead to 'new dimesnions' that are revealed as simply parallel spacetime regions- usually filled to the brim with Lovecraftian monsters-

    this is clearly a case where scientifically inclined seem to be wholly ignorant of how the greater culture has adapted their ideas- if you asked people on the street what a dimension was- nearly all of them would say 'a parallel world'- only a few nerds like us would even have heard of orthogonal degrees-of-freedom- you do realize that right?
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2007
  20. Jul 24, 2007 #19

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    If that is what this thread is supposed to be about, so be it. It that case could it perhaps be moved to some other forum, like Mind and Brain Science? Social Science and Humanities? or General Discussion?
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2007
  21. Jul 24, 2007 #20

    well yeah! just move the post then direct the poster to a BH FAQ- and they can learn about E-R bridges and such on their own-

    if you want to get to the meat then at least refer to some quality hard sci-fi by actual scientists like Greg Benford or Stephen Baxter to get an idea what really might be possible in terms of BHs and wormholes
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: A new DIMENSION?
  1. The fourth dimension (Replies: 52)

  2. Extra dimensions (Replies: 3)

  3. The Fourth Dimension (Replies: 1)

  4. Dimensions of universe (Replies: 8)

  5. Origin of dimensions (Replies: 2)

Loading...