A theory for a FIFTH dimension .

Don Cristo
Originally posted by Eh
You're missing the point, so here's an example of using dimensions. Take any event, say 2 particles colliding, and define what the xyzt coordinates will be. You'll have a location in space, and a time. So the coordinate tells you "where and when" to find an object. If you add matter as a coordinate, how is that going to change the location? Try to define that, and you'll see why it's not a dimension.
Ok, so why do they collide? Yes we can establish where they collide and when they collide, but we do not know exactly what makes them collide. Why don't they just pass straight though each other? This is partly one of the reasons for my bizarre theory. What is your arguement?

Eh
Why particles collide is irrelevant when locating an event. Remember that a dimension is only an axis in your coordinates, and so location is the important topic here. So if you think of a new idea for a dimension, ask yourself: does it tell us anything about location?

Don Cristo
Originally posted by Eh
Why particles collide is irrelevant when locating an event. Remember that a dimension is only an axis in your coordinates, and so location is the important topic here. So if you think of a new idea for a dimension, ask yourself: does it tell us anything about location?
No it isn't irrelevant. Remember we have already established that this is more of a philisophical matter so do not out-rule it without thinking beyond physics as you know it. My theory does in a way give us an idea for location because it makes up the elements which make the 'collision' happen in the first place. Without this 'Matter' being there, a location could not be detected as no collision would have taken place.

Eh
You are still missing the point. It has nothing to do with the definition of dimension. It's also not a philosophical matter either, since dimensions are already defined.

Don Cristo
Originally posted by Eh
You are still missing the point. It has nothing to do with the definition of dimension. It's also not a philosophical matter either, since dimensions are already defined.
No that is untrue - you are just so immersed in your own knowledge of physics that you are unwilling to venture beyond. And it IS a philosophical matter (no pun intended) - whether something has already been defined or not does not mean that I cannot think beyond it. If I told you grass was green, surely you would have a right to disagree? Or perhaps you would be so sure that it was green, you would do your utmost to argue with me. Now please, back to the topic!

Last edited by a moderator:
Eh
What part about definition of dimension don't you understand?

Don Cristo
Well instead of being so critical Mr 'Eh', perhaps you would like to explain to me (without reference to Matter) why an atom collides? Until then, take your restricted views elsewhere.

Eh
I already told you why an atom collides has nothing to with the definition of a dimension. And that's just it - matter doesn't fit the definition. You could just as well call it cotton candy.

Don Cristo
You clearly have not understood what I meant and also you could not answer my question. I know what you are trying to say but think about it from a different perspective!

Last edited by a moderator:
chroot
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Shouldn't this nonsense be in the theory development forum? Oh wait.

- Warren

Don Cristo
Originally posted by chroot
Shouldn't this nonsense be in the theory development forum? Oh wait.

- Warren
Firstly, that was an utterly pointless post. Secondly, bluntly labelling the theory as "Nonsense" without arguement is not necessary and shows ignorance. I know the theory is debateable and unlikely but please contribute to the debate before criticism.
Thanks. (sigh)

Last edited by a moderator:
Don Cristo
Does anyone else have anything to add to this discussion? I would very much like to see anybody's views on the topic.
Thanks

jeff
Originally posted by Don Cristo
...it IS a philosophical matter...
Then post the topic in the philosphy section.

Don Cristo
Originally posted by steinitz
Then post the topic in the philosphy section.
You have dissapointed me Mr Steinitz - I thought you were above insolence and stupidity. I am sure you can come up with a cleverer and more relevant remark that that. Good day.

jeff
[zz)]

Don Cristo
Originally posted by steinitz
[zz)]
You are a pathetic individual. You have patronized me for no good reason and you have made a mockery of me. You belong in the gutters for this atrocity. May you be stung by a thousand tempestuous scorpions, you amalgamation of loathsome repulsiveness. May you also be chased across the desert by sex-starved camels, you whose word is worthless I hope, pray and dream that you shall be dragged through the disease-ridden medieval sty by a demented pig, you grudge-festering scar on the face of beauty.

chroot
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
I wonder how many hours you had to spend with a thesaurus to write that stupid reply.

- Warren