Are extra dimensions required be compacted?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the necessity and nature of extra dimensions in theoretical physics, particularly whether they need to be compacted. Participants explore various models and implications of extra dimensions, touching on concepts from string theory, game theory, and the potential role of large or infinite dimensions in understanding the universe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that extra dimensions may arise from overlapping planes at different energy levels, proposing that they could be very small at intersections but potentially large or infinite elsewhere, possibly relating to "missing mass" or superpartners.
  • Another participant questions the necessity of more than six degrees of freedom in a three-dimensional universe, arguing that three plus one dimensions are sufficient to locate objects.
  • A different viewpoint highlights that both compact and non-compact extra dimensions exist in theoretical models, suggesting that the choice may be a matter of preference or "taste" among theorists.
  • One participant introduces the idea that game theory might provide insights into the fundamental rules of the universe, challenging the assumption of a fixed set of governing principles.
  • Another response elaborates on the application of game theory to dimensions, suggesting that dimensions could represent strategies and discussing the potential for new mathematical frameworks to address issues in physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and characteristics of extra dimensions, with no consensus reached on whether they must be compacted or the implications of their size and nature.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes speculative ideas about the relationship between dimensions and physical phenomena, as well as references to theoretical constructs that may not be universally accepted or understood.

Chris Walters
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
The attached image file shows the extra dimensions might come from overlapping planes with different energy value. In this model the extra dimensions are very small at the point where they intersect at the parent universe event horizon at the Plank Level (10 Minue 39).

This idea suggest the extra dimensions are very large/prehaps infinite where they do not intersect and might be where the "missing mass" or superpartners reside. This general line of thought comes from "Daughter Universe" concept which is being discussed online. If you cannot view the
attached image it is also online:

http://www.geocities.com/physicsquestion2007/intersection.htm

Thanks for any feedback

Chris Walters
 

Attachments

  • intersection.jpg
    intersection.jpg
    60.1 KB · Views: 579
Physics news on Phys.org
Is it not a matter of convenience and economy? How many dimensions [free floating coordinates are required to locate any object in the universe? 3+1 seems adequate to fix a single point. Add two more similarily fixed points and you can locate any object in the universe. So I see no need for more than six degrees of freedom in a three dimensional universe.
 
strings, branes and extra-dimensions are wonderful beasts in that they help us answer several big problems in physics, hopefully the LHC will give us some indication whether this picture is ultimately correct. regarding compactness of extra-dimensions, I guess it is a matter of "taste" these days, since both models involving compact and non-compact/infinite extra-dimensions exist.

this is just another example of the endless possibilities... and as some call it... a type of mathematical game we theorists like to play :smile:
 
But it is a very interesting game. Ironically, game theory may be our best and only hope of penetrating the veil of ignorance that shrouds modern science. We tend to presume the universe is governed by a timeless, inviolable set of rules, do we not? Perhaps that assumption is unfounded. Pioneer anomaly anyone?
 
Hi Chronos

RE: your comment 03-13-2007 01:42 AM
But it is a very interesting game. Ironically, game theory may be our best and only hope of penetrating the veil of ignorance that shrouds modern science.

1 - Game Theory tends to treat dimensions as strategies which allows for more than just space-time 4D.
For example, the curled-up string dimensions of Randall [large] and Arkani-Gamed [small] might be trajectory dimensions about virtual cylinders.

2 - I have found what appears to be an evolution of Dynamic Noncooperative Game Theory, from a mathematical l'ecole de francaise, that might allow:
a - notational modification of -oo and or +oo
b - operators that might be able to deal with the UV problem
c - allows for sources and sinks to be incorporated in graph techniques for nodes [vertices] and arcs [edges] through Petri nets
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K