Can the Universe Be Understood as a Two-Dimensional Model?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Futobingoro
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of modeling the universe as a two-dimensional construct, specifically focusing on the idea of a universe made up of points and time. Participants explore the implications of this model, its simplicity, and its philosophical relevance.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a model where the universe consists of 0-dimensional points and time, suggesting that higher-dimensional objects are formed through 'time exposure' of lower-dimensional constructs.
  • Another participant expresses confusion regarding the model, indicating a lack of clarity in the explanation provided.
  • A different viewpoint is introduced, arguing against the existence of dimensions in nature, suggesting they are merely geometric constructs, and referencing the book "Flatlanders" to illustrate the concept of beings in a two-dimensional universe encountering a three-dimensional object.
  • A participant reiterates the initial model, emphasizing its simplicity and questioning its philosophical implications, suggesting it may be overly simplistic for deeper discussions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity and clarity of the two-dimensional model. There is no consensus on its philosophical relevance or its adequacy as a representation of the universe.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the model's simplicity and its potential limitations in addressing complex philosophical questions. The discussion reflects varying interpretations of dimensionality and its implications.

Futobingoro
This is a model that describes a universe comprised entirely of points (0-dimensional objects) and time. The underlying mechanism of this model is very simple: any object is a collection of point-time constructions. A construction of a higher order can be accomplished through a kind of 'time exposure' of an object of a lower order.

Let me illustrate:

Think of one of the tail lights in http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/1807/1ld2.jpg .

Likewise, when a line is exposed to time its time exposure creates a rectangle.

And a rectangle creates a rectangular solid in time exposure.

A shape can therefore be thought of as a cross-section exposed to time.

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/7158/2gl4.png (time exposure is from left to right)

Note that, while a cube in our perception is the very unit of substance and form, it is nothing more than a point and some time in this model.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Space news on Phys.org
Umm...


What?!
 
When you mentioned a "two-dimensional universe" I was guessing at first that it only included spatial dimensions and not time. I personally don't believe dimensions exist in nature but is only a fabrication of geometry. Singularities gives us good intuition of this.
There was a book that I think was written in the 19th century called "Flatlanders" It tells of a story of beings living in a 2 dimensional spatial universe when a three dimensional sphere passes through their plane of existence.
I coudn't find it on Google and the only reference to it was made in a book review of the book, "The Elegant Universe" which is probably where I heard about "Flatlanders". The book is probably out of print and cannot be ontained used due to its age but I would imagine that some university libraries have it in stock
RAD
 
Futobingoro said:
This is a model that describes a universe comprised entirely of points (0-dimensional objects) and time. The underlying mechanism of this model is very simple: any object is a collection of point-time constructions. A construction of a higher order can be accomplished through a kind of 'time exposure' of an object of a lower order.

Let me illustrate:

Think of one of the tail lights in http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/1807/1ld2.jpg .

Likewise, when a line is exposed to time its time exposure creates a rectangle.

And a rectangle creates a rectangular solid in time exposure.

A shape can therefore be thought of as a cross-section exposed to time.

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/7158/2gl4.png (time exposure is from left to right)

Note that, while a cube in our perception is the very unit of substance and form, it is nothing more than a point and some time in this model.
What's your point? Looks like an oversimplified model that might be used say to illustrate some simple point in relativity but I don't see why it is in philosophy section.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
8K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
8K