It is a bit hybrid in its metaphysics as you say :-0.I am not sure CDT is entirely as you say.
Not sure how this would be relevant. And I would add that there is a further metaphysical novelty that would have to be introduced to discuss the n-dimensional realm that I dub the infinoverse here. The standard assumption is that it would be a "crisp" realm - that it would be a countable infinity of actual dimensions. But this way of thinking only works if you tie it to the notion of (ontic) vagueness. So the n-D realm would be ultimately vague - and as such, distinctions between cubes and sphere geometries would become "lost in the fog". They would "exist" as potential distinctions, but not as actual distinctions.Also, in higher dimensional approximations, the ratio of the volume of the n-sphere to the superscribed n-cube decreases as more dimensions are added.
Yes YOU can constrain it as you are acting from a larger context, a higher geometry. And here you seem to be achieving your effect by constraining your observational location - standing only to one side (or are you suggesting a moebius strip story - which does not work for other obvious reasons).And, you say the remaining dimensions cannot be constrained. Surely this cannot be correct. I can easily constrain a piece of paper, which has thickness, to consider only one of the two conjoined two dimensional surfaces. .
I would like it if there existed the math that could express the metaphysical notions here rigorously! In fact that is largely where I am at at the moment, looking into the available approaches.I think your writing is of good quality, but the development is not rigorous. Do you like math?
A thought-provoking question to which the simple answer is "nobody knows". You're implying that things may have once been different: e.g. that 'once' there may have been no dimensions (whatever a dimension is). Or maybe there may have been different numbers of dimensions. Or their relative magnitudes may have been different (some rolled up tight, others spread out). To all these possibilities the answer is still 'nobody can answer these questions'.out of curiosity is there any theory on how dimensions that we exist in were created? or are they always said to have existed.
out of curiosity is there any theory on how dimensions that we exist in were created? or are they always said to have existed.
You really should read the 2008 Scientific American article on CDT, a comparatively new kind of quantum geometry/gravity. I have the link always in my signature---small print at bottom of post, article by Loll. Let me know if the link doesn't work. It's an easy read. Well illustrated, understandably written. But the ideas are deep.im in no way insinuating creationism as a theory but what I am saying was before our universe was created there were no dimensions and than once it was created there was 3 spatial and one time and who knows there could be more if string theory works out. Im asking how the dimensions came to be and why there are a specific amount and all that and if there is a theory on this.
Yes indeed. This is why success in physics requires theory to be in close and continual contact with observation and experiment. We just aren't imaginative enough to predict, say from non-linear interactions (think Navier-Stokes equations), such complicated structures as the thunderstorms, hurricanes and tornadoes you mention. "Mother nature" has to rub our noses in fact, so to speak, before we can make real progress.When considering where space time may originate, it's interesting to consider the weather........I know they can't predict weather more than about three days distant with any high degree of certainty....
is very apt. But there's nothing like looking out of the window to see what the weather is actually doing, rather than trusting the forecasts!Then "weather" is vortexes over all available scales. So a fractal chaos of vortexes.