Do We Need New Definitions for Dimensions in Physics, Math, and Religion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pelastration
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dimensions
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of "dimensions" as it pertains to physics, mathematics, and religion. Participants explore the various interpretations and implications of dimensions, questioning whether new definitions are necessary to clarify their usage across different contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that dimensions are essential concepts but are used in various ways that create confusion, prompting the question of whether new definitions are needed.
  • There is a proposal that dimensions could be viewed as boundaries or limitations within a specific context, leading to discussions about isolation and interaction among dimensions.
  • One participant questions the classification of time as a dimension, arguing it may be more accurately described as a quality of physical processes rather than a dimension itself.
  • Fractal geometry is mentioned as an example that necessitates a redefinition of dimensions, similar to how quantum mechanics challenges traditional logic.
  • Participants discuss the idea of modifying existing definitions versus developing new ones based on physical evidence, emphasizing the importance of context in understanding dimensions.
  • There are assertions that the dictionary definition of dimension is self-referential and contradictory, suggesting a need for broader definitions that encompass both personal and physical contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of dimensions, with no clear consensus emerging. Some agree on the need for new definitions, while others challenge existing interpretations, indicating ongoing debate and uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in current definitions of dimensions, particularly regarding their application in different fields and the potential for ambiguity in their meanings. There is also a recognition that perceptions of reality may influence how dimensions are understood.

  • #31
This obviously has reference to the physical type of dimension.

So, what is non-physical about magnitude?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Originally posted by (Q)
This obviously has reference to the physical type of dimension.

So, what is non-physical about magnitude?

Magnitude is not one of the physical dimensions, because it is not used to describe position or movement. That is what the physical dimensions (which compose spacetime) do.
 
  • #33
Magnitude is not one of the physical dimensions, because it is not used to describe position or movement.

Ah, the youth – forever ignorant in their defiance.

Velocity and acceleration are vectors; therefore they both have magnitude and direction.
 
  • #34
Originally posted by (Q)
Magnitude is not one of the physical dimensions, because it is not used to describe position or movement.

Ah, the youth – forever ignorant in their defiance.

Velocity and acceleration are vectors; therefore they both have magnitude and direction.

Ah the aged - forever patronizing.

What does that have to do with anything. Velocity and acceleration are not dimensions. The have magnitude and direction, but they don't describe the position of an object. And they don't warp due to the presence of matter (as Relativity dictates about spatial and temporal dimensions).
 
  • #35
What does that have to do with anything. Velocity and acceleration are not dimensions.

Don’t try and squirm out of this by putting words in my mouth. I didn’t say velocity and acceleration are dimensions, did I?

The have magnitude and direction, but they don't describe the position of an object.

Again, I didn’t say that either. You’re digging yourself deeper and deeper.

And they don't warp due to the presence of matter (as Relativity dictates about spatial and temporal dimensions).

Bravo! You managed to have completely twisted my response out of proportion to suit your needs, yet have failed miserably because you really have no idea what you’re talking about.
 
  • #36
Originally posted by (Q)
What does that have to do with anything. Velocity and acceleration are not dimensions.

Don’t try and squirm out of this by putting words in my mouth. I didn’t say velocity and acceleration are dimensions, did I?

The have magnitude and direction, but they don't describe the position of an object.

Again, I didn’t say that either. You’re digging yourself deeper and deeper.

And they don't warp due to the presence of matter (as Relativity dictates about spatial and temporal dimensions).

Bravo! You managed to have completely twisted my response out of proportion to suit your needs, yet have failed miserably because you really have no idea what you’re talking about.

If you weren't trying to reconcile velocity and acceleration, with my definition of "dimension", then what were you doing by saying:

Magnitude is not one of the physical dimensions, because it is not used to describe position or movement.

Ah, the youth – forever ignorant in their defiance.

Velocity and acceleration are vectors; therefore they both have magnitude and direction.

?
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Trying To Conceptualize Two Dimensions Of Time
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Graduate Do we have "Newtonian space-time" in classical physics?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
High School Does Spacetime Have Physical Existence?
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
4K
High School What is the physical significance of mass-time-length equivalences in physics?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
High School I can't understand more than 3 spatial dimensions
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Graduate "Monstrous Higgs and Leech Spacetime"
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
High School Why Do We Draw Dimensionless Unit Vectors in Diagrams?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
Undergrad Testing string/m-theory extra dimensions prediction
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Philosophy of Science: Discussing Maths, Physics, Mind, & AI
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Undergrad Robert B. Laughlin (Physics Nobel Laureate, Stanford University)
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K