How do we say that the universe we live is 3 dimensional?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the dimensionality of the universe, specifically questioning the assertion that it is fundamentally three-dimensional. Participants explore various perspectives on dimensionality, including theoretical implications from string theory and the limitations of human perception.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the universe may not be strictly three-dimensional, suggesting that human perception limits our understanding of its true nature.
  • One participant proposes the idea of a hypothetical being with a different dimensional perception, implying that physics could be simpler in higher dimensions.
  • Others emphasize that scientific understanding is based on observable phenomena, asserting that the three-dimensional framework is sufficient for our current models.
  • String theory is mentioned as a framework that posits the existence of additional dimensions beyond the three we experience, though its acceptance and evidence are questioned by some participants.
  • Concerns are raised about the lack of mainstream theories that incorporate more than three spatial dimensions in practical applications, with references to classical mechanics and Bertrand's theorem as limitations on higher-dimensional models.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the dimensionality of the universe, with no consensus reached. Some advocate for the possibility of dimensions beyond the three we observe, while others maintain that current scientific understanding is firmly rooted in three-dimensional space.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference theoretical frameworks and concepts that may not be universally accepted or applicable, highlighting the ongoing debate regarding the nature of dimensions in physics.

Altamash
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
i opine that the universe is not 3 dimensional at all. its not build up of 3 coordinates at all. it is because, we humans could see 3 dimensions it doesn't mean the space metric is of 3 dimensions. suppose there's a super being living on an Earth like planet of some other galaxy whose viewing capacity is of say a complex dimension(i don't want to use the term multi-dimensions or something else), for that being, the whole physics is completely different, may be because of dimensional power of observing objects and their motion, the physics for him would be more simple and elegant.
 
Space news on Phys.org
Remember that science is all about what we can observe. What some alien or higher-dimensional being can or cannot see is irrelevant, as we are stuck firmly here in the 3-dimensional world. For information on why we say the universe is 3-dimensional, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension#Spatial_dimensions
 
okay, what about string theories then, string theorists say we live in a 3 dimensional membrane of the multidimensional space of universe.

what my point is, 3 dimensional analysis is not the only reality but there's something else beyond our 3 dimensional physics. also, as string theories rely on extra dimensions, it could mathematically reconcile general relativity and quantum physics...
 
Altamash said:
okay, what about string theories then, string theorists say we live in a 3 dimensional membrane of the multidimensional space of universe.

Indeed but it is nothing like what you're imagining and there is no evidence supporting string theory over any other physical theory.

Altamash said:
what my point is, 3 dimensional analysis is not the only reality but there's something else beyond our 3 dimensional physics.

I'm not sure where you're getting this from. There are exactly zero mainstream, accepted theories used to model things in real life that have more than 3 spatial dimensions. There are certainly other theories out there with more than 3 spatial dimensions, but they are not accepted as of yet (mainly because we have yet to find a situation where they describe space better than GR).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Altamash
Altamash said:
i opine that the universe is not 3 dimensional at all. its not build up of 3 coordinates at all. it is because, we humans could see 3 dimensions it doesn't mean the space metric is of 3 dimensions. suppose there's a super being living on an Earth like planet of some other galaxy whose viewing capacity is of say a complex dimension(i don't want to use the term multi-dimensions or something else), for that being, the whole physics is completely different, may be because of dimensional power of observing objects and their motion, the physics for him would be more simple and elegant.

Since this is a topic marked "Advanced", then you should be able to understand classical mechanics. Thus, this link will be of interest: http://usersguidetotheuniverse.com/index.php/2013/12/03/a-technical-post-on-more-than-3-dimensions/

Essentially, Bertrand's theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_theorem tells us that dimensionality >3 means that there are no closed orbits. Which I'll think you'd agree, is fairly essential us to be here.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith and Altamash

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
8K