Hi guys and gals, Stumbled across this forum via google. Quick introduction: I'm not involved in cosmology at all. But I do have a casual interest in it, simply because it inspires me. I'm in my mid 30s, mechanical design engineer, atheist bordering on anti-theist, but that could simply be because I live in South Africa, and religion is a bit more conservative here than the rest of the world I think. I mention my religious view or lack thereof simply because it's primarily responsible for my interest in cosmology. Though that interest now extends beyond that. And indeed my I now have interests in evolution, evolutionary biology, religion, micro biology, science, the scientific method, promoting the understanding of science and a myriad of other relates subjects. So I know very little about a lot, which means I really know nothing about everything. And I'm fine with that. The only purpose of it all is to see for myself simply what you guys and girls know, in all the fields I mentioned. A couple of months ago I didn't even know what red shift is. I didn't know about the ERV insertions at the same places of our DNA and all our cousins, right back to each common ancestor. I believed all the basics. Evolution, BBT, Gravity. Very basics, that you'll probably consider as below par with what should be common knowledge. I read a thread earlier (I lost it now) about critique levied against Lawrence Krauss's talk at AAI 2009 about a the geometry of our universe (A universe from nothing), and I felt compelled to just share a layman's perspective. To add a bit of perspective, I'm now approaching 300 video clips (Almost 30gb) Probably around 100hours of actual playing time. On various subjects by various people. Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Carl Sagan. And some compilations by proffesionals and amateurs. thunderfoot, tony darnell and so on and so on. And of all these, I value that single talk by Lawrence Krauss most, over everything else. Now I can understand that the universe is actually closed instead of flat, and a quick google shows that Krauss holds this view as well http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9902189 But the simplicity with which he explained it all, from virtual particles between the quarks, to quantum fluctuations that could produce a universe, to dark matter and dark energy. Though this doesn't make me physicist and I can't join in discussions with you guys about anything, it is "a" answer for me. Just a broad understanding of what we know/think about the universe. Even if it just points to the direction in which we are thinking. Expansion of spacetime. So while everything he said may not be factually true for you guys, it's the only way I can be made to understand more or less with the little understanding of your world, that I have, and the 1 hour he used to convey that. And not only does it inspire, it also intrigues me, and pulls me in deeper. Which is the other reason I'm here: If I combine one of Carl Sagan's clips from the old Cosmos series, the 4th dimension with Lawrence Krauss' video, an interesting "beg the question" arises for me. Yes I know, not scientific, but I'm not a scientist, so I can get away with some, and indeed a lot of speculation :-) In Carl's video, while the apple is floating above the flat square, the flat square cannot see the apple or interact with it. But, the apple will still have a gravitational influence on the flat square? The square and apple should gravitate to each other? Though the flat square cannot be elevated to the 3rd dimension, it should be pulled in the 2D direction of the floating apple. Or rather experience an attractive force proportional to their mass? As I understand, again, I understand very little, but if I understand some experiments of the LHC correctly, a graviton could be produced. Which I understand as a unit-particle of gravity, or a gravity-particle. I don't even know how to describe it. My question is, has the possibility been considered that dark matter and dark energy are simply "matter" with "mass" in the 4th dimension having an influence on objects with mass in our 3 lower dimensions? Higher dimensional matter that cannot be seen or interacted with, but of which we can only see it's influence in our 3 dimensions. If this is utter bull, bordering on UFO-conspiracy theories and the super natural, please say so. I have no ego on the matter, just pure curiosity. You have no idea how hard it is for us laymen to find some science in a easily digestible and understandable form out there, that we can squeeze in after dinner and before going to bed. Mainstream media is shoving super natural tv series down our throats, hyped up and suped up science that has entertainment value, more than educational value. Thanks for your time, apologies for the wall of text! Thanks for the work you guys and gals are doing for us! Really, thank you!