- #1
Tommahawk
- 3
- 0
I want to say the imagine the gravity on Earth as a 2D. A gravity exhibited by mass in space as the equivalent 3D view, drawing and imagining gravity in 3D is weird.
With gravity, we lose a dimension when we can stand on a big solid mass like the earth. We gain a dimension when the mass is in space. But the same idea applies. We still have surface area, density, weight (now exhibited in space) and mass at play.
I like to think of a 3D view of the hypercube where the innercube is pulling/weighing on the outercube (space is now the platform as Earth was in the 2Dview) due to its mass. This hypercube is connected to other hypercube and regulating the tension. This effect repeats making up the fabric of space.
But the fabric of space is not literally a hypercube.
If the Earth expanded we would not because we have the higher space dimension but matter does expand with the universe because it has no dimension to which is can escape and not be affected.
Wierd huh? Correct me if I'm wrong.
With gravity, we lose a dimension when we can stand on a big solid mass like the earth. We gain a dimension when the mass is in space. But the same idea applies. We still have surface area, density, weight (now exhibited in space) and mass at play.
I like to think of a 3D view of the hypercube where the innercube is pulling/weighing on the outercube (space is now the platform as Earth was in the 2Dview) due to its mass. This hypercube is connected to other hypercube and regulating the tension. This effect repeats making up the fabric of space.
But the fabric of space is not literally a hypercube.
If the Earth expanded we would not because we have the higher space dimension but matter does expand with the universe because it has no dimension to which is can escape and not be affected.
Wierd huh? Correct me if I'm wrong.
