# Proving "Quantitized Dimension" Theory: Answers Needed

• scilover89
In summary: This statement just flow through my mind.Recently I was thinking about these statement:1. Dimension is as if a 3-D graph, which every coordinate is the smallest unit for dimension.The statement is flawed because it does not make sense.
scilover89
Recently I was thinking about these statement:
1. Dimension is as if a 3-D graph, which every coordinate is the smallest unit for dimension.
2. Volume of an object is a whole number multiply the volume of the dimension unit.
3. Distance is a whole number multiply the length of the dimension unit.
4. When object travel from one dimension unit to the other, it do this by "looping".

Are there proves that can support this statement or show that this statement is untrue?

I don't really understand 1.

But for 2-3 : Why should this a whole number, I can have a volume of .000001 units of volume ??

A simple analogy will be the 'paint' aplication in the windows. Let say you draw a square. And you click the option zoom. You will find that the square is consist of many small square. The small square is the smallest unit.

I don't know why should(or shouldn"t)2-3 be ture either. This statement just flow through my mind.

scilover89 said:
Recently I was thinking about these statement:
1. Dimension is as if a 3-D graph, which every coordinate is the smallest unit for dimension.

Think again. Your "coordinates" or tick marks on the graph are NOT your smallest unit for "dimension". If it is true, you have no way of describing a value that in between those units - unless you practice the discarding of data points that do not fall into clear values. Furthermore, it would be meaningless to draw a continuous curve on your "graph", since you are assuming the existence of an infinite set of continuous values all along the line.

I'm not saying quantized spatial dimension doesn't exist (this is still a research area and conclusive proof is still not here yet). I'm just saying the impetus you are using to argue for its existence is faulty.

Zz.

Maybe we could understand this more if we look at how was the conclusion drawn that energy is quantized for example...

This will show that this approach is not good to understand if space-time is quantized :

In fact only the Action is quantized, this comes from the old Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization, starting from the experimental values of Hydrogen levels :

Starting from it : $$S=\int_{t_a}^{t_b}L(q,q',t)dt=nh, n\in\mathbb{N}^*$$ L is the Lagrangian.

What can we deduce : suppose the particle is moving freely :
$$L=\frac{mv^2}{2}$$

hence : $$t_b-t_a=nh\frac{2}{mv^2}$$

So if you try to find out if time is quantized, then you have to show that the energy of a free particle is quantized...but the Energy is E=hw...where omega is the pulsation of the wave...hence the energy of a free particle is quantized iff time is quantized...so it's a tautology

## What is "Quantitized Dimension" Theory?

"Quantitized Dimension" Theory is a scientific theory that proposes that the fundamental dimensions of the universe are not continuous, but rather they exist in discrete, quantized units. This theory suggests that the fabric of space and time is made up of building blocks, which can only exist in specific sizes or amounts.

## What evidence supports "Quantitized Dimension" Theory?

There is currently no direct evidence that supports "Quantitized Dimension" Theory. However, some theories in physics, such as string theory, suggest that the fundamental building blocks of the universe are indeed discrete and quantized. There is also ongoing research and experimentation in quantum mechanics that may provide evidence for this theory.

## How can "Quantitized Dimension" Theory be proven?

In order to prove "Quantitized Dimension" Theory, empirical evidence must be gathered through experiments and observations. Scientists would need to find a way to measure the discrete units of the fundamental dimensions of the universe and show that they exist in specific, quantized amounts. This would require advanced technology and techniques that are currently not available.

## What are the implications of "Quantitized Dimension" Theory?

If "Quantitized Dimension" Theory is proven to be true, it would have significant implications for our understanding of the universe. It would challenge our current understanding of space and time and potentially change our understanding of fundamental physics. It could also lead to the development of new technologies and advancements in our understanding of the cosmos.

## Are there any criticisms or controversies surrounding "Quantitized Dimension" Theory?

As with any scientific theory, there are criticisms and controversies surrounding "Quantitized Dimension" Theory. Some scientists argue that there is not enough evidence to support this theory and that it is untestable. Others argue that it goes against our current understanding of physics and would require a complete overhaul of our understanding of the universe. Further research and experimentation are needed to address these criticisms and controversies.

• Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
• General Math
Replies
3
Views
809
• General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
• Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
• Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
• Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
1K
• Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
• Cosmology
Replies
2
Views
1K
• Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
1K
• Other Physics Topics
Replies
6
Views
2K