Relativity and Spatial Dimension

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ajjjja
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dimension Relativity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between mass, spacetime geometry, and the necessity of additional spatial dimensions in the context of general relativity and theoretical physics. Participants explore whether the influence of mass on the shape of three-dimensional space plus time implies the existence of higher spatial dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that mass influences the shape of spacetime, questioning whether this necessitates a higher spatial dimension.
  • Others argue that it is matter, rather than mass alone, that determines the structure of spacetime, suggesting that three spatial dimensions may suffice.
  • A participant references general relativity, stating that it describes four dimensions (three spatial and one temporal) without requiring additional dimensions.
  • Another participant introduces Kaluza-Klein theory, which incorporates an additional spatial dimension to derive electromagnetic laws, and mentions M-theory's consideration of up to 11 dimensions.
  • One participant explains that it is possible to have curved surfaces without invoking higher dimensions, using examples of measuring curvature on a 2D surface.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of additional spatial dimensions, with no consensus reached on whether mass's influence on spacetime geometry requires such dimensions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various interpretations of mass and its role in spacetime, as well as differing understandings of curvature and dimensionality, which remain unresolved.

ajjjja
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
If mass influences the 'shape' of three dimensional space plus time, does that require a further or higher spatial dimension, or is that unnecessary?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ajjjja said:
If mass influences the 'shape' of three dimensional space plus time, does that require a further or higher spatial dimension, or is that unnecessary?

Mass doesn't determine the structure of spacetime; matter does. Mass is simply defined as, "a resistance to a change in motion" and nothing more.
BTW, why don't three spatial dimensions work just fine? Why an additional spatial dimension?
 
General Relativity states that the presence of mass/energy changes the geometry of spacetime. We have three (noneuclidean) spatial dimensions and one time dimension--for a total of 4, and that's it for general relativity.

You might be intrigued by something called "Kaluza-Klein" theory. By incorporating another spatial dimension into general relativity, Kaluza managed to derive the laws of electromagnetism.

M-theory's up to 11 or so, last I heard...
 
ajjjja said:
If mass influences the 'shape' of three dimensional space plus time, does that require a further or higher spatial dimension, or is that unnecessary?
If I correctly understand what you're asking, no, an extra dimension is not necessary.

You may be thinking of curved 2D surfaces as an example. For example, a sphere. I'm guessing that you can't imagine how one could have a 2D surface that is curved like the surface of a sphere without there being some higher-dimensional space for the full sphere to live in. Am I on the right track?

If so, I don't blame you, since this is a tricky idea to get used to, but it is in fact possible to have, say, a spherically curved 2D surface without there being a whole 3D sphere. You can actually measure the curvature of a surface without leaving the surface itself. The method for doing so is, roughly speaking, to measure how the distance between two points depends on the path you take between those points. Alternatively, you can measure the ratio of the diameter of a circle to its circumference, or the sum of the angles of a triangle, or other geometric things like that. In "flat" space they have the normal values we're used to (pi, or 180 degrees, respectively), but in "curved" (I prefer "distorted") space you will notice some different numbers. Still, these sorts of measurements are based only on the space itself, so there's no need to have any higher dimension.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
3K