What Shapes Can We Visualize in the Fourth Dimension?

[THE[>U<]DUDE]

It's certainly interesting to note that we can accurately state the mass of something we cannot accurately locate. Uncertainty states we cannot accurately predict the location of the electron at any given moment ... so how can we so accurately state it's mass?

My mind's still groggy from New Year - so no doubt you'll elucidate.

As for this apparent electron mass being enough to determine an atom's 'movement' through space (as implied by John), I'm still not convinced. Let's face it, anything with a mass so teeny tiny is pretty much insignificant in gravitational terms ... isn't it?

[b(]

 

[selfAdjoint]

The uncertainty principle states that you can't accurately measure BOTH of a pair of complementary observables AT THE SAME TIME. For this discussion the two important pairs of complementary observables are momentum and position, and energy and time (say, duration). If you don't care about one of a pair, you can measure the other one as accurately as you want. The thing about mass is that, unlike momentum, energy, or duration, it is persistent. So you can exploit that. The mass of the electron is determined from seeing how it scatters.

 

[arivero]

Originally posted by theriddler876
hey, anyone out there care to offer their thoughts on the fourth dimension? as in what would it be, all I have is that a fourth dimensional object would seem like a 3 dimensional object moving down and then disapearing?

Try stronger questions. For instance how many regular (or platonic) bodies can you visualize (or find) in four dimensions? How many in five? How many in three? (In two there are infinite).