Why do we assume that the other 6 dimensions that are curled up are spacial

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jack
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dimensions
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of the six additional dimensions in theories like M-theory, questioning the assumption that they are exclusively spatial. The argument highlights that these dimensions are necessary to reconcile the forces of nature within the frameworks of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. It points out that temporal dimensions operate differently than spatial ones, which is crucial for the physics involved in higher-dimensional theories. The conversation also touches on the concept of time as a dimension, referencing the space-time model from relativity, while provoking thought on whether time could be perceived as spatial. Overall, the dialogue emphasizes the complexity of dimensionality in theoretical physics and the need for clarity in understanding the roles of different types of dimensions.
Jack
Messages
107
Reaction score
0
Why do we assume that the other 6 dimensions that are curled up are spatial dimensions? Could they not be dimensions of time?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org


Originally posted by Jack
Why do we assume that the other 6 dimensions that are curled up are spatial dimensions? Could they not be dimensions of time?

The other spatial dimensions arise out of necessity when one wishes to explain all of the forces in a manner that pleases both Relativity and QM.

They couldn't all be temporal dimensions, because time dimensions work slightly differently than spatial ones, and the physics of higher dimensions (in such theories as M-theory) require the spatial kind of dimension.
 
plus these extra dimensions come from strings/branes twisting and vibrating and whatnot, so spatial dimensions are required for these "spatial" components.
 
wait ...why do we assume that time itself is a dimension...I know its because of the space-time notion in relativity...why don't we believe that time is spatial...I know its a common stupid question...so please try to control your words...thanks...
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
48
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
34
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
989
Back
Top