• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

The 10 dimensions explained - pretty trippy

Status
Not open for further replies.
I always thought the multiverse theory was far more believable with the possibility to have an infinite an amount of parallel realities branching of from each and every decision we make...
 
Luna104 said:
i don't know if they branch off when we make decisions as that is really placing humans at the center of the universe.

...

well, i typed up some more but i deleted it, i think my head is going to explode.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. When we are discussing the "decisions" we make, we are talking about every decision of every being in our universe. Consider every moment a state and that state differs in every universe because every universe has a slightly different decision construct.
 
Nice. I always find it difficult to understand these higher dimensions when reading or watching docs about string theory and the like, and this helps a bit.
 
That was interesting, and I'm shocked at how much of it I understood.

The only thing I don't really get is their use of the word "infinity". Like, the 10th dimension is an infinity of infinities, but that seems to be based on the fact that they're defining a single infinity as all the possible things that could ever happen from the start of a universe to the end based on the possible laws of that universe. But why doesn't infinity cover all the possible laws too, why have they drawn this distinction?

Am I just getting too wrapped up in the wording?
 
Isn't this completely against super string theory? Doesn't it state that all higher dimensions are similar to the three that we know but just ridiculously small. This went on about possabilities and what not. Also, why does time have to be the '4th' dimension and not the 12th?
 
bachikarn said:
Isn't this completely against super string theory? Doesn't it state that all higher dimensions are similar to the three that we know but just ridiculously small. This went on about possabilities and what not. Also, why does time have to be the '4th' dimension and not the 12th?
Click to expand...

It's just the natural progression of this theory. Time wouldn't make sense if it came LAST, since in order for there to be any alternate futures and therefore a dimension of every single possible outcome of a life, of a universe, of infinite number of parallel universes... time has to progress. No time, no movement.
 
I enjoy thinking about concepts like this, but I am always bummed when there seems to be zero practical use for even imagining these scenarios.

To illustrate what I mean, assume for a second time really is a fourth dimension. To us as three dimensional beings, we can only remember the past and guess the future. That is it. We have no way of affecting either by jumping back or forward in time. They are both completely and utterly inaccessible. We can only exist in the present.

Boo.
 
Mama Smurf said:
That was interesting, and I'm shocked at how much of it I understood.

The only thing I don't really get is their use of the word "infinity". Like, the 10th dimension is an infinity of infinities, but that seems to be based on the fact that they're defining a single infinity as all the possible things that could ever happen from the start of a universe to the end based on the possible laws of that universe. But why doesn't infinity cover all the possible laws too, why have they drawn this distinction?

Am I just getting too wrapped up in the wording?
Click to expand...

It talked about different initial conditions which would form completely different universes (and their various outcomes), which aren't included in a single point in the 7th (or 8th) dimension.

Now trying to understand that is a bit weird, but I guess they take the initial matter that created the universe as constants that are proper to that infinity of possibilities.

So if I take the example of my life. There are an infinite amount of possibilities of how my life couple pan out and how it will ultimately end. But the constants are the fact that I am born a white male from a European background. Another infinity of possibilities would be if I was born a tiger or something. My life as a human and my life as a tiger is two completely different infinities which include another infinity of possibilities, hence two dots.
 
Adagio said:
That site (and, consequently, that "theory") is complete shit. No one takes it seriously.
Click to expand...

The theory is innocent. It kind of makes me think of how a lot of sci-fi and fantasy novels and movies use it to explain "time travel" and "crossing dimensions".
 
Date of Lies said:
It talked about different initial conditions which would form completely different universes (and their various outcomes), which aren't included in a single point in the 7th (or 8th) dimension.

Now trying to understand that is a bit weird, but I guess they take the initial matter that created the universe as constants that are proper to that infinity of possibilities.

So if I take the example of my life. There are an infinite amount of possibilities of how my life couple pan out and how it will ultimately end. But the constants are the fact that I am born a white male from a European background. Another infinity of possibilities would be if I was born a tiger or something. My life as a human and my life as a tiger is two completely different infinities which include another infinity of possibilities, hence two dots.
Click to expand...

I understand that, what I don't understand is why all the possible different laws different universes can have don't already fall under the definition of infinity.

Maybe I have the definition of infinity wrong. To me infinity means everything, every possibility, and everything includes other universes with different laws.
 
bachikarn said:
Isn't this completely against super string theory? Doesn't it state that all higher dimensions are similar to the three that we know but just ridiculously small. This went on about possabilities and what not. Also, why does time have to be the '4th' dimension and not the 12th?
Click to expand...

Correct. The higher dimensions exist at the sub-atomic level so what the movie hypothesizes is complete crap.

The Flash movie (and book) are by the same people who did the terrible "What the Bleep Do We Know?" movie. Basically take a bunch of new-age hippies who dress up their babble with a rudimentary (and completely incorrect) take on superstring theory in order to make it sound scientific.

The Elegant Universe is still the best way to introduce yourself to superstring theory.
 
Piscopink said:
I enjoy thinking about concepts like this, but I am always bummed when there seems to be zero practical use for even imagining these scenarios.

To illustrate what I mean, assume for a second time really is a fourth dimension. To us as three dimensional beings, we can only remember the past and guess the future. That is it. We have no way of affecting either by jumping back or forward in time. They are both completely and utterly inaccessible. We can only exist in the present.

Boo.
Click to expand...

Well there are some who would disagree with you.
 
Technodrome.jpg
 
Mama Smurf said:
I understand that, what I don't understand is why all the possible different laws different universes can have don't already fall under the definition of infinity.

Maybe I have the definition of infinity wrong. To me infinity means everything, every possibility, and everything includes other universes with different laws.
Click to expand...


They see one realm of possibilities linked to initial constants (ie: the universe started with such and such number of atoms of such and such elements), but then you'd have to wonder where those atoms came from and if it's at all POSSIBLE that ONE SINGLE universe of possibilities created them. It deals with the origin of the matter that makes up a universe. The theory concludes that the original matter a given universe started with is a constant (much like a body is a constant to an animal), probably because we don't know the origins of matter and the people who made up this theory thought of the matter a universe starts with as a constant initial conditions which are inalterable and proper to that universe alone.


It's interesting mind-cultivating pop-science but I'd think twice about taking a flash movie as a strong reference. It might make an interesting topic of conversation though. This theory has no practical use, it's more of a nice logical 'puzzle' that fits in together nicely.
 
Mama Smurf said:
That was interesting, and I'm shocked at how much of it I understood.

The only thing I don't really get is their use of the word "infinity". Like, the 10th dimension is an infinity of infinities, but that seems to be based on the fact that they're defining a single infinity as all the possible things that could ever happen from the start of a universe to the end based on the possible laws of that universe. But why doesn't infinity cover all the possible laws too, why have they drawn this distinction?

Am I just getting too wrapped up in the wording?
Click to expand...

Why draw any distinctions then? Basically, it would be cumbersome.



Think of it like mathematics, where there are different sized infinities. For example, the set of all integers versus the set of all real numbers. While they are both infinite, the set of real numbers is inherently larger.

So basically, a given universe from beginning to end = integers ... and all universes from beginning to end = real numbers.
 
I need to listen through to it again, do they use the word infinite as in "if an infinite number of monkeys..." or the word infinity?

You know what, I should just look in a dictionary.

EDIT: Alright, looking it up I think I've been using it wrong. I've always thought of "infinity" as everything, everything that ever was, could be, will be, is. Whereas infinite was like...you could asign that to specific thing. But apparently you can assign the word infinity to specific things too, my bad.
 
Onix said:
Why draw any distinctions then? Basically, it would be cumbersome.



Think of it like mathematics, where there are different sized infinities. For example, the set of all integers versus the set of all real numbers. While they are both infinite, the set of real numbers is inherently larger.

So basically, a given universe from beginning to end = integers ... and all universes from beginning to end = real numbers.
Click to expand...
Or think of it in terms of series convergence...

The limit of x^2 as x approaches infinity = infinity
The limit of x^3 as x approaches infinity is a larger infinity than that of x^3.
 
Mama Smurf said:
I need to listen through to it again, do they use the word infinite as in "if an infinite number of monkeys..." or the word infinity?

You know what, I should just look in a dictionary.

EDIT: Alright, looking it up I think I've been using it wrong. I've always thought of "infinity" as everything, everything that ever was, could be, will be, is. Whereas infinite was like...you could asign that to specific thing. But apparently you can assign the word infinity to specific things too, my bad.
Click to expand...

While children, we were innocently taught the incorrect definition of infinite :p



When I first learned about aleph-null, aleph-one, etc. (ways to represent the differing sizes of infinite sets) ... I was like wtf?!?!

Countable and uncountable infinities?!?! The f*ck!?!!? :lol
 
Onix said:
While children, we were innocently taught the incorrect definition of infinite :p



When I first learned about aleph-null, aleph-one, etc. (ways to represent the differing sizes of infinite sets) ... I was like wtf?!?!

Countable and uncountable infinities?!?! The f*ck!?!!? :lol
Click to expand...

Stop trying to teach me things, I didn't leave school for gaf to be taught stuff.
 
thats the tree of life, something kabbalah based thats supposed to explain reality as we know it ect ect. i always assumed it had congealed with modern with physics but i'm not smart enought to explain why. but ten sephiroth=ten dimensions. makes you think
 
GaimeGuy said:
Or think of it in terms of series convergence...

The limit of x^2 as x approaches infinity = infinity
The limit of x^3 as x approaches infinity is a larger infinity than that of x^3.
Click to expand...
Actually, no.

Set theory doesn't work that way. They're both the same infinity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Are there dimensions higher than the 4th ?
2
53
2K
Sticks replied
Windows 10 update issue wuauservice cant start
8
206
MMaRsu replied
The Artful Dodger | S2 Official Trailer | Hulu | Feb 10
3
307
mitch1971 replied
Chinese supercomputer hacked - 10 petabytes taken over months
30
692
ChuckeRearmed replied
Litrpgs are pretty amazing
27
2K
jason10mm replied
Top Bottom