Dimensions and observers...

[ollypenrice]

Imagine taking a small wooden sculpture of a walking cat. Place it in a cubic box and then fill the box with pale grey resin all around the cat so you can no longer see it.

Now orientate the cube so that when you saw it into two parts you saw through the cat from nose to tail and neatly through each left leg. Looking at the newly cut section you will clearly see a cat shape. (It might not have much of a tail!)

Glue it back together and, this tme, make a saw cut at 90 degrees to the first one. This time you don't see a cat shape, you just see an oval of wood where the cat was cut through the abdomen. (No real cats are used in this experiment.) It would not occur to you that the cube contained a cat. It could just contain an oval length of wood.

Now suppose that the cube with the cat inside represents all that there is, the multiverse with all its dimensions. Only a few chosen cutting sections will reveal anything like a cat. Other sectons reveal different wooden shapes, not at all cat like.

Could it be that we and the muliverse and are like this? We happen to have 'been allocated' a particular cross section - a particular set of dimensions. Had we been allocated other dimensions our cross section would have been different and contained no cat.

Ingenious CAD designers could, no doubt, produce sculpures which, cross sectioned one way, revealed a lively looking cat. Cross sectioned another way the cat might look dead. And yet another cross section might produce a remarkable profile of Schroedinger.

The point of all this is simply to explore ways, by anology, in which we might think of the observer's role and position as determining what is seen. We see and measure, in science, what our cross section allows us to see and measure. But what of the rest? We see stars and galaxies, but what might a different cross section reveal?

Olly

[Earl]

As we have the ability to 3D model we can see this already?

[ollypenrice]

Ah, but 3 dimensions aren't enough!

Olly

[Earl]

Well if you watch the screen long enough your experiencing it in the 4th

[ollypenrice]

True!

[DarkStar7]

The 4th Spatial Dimension... Scale

Imagine being able to zoom in to infinitesimal small scales. Then pan out to large scales you have a direction. If you could accept it is a direction then like any other direction is is subjected to the rules of relativity. It is obvious to most people on this site that the laws governing the very small are incompatible with the laws of the large scale. This implies that the laws of nature are non relative through the 'scale' dimension.

Lets do a thought experiment.. You observe an object in a hypothetical void where you have no references. You have no idea it's size. Intuitively you make think scale does not matter and things may look the same at any scale..

But they don't, otherwise you could potential have atoms that could be macroscopic! So hypothetically traveling along the scale dimension it would appear non relative. As non relative space is curved space, then the whole universe in the forth scale dimension is in a gravitational field! For a number of reasons I can believe that it is the expansion of the universe that is moving out into this forth spatial dimension and giving us the sense of time. Time runs at a slower rate in a gravitational field because it is curved towards small scales. It is the expansion of space towards higher scales that gives us the forward arrow of time. I suggest that the property of time is intrinsically related to scale.

Bend the fabric of space-time into the forth dimension and at right angles to this we can see space twisting up into the 5th dimension..this is where the forces of electromagnetism reside ,

[steelfixer]

As we have the ability to 3D model we can see this already?

Surely you can only produce a 3d model if you know what it is you are lookin at.

If the cross section in Oly's model is an oval then unless someone tells you it is a cat you cannot produce a 3d model from the information you have in front of you.

Or have I got this back to front.

Graham

[DarkStar7]

Terms like multiverse and dimensions are used to loosely in Olly's model. What is meant by multiverse with all it's dimensions. It seems terms are used which are banded around to disguise the fact that something is not known. What do mean by a multiverse? A universe of universes in a universe. It tells you nothing about why the big bang happened. Branes crashing together in a multiverse is surely a large scale version of quantum foam in this universe. The word universe means everything. So you don't need a bigger everything. This universe creates itself within the quantum foam. From antiparticle and particle pairs.

The other word loosely used is dimension. All dimensions are at 90 degrees from one another.If you want to understand a higher dimension then try this one....

Imagine nothing,... Can't be done so try nearly nothing, an infinitesimally small point. This has size so let's shrink it. Ah its closer to nothing but it still has size.Shrink it further.. Ok can't achieve nothing. Shrink the point further and further. What we find is that in order to approach zero size we have an increasing acceleration, momentum energy. View this shrinking point as a direction and apply special relativity. What do we get? We find nothing contains almost infinite amount of energy but when limited by special relativity, we get increasing mass! no need for a Higgs boson. Mass is energy slowed by time.This is the 4th spatial dimension. It is associated with the forth temporal dimension of time but I will not discuss this here yet, except to mention the universe is expanding out into a forth spatial dimension in the opposite direction. Can you guys see variations in scale as a direction of movement and apply special relativity? Give it a try until your brain hurts. lol

[ScubaMike]

Terms like multiverse and dimensions are used to loosely in Olly's model. What is meant by multiverse with all it's dimensions. It seems terms are used which are banded around to disguise the fact that something is not known. What do mean by a multiverse? A universe of universes in a universe. It tells you nothing about why the big bang happened. Branes crashing together in a multiverse is surely a large scale version of quantum foam in this universe. The word universe means everything. So you don't need a bigger everything. This universe creates itself within the quantum foam. From antiparticle and particle pairs.

The other word loosely used is dimension. All dimensions are at 90 degrees from one another.If you want to understand a higher dimension then try this one....

Imagine nothing,... Can't be done so try nearly nothing, an infinitesimally small point. This has size so let's shrink it. Ah its closer to nothing but it still has size.Shrink it further.. Ok can't achieve nothing. Shrink the point further and further. What we find is that in order to approach zero size we have an increasing acceleration, momentum energy. View this shrinking point as a direction and apply special relativity. What do we get? We find nothing contains almost infinite amount of energy but when limited by special relativity, we get increasing mass! no need for a Higgs boson. Mass is energy slowed by time.This is the 4th spatial dimension. It is associated with the forth temporal dimension of time but I will not discuss this here yet, except to mention the universe is expanding out into a forth spatial dimension in the opposite direction. Can you guys see variations in scale as a direction of movement and apply special relativity? Give it a try until your brain hurts. lol

On the contrary, Ollys description is quite elegant and relies only on common language and concepts.

Therefore it appeals to a wider audience and is not restricted to those with some comprehension of quantum foam.

I'm all for theories and descriptions of this nature or other exotic terminology, even if they may not be *precisely* accurate at a quantum level, they are phrased in a way that are understandable to ordinary folk and give them some level of understadning of difficult concepts.

Example, the thin rubber sheet description of time/space is not accurate (being a three dimensional representation of a 4 -dimensional concept), but it lends comprehension without resorting to complicated mathematics.

[NeutrinoWave]

We find nothing contains almost infinite amount of energy but when limited by special relativity, we get increasing mass! no need for a Higgs boson. Mass is energy slowed by time.This is the 4th spatial dimension. It is associated with the forth temporal dimension of time but I will not discuss this here yet, except to mention the universe is expanding out into a forth spatial dimension in the opposite direction. Can you guys see variations in scale as a direction of movement and apply special relativity? Give it a try until your brain hurts. lol

Time gives Mass vs Higgs gives Mass

Please explain how Time gives Mass starting out with how you got almost an infinite amount of energy from nothing...and where SR came into play, thanks.