What is the 6th Dimension?

[Dywyddyr]

because your asking time to be an influence upon things , it can't

Wrong again.
Time is a dimension, like length.
What "influence" does length have?
Ageing is passage through the dimension of time, not time itself influencing things.

but time isn't about the ability , fundamentally , of the objects ability to manifest , time isn't a quality , in the sence that if time were absent doesn't mean that the object wouldn't manifest

That's merely a supposition of yours.

but the absence of , length , hight , depth and breadth does
take away any of these qualities and the object can't manifest
see my point ?

That, also, is a supposition.
It could be possible that time, length and width could give rise to "something" - a nominally "2D" existence (compared to our nominally "3D" one).

 

[thinking]

“ Originally Posted by thinking
because your asking time to be an influence upon things , it can't ”

What "influence" does length have?

as I keep trying to explain to you

length is essential to the manisfestation of an object

Ageing is passage through the dimension of time, not time itself influencing things.

and aging is based essentially on what ?

the bio-chemistry of any being and genetics

 

[Dywyddyr]

as I keep trying to explain to you
length is essential to the manisfestation of an object

No it isn't.
Length is merely an "indication" of something existing that particular dimension.
"Length" as a dimension has nothing to do with an object.
Call it "distance" if that makes it easier for you.
Distance between two objects is length.

and aging is based essentially on what ?
the bio-chemistry of any being and genetics

Ageing doesn't happen to non-living things?
Decay?
Ageing happens because there's "movement" along the time dimension.
Things "experience" duration - movement through time.

 

[thinking]

“ Originally Posted by thinking
as I keep trying to explain to you
length is essential to the manisfestation of an object ”

No it isn't.
Length is merely an "indication" of something existing that particular dimension.
"Length" as a dimension has nothing to do with an object.
Call it "distance" if that makes it easier for you.
Distance between two objects is length.

lets look at length differently

each object , or atom or quantum particle , no matter how small needs length

why ?

because length as one of the dimensions with which applies extension in space of the particle and hence allows for the manifestation of the particle

 

[Dywyddyr]

lets look at length differently
each object , or atom or quantum particle , no matter how small needs length
why ?
because length as one of the dimensions with which applies extension in space of the particle and hence allows for the manifestation of the particle

No, you're looking at it wrongly.
It "needs" length?
Length is a dimension.
The fact that an object HAS length is a concomitant, not a necessity.
And those particles also have duration... because they exist in time.

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Looks like I have some catching up to do here...

 

[Jozen-Bo]

You don't need a 4th dimension to curve space, you can curve space in any number of dimensions, even 1. You don't need a computer to conceive more than 10 dimensions, mathematicians having been doing stuff involving infinite dimensions for more than 100 years. Doing vector calculus with some unknown but finite number of dimensions is second nature to most maths students. Heck, even school kids have done stuff on infinite dimensional vector spaces, they just didn't realise it. Ever done anything to do with polynomials?

How exactly are we curving space......

Also, what is your idea, then, of a vector motion in, say, the 689th dimension...

I am curious as to what your answer will be.

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Summary for anybody new here:
Question answered in the first 5 lines.

You have...two quotes...are you a sock puppet or are you also new here...

Jozen-Bo is an insane dude who claims to be able to use a/the "Mind Portal", which I'm still not sure what is. Personally, I'm classing this with telekinesis and other psychic abilities; utter garbage

So...your not sure what it is and yet you claim to have a scientifically backed view...

You reveal your own presumption...

As Jozen's pschotic rave came to a peak, somebody started talking sense (finally), and Jozen's arguement collapsed completely. Go to vote (DOT) sparklit (DOT) com/poll.spark?pollID=861305 and listen to the "TK'ers" and the smart people. It sounds the same as this.
FFS, Jozen, stop wasting your life.

Again aimed at myself, and, can you please specify exactly where my argument collapsed...

And...blow off for insulting the members of this forum as if...the dumb people talk here and the smart people talk there...what a bunch of arrogant bull-blabber.

I've been insane before, and what you're going through is almost exactly the same. It's just sad to me that you could have actually convinced anyone. Shows just how much people crawl back to juvinile power fantasies.

Are you a professional psychologist...seriously...because accusing others of being insane on the net is weak-minded bullshit, you can't even back anything up with REAL LEGAL EVIDENCE...so kiss my arse!

I believe you when you say you've been insane before...I can see why...care to share what you where legally classified with...

tl;dr
Anyway, I hope my previous message wasn't offensive to you

How...insincere...thanks!

I was merely voicing my (scientifically backed) opinion that spinning a colorful paper wheel does not unlock the secrets of dimensions, but merely causes disorentation and minute hallucenogenic effects.

Care to provide some scientifically backed proof on this...really! And where is this organization backing you...or is it simply a cluster...a community that you try to make sound bigger then it is...your inability to provide evidence is utterly astonishing!

Oh and expect me to abide by rule 34 of the internet with regard to wheel.

I can't taste the humor...was that a joke...

 

[Dywyddyr]

Also, what is you idea, then, of a vector motion in, say, the 689th dimension...

Whatever you want it to be, depending upon how your dimensions are defined...

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Whatever you want it to be, depending upon how your dimensions are defined...

I need to catch up more before I can better comprehend what you mean by this statement and where your coming from...it shouldn't take long.

 

[Dywyddyr]

I need to catch up more before I can better comprehend what you mean by this statement and where your coming from...it shouldn't take long.

It's quite simple:
there's no such thing as THE 689th dimension: it depends upon what you're looking at, what you've selected for your dimensions (the total phase space you're considering) etc...

Although I'd guess that nobody really considers that many dimensions, especially for motion.

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Can you? Isn't the Riemann tensor always zero in one dimension.

Just to reiterate the question...

 

[AlphaNumeric]

How exactly are we curving space......

I was refering to describing space. It is possible to construct a consistent description of non-Euclidean 3d space without needing to view it as being part of 4 (or more) dimensional space.

Also, what is your idea, then, of a vector motion in, say, the 689th dimension...

If you knew any vector calculus you'd know what I'm talking about. Just as you can describe 3d systems using x,y,z coordinates you can generalise that to however many dimensions you want and span the space using $$x_{1}$$, $$x_{2}$$, .... $$x_{n}$$. It's basic geometry.

 

[Gustav]

when will the crackpottery end?
when, i say

 

[Jozen-Bo]

@Jozen-Bo
you are a genius with dense ideas and super ego, many thanks for a certain enlightenment. although a shame about your arrogance, as it interferes with the ebb and flow of this forum. publish your journals to satisfy your 1 way plot, but thanks for the drama and tangents.

My state of mind is prone to many sudden changes, in order to better understand many different views to increase my own perspective my mind can focus on a single view as truth or two 'opposing' ideas or such at the same time and perceive their relationship. Because of this I may either seem are be arrogant from time to time, as my mind explores both different views and different feelings that find expression of those views. I can be dramatic...I know...and I could also be wrong in what my sensory input has received. Do we ever change...

As to my 1 way plot...to seek a true death as I view is to embrace true life as it continues to reach new limits. If, aside from self-destruction (a fake one...a recycling into time/maya) life does in the long haul of time evolve to have limits that are fantastic and beyond our own now, when and where does it stop. Does it.
(I have no question mark on my keyboard)... If there is a plot, then how can I be sure that it is my own. Could it be a universal design.

Science can't disprove the existence of a spirit.

I have experienced it.

There is no time as we normally know it if the ultimate geometry contained within a vacuum of infinite vectors would contain ever possible shape. Then how is it that certain shapes manifest to us...why these shapes. If this is correct, then there is infinite variable futures and pasts. If our spirit can move both forward and backward through this infinite range of potentials, we may not all have arrived from the same big bang as we know it. I am left wondering to myself if this is a natural course or selection to move towards, that if, after a giving time anyone would make this decision, giving the age of their spirit. If so, then I didn't make the plot. It was always there to begin with.

If you saw a car moving to run you over wouldn't you step out of the way...because your senses told you this was happening. I can honestly say that my senses have changes a great deal from experimenting as I have.


I appreciate your advice. Such thoughts settle well into constructive actions.

 

[Jozen-Bo]

...

If you knew any vector calculus you'd know what I'm talking about. Just as you can describe 3d systems using x,y,z coordinates you can generalise that to however many dimensions you want and span the space using $$x_{1}$$, $$x_{2}$$, .... $$x_{n}$$. It's basic geometry.

So, then, these coordinates would be moving in an invisible direction...

How do we know these are dimensions...what shapes are we describing...

What are they doing...

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Mabey I'm in the wrong place for this, but as I was setting here drinking my morning coffee, I started thinking of thought being a dimensional device. That is we see in three dimensions there for we think in three dimensions. We watch TV we see two dimensions, which brings up 2 questions: 1. Do we translate the 2 dimensional images we see into 3 dimensions? or 2. Do we merely accept the 2 we see and go on from there. But this isn't the point of my post.

The human brain has the largest proportion of itself dedicated to light procession then from any other animal. As the images are produced and passing through the 3 primary visual chambers, they would cease to be 2rd dimension therein. The neurotransmitters would fire along an electric river-like structure of connected neurons that synchronize the experience into a sensation of seeing. We would need many variables to fully describe this process, not just three. And, the process could never be fully described, because it interacts with the universe around it and likewise.

This does little to explain thought, however, just seeing.

It has been said that insane people are not aware that they are insane. Which begs the question; if we are aware of more dimensions than 3, is it possible to think in 4, 5, or 6 dimensions, and if this were true would we be able to overcome our 3 dimensional insanity, or are the insane actually thinking in more than 3 dinension?
I believe, that as sentient beings, if we imagine it we can make it happen.

Insanity comes and goes and waves for everyone. It is never consistent always. Even if one spends a life insane and they have another, will it be too. How many people do you know went a little crazy from time to time.

Now to the question: If thoughts are themselves multi-dimensional then it would be impossible to have 3rd dimensional thoughts, though possible to focus on the 3rd dimension with those thoughts and formulate self-repeating patterns that last centuries, using an intellect to provide all sorts of ration for such continued thinking. This would then be, a classical case of insanity and you could call it 3 dimensional insanity. We'll set the consequences aside, if this be the case, then, yes, it would be possible to overcome such insanity.

 

[Jozen-Bo]

What makes you think thought has a dimensionality?
We can think in as many dimensions as required: for example as a design engineer (draughtsman) I was often required to think in 2 dimensions (in the old days of doing drawings on paper*), mathematicians can think in four, five or more depending on what they're doing.
And don't forget we experience at least 4 dimensions - time being the other: next week I'll visit X, tomorrow I need to go shopping, last year I had a great holiday...

It has never been proven formally that time is the fourth dimension. It has been assumed and the assumption fit for describing and predicting to a certain degree. If there was such a test, I'd love to hear about it! It is a matter of human logic and deduction as to this perception. Without finding a way to prove this by testing, it could be a gross error in human perception that is taking for granted and limits our development.

The mathematicians are no exception; they can't prove either that they are truly thinking in the 4th or 5th dimension, as it is open to debate as whether the 4th dimension is time. They may simply be describing what Draqon refers to as sub-spaces within spaces, with have little to do with higher dimensions.

No one has ever proven the 4th dimension is time. According to the descriptions AlphaNumeric uses, having infinite vectors, this would be inconsistent with the 4th dimensional time model. These inconsistencies lend credence further to the fact we don't have any solid proof anywhere at all what the 4th dimension is.

* I have come to the conclusion (unsupported by any study) that draughtsmen have a facility (maybe through training, or maybe a natural predilection enhanced through training) for "switching" to 2 dimensions. Non-draughtsmen always seem to screw up somewhere in converting a 3D object to an accurate/ representative 2D drawing.

I've done this kind of work too. At one time I as converting entire homes from USA standards to german standards at a rate of one house every 4 hours. The company made lots of money! I got to exercise my brain to move as fast as it could in the process at doing such conversions. There are other things to gain from such activities as well...

 

[Jozen-Bo]

actually the 4th is breadth , because with out breadth neither of the first 5 could exist

I would be interested in hearing a bit more description on what you mean by breadth...

and time is not a true dimension , since time is a consequence of physical compartive movement by objects , expressed by mathematics

Interesting way of seeing it.

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Wrong again: the separation has to occur in something and that something is what we call time.
Otherwise the movement couldn't happen.

Can we prove that there is really separation...where is the test..

How could there be when there is consistency from one moment to the next, and when this consistency is so crucial to all scientific experimentation for collecting data to make informed decisions with...

How do we know for sure what your saying has been proven and by which scientific experiment, if any...