What is the 6th Dimension?

[Dywyddyr]

It has never been proven formally that time is the fourth dimension.

I think, if you actually read what was written, that he said time is NOT the fourth dimension.

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...

I sincerely doubt that you were doing it at the rate of 1 every four hours, unless you simply mean dimensional changes (e.g. imperial to metric or some such).
The building & safety regulations vary widely and would require far longer than 4 hours per...

 

[Jozen-Bo]

again , give an example where time influences objects

to the point that we can see that time is an actual influential dimension upon any object in the Uinverse or here on Earth

Well put!!!

Can we put time in a bottle...can we show what force it exerts on matter...can we find a direct connection...as we do with the 2 dimensions of a piece of paper...at what point does space fold into time...

 

[Dywyddyr]

Well put!!!

Nonsense.
It betrays wrong "thinking".

Can we put time in a bottle...can we show what force it exerts on matter...

Give me a bottle of "length".
Show what force "width" exerts.

at what point does space fold into time...

At what point does length fold into width?

 

[Jozen-Bo]

...

I sincerely doubt that you were doing it at the rate of 1 every four hours, unless you simply mean dimensional changes (e.g. imperial to metric or some such).
The building & safety regulations vary widely and would require far longer than 4 hours per...

It was blood pumping in the brain work! Day after day I could fell it pumping. I work very fast when I want to. And, to further clarify, I said convert, which means I took a pre-existing set of plans and modified all of their dimensions to suit German standards. And, because the plans where often incomplete and never included truss systems, I designed them on the spot...which is rather easy. Also, if your familiar with the basic Architectural needs of a home, for example the minimum requirements for a bathroom, and don't need to refer to manuals so often, it is just a matter of exerting your mind.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Ah so it wasn't a conversion to German standards then, more a metrication.
Four hours?
You wasted time.
Should have written a macro and done them as a batch in 5 minutes each...

 

[thinking]

“ Originally Posted by thinking
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...

breadth

extension out into space

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Nonsense.
It betrays wrong "thinking".

Since this isn't going anywhere...all hearsay and no proof...there is no point arguing.

Give me a bottle of "length".
Show what force "width" exerts.

Yes, in both cases. Give the bottle and I can measure its length. If it measures 9 inches then is a bottle of 9 inches length. As to the force of width, this too can be calculating as to what portion such width plays into the manifestation of the gravity of the object whereupon the width was measured. In order to do so one would need to gather the other dimensional information of the object, enough to determine the volume and then the density could be extracted be determining the weight. Then we could determine how much gravitational force that width contributes to the whole of the object and thereby predict how that might change if we modified the width.

:bugeye:...That was easy...

At what point does length fold into width?

Curves don't have points. If the fold is 90 degrees, then we could say is it at that edge, unless we are talking about a string (which would provide a point). If it is has a radius, there is no actual point.

 

[Jozen-Bo]

breadth

extension out into space

This extension out into space I did not call breadth, I referred to it as a static vibration for lack of better words. Basically, aside from what I called it, it is as you describe, extension of space out and onto itself, not moving in any way and providing nearly infinite potential meridians for manifestation. Kinda like the Tesserac version of the fourth dimension, your familiar with that are you not...

 

[thinking]

“ Originally Posted by Dywyddyr
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...

Jozen-Bo

what Dywddyr is doing is giving time some kind of a force and not just him many are do the samething

we have gone from time being a measurement of movement , a mathematical concept to a force

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Ah so it wasn't a conversion to German standards then, more a metrication.
Four hours?
You wasted time.
Should have written a macro and done them as a batch in 5 minutes each...

Your out of your league here, you can't possibly use a macro to do what I did. But, this is a digression...so it can rest here...

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Jozen-Bo

what Dywddyr is doing is giving time some kind of a force and not just him many are do the samething

we have gone from time being a measurement of movement , a mathematical concept to a force

I agree, the Scientific Communities do not all give consistent descriptions of what the 4th dimension is. :shrug:

They are clearly not all correct and none of them have ever provided a test for what the fourth dimension really is, they simply assume their version is correct and use it to describe phenomena, and if there is resemblance, they dive further into their assumption.

How could we develop a test for what the fourth dimension really is...

 

[Dywyddyr]

Yes, in both cases. Give the bottle and I can measure its length. If it measures 9 inches then is a bottle of 9 inches length.

Wrong, in that case you're measuring the bottle's length: you haven't got some "length" (in and of itself) IN the bottle.

As to the force of width, this too can be calculating as to what portion such width plays into the manifestation of the gravity of the object whereupon the width was measured.

Also untrue.
That would also vary with density etc.
You haven't measured the effect of "width" simply the quantity of matter...

:bugeye:...That was easy...

Of course it was.
Giving incorrect answers is always easy...

Curves don't have points.

Apart from being untrue (a curve can be considered to be nothing but points) where did "curves" come into it?

Your out of your league here, you can't possibly use a macro to do what I did.

Hardly, in fact not even close.
And I have written macros for such.

I agree, the Scientific Communities do not all give consistent descriptions of what the 4th dimension is.

One more time: there is no THE fourth dimension.
There is no THE first, or THE 2nd etc...

How could we develop a test for what the fourth dimension really is...

Wrong "thinking" on your part again.
There is no THE 4th dimension.

what Dywddyr is doing is giving time some kind of a force and not just him many are do the samething

You still don't read do you?
I have stated that time is a dimension, not a force.
The same way length is not a force, etc.
Post #241 for example.

 

[thinking]

Wrong, in that case you're measuring the bottle's length: you haven't got some "length" (in and of itself) IN the bottle.


Also untrue.
That would also vary with density etc.
You haven't measured the effect of "width" simply the quantity of matter...


Of course it was.
Giving incorrect answers is always easy...


Apart from being untrue (a curve can be considered to be nothing but points) where did "curves" come into it?


Hardly, in fact not even close.
And I have written macros for such.


One more time: there is no THE fourth dimension.
There is no THE first, or THE 2nd etc...


Wrong "thinking" on your part again.
There is no THE 4th dimension.


You still don't read do you?
I have stated that time is a dimension, not a force.
The same way length is not a force, etc.
Post #241 for example.

but in post # 169

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

the separation occurs in space not time

and why ?

because it is the interactions between objects which causes the separation in space between these objects

now can apply time though to understand the why's of the separation

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Wrong, in that case you're measuring the bottle's length: you haven't got some "length" (in and of itself) IN the bottle.

That isn't what you asked. Go back and see for yourself and quote it or shut it!

Also untrue.
That would also vary with density etc.
You haven't measured the effect of "width" simply the quantity of matter...

...gravity produces an effect...whether it is kinetic or potential energy...and that the quantity is needed to know the measurement of that energy....a force...

oh never mind...:shrug:

Apart from being untrue (a curve can be considered to be nothing but points) where did "curves" come into it?

You haven't read the thread from the first page...obviously.

Hardly, in fact not even close.
And I have written macros for such.

Irrelevant...quite diverting attention away from the topic of focus.

One more time: there is no THE fourth dimension.
There is no THE first, or THE 2nd etc...

...the...a...who gives a crap....by the a place is not meant...there is no "going" to the 6th dimension...it is the fabrics present anywhere any place exists...DUH!!!!!

Wrong "thinking" on your part again.
There is no THE 4th dimension.

I love your argument here...WOW

You still don't read do you?
I have stated that time is a dimension, not a force.
The same way length is not a force, etc.
Post #241 for example.

LENGTH...is part of that which produces force...it is not separate from the manifestation of force physically...your again playing with words to confuse yourself and others...

 

[Dywyddyr]

but in post # 169

I see your comprehension is as poor as your reading.

the separation occurs in space not time
and why ?
because it is the interactions between objects which causes the separation in space between these objects
now can apply time though to understand the why's of the separation

What is the "separation in space" between, say, me reading this reply NOW and then re-reading in thirty seconds?
None, it's a separation along the time dimension.
What is the separation in space between the decay of two different nucleii that wasn't already there before they decayed?
They start off separated in space (i.e. they are in different positions) and one decays before the other, but they're still in the same relative spacial positions.

 

[Dywyddyr]

That isn't what you asked. Go back and see for yourself and quote it or shut it!

Wrong again.

Give me a bottle of "length".

See the post prior which said "Can we put time in a bottle".
Context is everything...

...gravity produces an effect...whether it is kinetic or potential energy...and that the quantity is needed to know the measurement of that energy....a force...
oh never mind...:shrug:

In other words you can't answer.

You haven't read the thread from the first page...obviously.

Or you're making assumptions.
Hmm, I wonder which is true...

...the...a...who gives a crap....by the a place is not meant...there is no "going" to the 6th dimension...it is the fabrics present anywhere any place exists...DUH!!!!!
I love your argument here...WOW

I see, so you not on;y have no answer it appears that it's YOU who hasn't read the thread from the beginning.
The first post is:

If the 4th dimension is space
and the 5th dimension time,
then what is the 6th dimension?
What would dimensions 7 - 10 be?
-Dan

LENGTH...is part of that which produces force...it is not separate from the manifestation of force physically...your again playing with words to confuse yourself and others...

Wrong again.
Length does not produce force.
I'm not "playing with words" I'm pointing out misconceptions.
Time is not a force, nor is length, yet "thinking" is under impression that I have stated time IS a force...

 

[Jozen-Bo]

Wrong again.

Blah blah blah...

Tedious...:yawn:...like banging your head against a wall...

 

[Jozen-Bo]

If there is length then there is force...this is extremely and painfully elementary physical deduction based upon...if there is length...something is there in one way or another. Either the length is between two THINGS or of a single THING. If it is a thing...it is physical...and therefor there is force...this doesn't change no matter how much you toy with words...

 

[thinking]

“ the separation occurs in space not time
and why ?
because it is the interactions between objects which causes the separation in space between these objects
now can apply time though to understand the why's of the separation ”

What is the "separation in space" between, say, me reading this reply NOW and then re-reading in thirty seconds?

your movement

None, it's a separation along the time dimension.

movement in space

What is the separation in space between the decay of two different nucleii that wasn't already there before they decayed?

They start off separated in space (i.e. they are in different positions) and one decays before the other, but they're still in the same relative spacial positions.

then there is something about being in one position in space that allows one nucleii to decay before the other

regardless of there relative positions

 

[Dywyddyr]

your movement

Which movement?

movement in space

Wrong.

then there is something about being in one position in space that allows one nucleii to decay before the other
regardless of there relative positions

Facile baseless assumption.
Unsupported by any evidence.