Correct me if I'm wrong (and you better cite a law or mostly proven theory) but I am pretty sure for it to be a "dimension" it requires that it can be measured with a quantifier like the meter. I say we are in a 4 dimensional universe as matter can phase though other matter. (electrons for example) I cite the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (aka. HUP) for backing.
Classically, i.e., in our macroscopic world, I can measure the postion of a object with apparent perfect accuracy. There is really no question where something is and what its momentum is.
In the Quantum Mechanical world, the idea that we can measure things exactly breaks down. Let me state this notion more precisely. Suppose a particle has momemtum p and a position x. In a Quantum Mechanical world, I would not be able to measure p and x precisely. There is an uncertainty associated with each measurement, e.g., there is some dp and dx, which I can never get rid of even in a perfect experiment!!!. This is due to the fact that whenever I make a measurement, I must disturb the system. (In order for me to know something is there, I must bump into it.) The size of the uncertainties are not independent, they are related by
dp x dx > h / (2 x pi) = Planck's constant / ( 2 x pi ) The preceding is a statement of The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. So, for example, if I measure x exactly, the uncertainty in p, dp, must be infinite in order to keep the product constant. [/QUOTE]
Again as I said before when things go to the astromical or atomic level, weird stuff happens. In fact many astrophysicists are wondering if "dark matter" is nothing more than an error in the current equations for gravity. It may be totally insignifigant at the stellar or planetary scale, but when you are up the to galatic and super cluster scale the readings are way off from what should be the expected outcome. Yet more reason why we don't really understand our universe in full.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin-x5+Nov 4 2004, 10:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (x5 @ Nov 4 2004, 10:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Correct me if I'm wrong (and you better cite a law or mostly proven theory) but I am pretty sure for it to be a "dimension" it requires that it can be measured with a quantifier like the meter. I say we are in a 4 dimensional universe as matter can phase though other matter. (electrons for example) I cite the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (aka. HUP) for backing. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> String theory as far as I know doesn't have any experimental evidence to back it up yet. Its basis is purely mathematical. However, the properties of our universe fall out of it so elegantly, that it has attracted a lot of attention. I'm not familiar enough with it to really give you insightfull information, but as I understand it, the basic idea is that every subatomic particle can be modelled as vibrating subspaces of 11 dimensional space whose frequencies are the harmonics of the space.
As I understand it, the additional dimensions that we unable to observe are "curled up," meaning that travelling off in one dimension will cause you to come back in the other side. As a result, on the macroscopic scale we are unable to notice them.
However, the effects that would distinguish string theory from other approaches have so far been restricted to scales that are even below the Heisenburg uncertainty threshold for things we can observe.
<!--QuoteBegin-x5+Nov 4 2004, 10:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (x5 @ Nov 4 2004, 10:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> In fact many astrophysicists are wondering if "dark matter" is nothing more than an error in the current equations for gravity. It may be totally insignifigant at the stellar or planetary scale, but when you are up the to galatic and super cluster scale the readings are way off from what should be the expected outcome. Yet more reason why we don't really understand our universe in full. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> For more information on this topic, see the wiki for Modified Newtonian Dynamics. <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOND' target='_blank'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOND</a>
There's a trick to the Heisenburg Principle. It's sort of an illusion to an unpredictable pattern that we're not used to. When we try to measure, we end up getting inaccurate results due to the system changing upon measurement.
However, I imagine this is the very heart of the chaos theory. Chaos theory meaning everything seemingly chaotic has a pattern. When a pool stick hits a cue ball and sends the cue ball into another ball on the table, the path is very predictable, though it isn't enough so that we can say exactly what will happen. The variability is large on the molecular scale, though the "averages" of these variabilities makes the result of a ball striking another very predictable.
The variabilities on a molecular scale are largely due to the Heisenburg Principle itself. However, the Heisenburg Principle is nothing more than an illusion to an unpredictable pattern as I mentioned above, therefore the exact results are calculatable when the pattern is taken into consideration.
Then, you can figure out exactly what will happen regarding everything, if every molecule is taken into consideration. The only problem with this model, is that according to quantum mechanics, every molecule has a counterpart in a random part of the universe that is affected and affects it. Therefore, in order to have a completely accurate portrayal of any given situation, you need to account for every single molecule in the universe (or at least every environment surrounding the counterpart molecule to the system you are observing).
I'm probably going over many people's heads here (my own included). Sorry. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Comments
Classically, i.e., in our macroscopic world, I can measure the postion of a object with apparent perfect accuracy. There is really no question where something is and what its momentum is.
In the Quantum Mechanical world, the idea that we can measure things exactly breaks down. Let me state this notion more precisely. Suppose a particle has momemtum p and a position x. In a Quantum Mechanical world, I would not be able to measure p and x precisely. There is an uncertainty associated with each measurement, e.g., there is some dp and dx, which I can never get rid of even in a perfect experiment!!!. This is due to the fact that whenever I make a measurement, I must disturb the system. (In order for me to know something is there, I must bump into it.) The size of the uncertainties are not independent, they are related by
dp x dx > h / (2 x pi) = Planck's constant / ( 2 x pi )
The preceding is a statement of The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. So, for example, if I measure x exactly, the uncertainty in p, dp, must be infinite in order to keep the product constant. [/QUOTE]
<a href='http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/UncertaintyPrinciple.html' target='_blank'>http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Un...yPrinciple.html</a>
Again as I said before when things go to the astromical or atomic level, weird stuff happens. In fact many astrophysicists are wondering if "dark matter" is nothing more than an error in the current equations for gravity. It may be totally insignifigant at the stellar or planetary scale, but when you are up the to galatic and super cluster scale the readings are way off from what should be the expected outcome. Yet more reason why we don't really understand our universe in full.
String theory as far as I know doesn't have any experimental evidence to back it up yet. Its basis is purely mathematical. However, the properties of our universe fall out of it so elegantly, that it has attracted a lot of attention. I'm not familiar enough with it to really give you insightfull information, but as I understand it, the basic idea is that every subatomic particle can be modelled as vibrating subspaces of 11 dimensional space whose frequencies are the harmonics of the space.
As I understand it, the additional dimensions that we unable to observe are "curled up," meaning that travelling off in one dimension will cause you to come back in the other side. As a result, on the macroscopic scale we are unable to notice them.
However, the effects that would distinguish string theory from other approaches have so far been restricted to scales that are even below the Heisenburg uncertainty threshold for things we can observe.
For more information on this topic, see the wiki for Modified Newtonian Dynamics.
<a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOND' target='_blank'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOND</a>
However, I imagine this is the very heart of the chaos theory. Chaos theory meaning everything seemingly chaotic has a pattern. When a pool stick hits a cue ball and sends the cue ball into another ball on the table, the path is very predictable, though it isn't enough so that we can say exactly what will happen. The variability is large on the molecular scale, though the "averages" of these variabilities makes the result of a ball striking another very predictable.
The variabilities on a molecular scale are largely due to the Heisenburg Principle itself. However, the Heisenburg Principle is nothing more than an illusion to an unpredictable pattern as I mentioned above, therefore the exact results are calculatable when the pattern is taken into consideration.
Then, you can figure out exactly what will happen regarding everything, if every molecule is taken into consideration. The only problem with this model, is that according to quantum mechanics, every molecule has a counterpart in a random part of the universe that is affected and affects it. Therefore, in order to have a completely accurate portrayal of any given situation, you need to account for every single molecule in the universe (or at least every environment surrounding the counterpart molecule to the system you are observing).
I'm probably going over many people's heads here (my own included). Sorry. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->