Four Dimensional Space-time

[x04ty29er]

Can anybody think of a way to visually represent a four dimensional environment?

[bluebellbrass07]

Is that even possible....I know there was a Simpsons episode were Homer and Bart somehow ended up in a 4th dimension. Maybe go watch it.

[sax5warrior]

...what?

[BlinK Day 41]

uh....... maybe if u had peole turning inside out and crazy **** like that loll... but it'd be pretty hard soooooooo.. yea going back in time would be pretty crazy too but then it wouldn't really have a visual effect cuz then everybody wouldn't notice cuz we're 3 dimensional beings so we wouldn't notice going back in time i don't think

 

ne wayz yea i don't think it's possible

[Dynasty]

No. I don't think a bunch of kids could even know where to begin....

 

I mean, I'm even bashing myself. There are geniuses out there, dedicated to this task, that can't even do this.

 

Is your avatar a fusion reactor?

[Xenon]

  x04ty29er said:

Can anybody think of a way to visually represent a four dimensional environment?

Building a Hypercube in three dimensions is the equivalent of drawing a cube in two dimensions.

[viccro]

Everything that I've read has used the analogy of a 2-D universe, such as ants on a flat surface...the fourth dimension would be like realizing that the surface is shaped into the surface of a sphere.

 

However, I don't think that we could visualize it at all without cutting it down like that...

[Fortisimo]

Well, really it would be more like them walknig along and then looking up and going, 'Hey... there's more to this...'. That is, if dimension progress in the normal sense. When one considers the ideas of multiple dimensions, as in String/M Theory things get a bit hazy. They curl in upon each other and distort wildly, but they are curled into loops far too small to be experienced by other than the loops themselves. Then there is the whole issue of time versus spatial dimensions.... but we all know what time is like. Anyways, to draw a conceptual 'hypercube', or more properly titled, Tesseract, do this:

Draw a point. Draw another point. Connect them. Now you have a line. Draw another line. Connect them at the end points. Now you have a square. Draw another square. Connect the two squares to each other's corresponding corners. Now you have a cube. Draw another cube. Draw lines to connect each corresponding pair of vertices on the cubes. Now you have a Tesseract.

[whitewing09]

im so confused wtf are yall talking about!?!?!?!?

[Xenon]

  whitewing09 said:

im so confused wtf are yall talking about!?!?!?!?

http://www.traipse.com/hypercube/

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypercube

[bariphonium]

See Fortisimo's above post.

[Xenon]

Per General Relativity, there are 4 physical unseperable space-time (space and time are connected, not seperate) dimensions.

 

What you are describing with 3-physical (space only) dimensions and a single time dimension, only makes sense from a Newtonian viewpointe.

[bariphonium]

Unfortunately, I've not had much more than Newtonian physics so far.

[Fortisimo]

Perhaps if you all would read my post, you wouldn't repeat what I've already said. That is, except you haven't said anything about the nature of higher order spatial dimensions in the much more contemporary String/M Theory.

[bluebellbrass07]

QUOTE (Fortisimo @ May 18 2006, 06:33 PM)

That is, except you haven't said anything about the nature of higher order spatial dimensions in the much more contemporary String/M Theory.

???????

 

This stuff goes way over my head, Im not going to attempt understanding it

[whitewing09]

i thought that the 4th dimension had to do something with time... idk im confused

is there a like 5th dimension too

[viccro]

There may or may not be...thus the debate between modern physicists/cosmologists.

 

In supertring/M Theory there can be 10 or 11 dimensions, whereas in "bosonic string theories" there must be 26 to make it all work out. Or you could see variations on the manifold theory inwhich there are only 6 or 7.

 

The number of dimension varies widly with the different models of the universe, based on how complex it must be to make everything work out as we know it. However, like in string theory, in many instances you can't see/prove some of them as they are curled up beyond visibility. So with no available evidence, many scientists are skeptical...

[Fortisimo]

As she said, it would be impossible to observe the extras directly; at least within the ideas of string theory. This is because firstly, as she mentioned, they are curled up tightly with in each other, and secondly because they would be located at the intersection of string matrices and would thus be smaller than the Planck length, the smallest possible length within the confines of our existence. That is because anything smaller than this length reaches a point to where there is quantum fluctuations to such an extent that it is impossible to derive anything meanigful (this is often refered to as 'quantum foam'). Plus, there is the whole issue of how to look into the other dimensional directions anyways. INdirectly though, they believe that they may be able to find indications of these extra dimensions in real world deviations from the Inverse Square law.

[I<3thebox]

holy hottness you kids are cool! A string theory discussion on a band website... lol

 

I have the Elegant Universe book but I havent read it yet - blargh. I kinda understand it at a very basic level.. but thats about it.

 

Actually for a while I wanted to major in Astrophysics, but then I realized the career options are ZERO unless you want to be a Professor for the rest of your life doing research, which is cool, but not somethign I want to do to earn money... so yeah.

 

I was going to suggest some websites b/c I did a presentation on "Tesseracts" for my AP Phys class... but someone has already done so. snap.