Nice interview! I love that reality is not just stranger than we imagine, but stranger than we CAN imagine! Seems a pity Physics must hide these extra dimensions in tiny Planck length Calabi-Yau manifolds, or inaccessible Branes... Will we ever be able to set out, like Columbus, (or the Square in Abbot’s “Flatland”) to explore and these 10+ dimensions, or must they remain forever mere possibilities in the imaginations of Physicists? 🥺
People who want to consider the possibility of extra dimensions should learn the mathematical characteristics of manifolds. If you understand that our 3D space (or 4D space-time) is an embedded manifold in a space of higher dimensions, then it is unreasonable to expect to "see" outside of our manifold or that any physical structure in our manifold could interact with anything outside of our manifold depending on the nature of the forces acting in our manifold. To think about this, drop down a dimension and consider some lower-D manifolds that we can understand. For example, think about the surface of the Earth. That surface is a 2D manifold embedded in our 3D space. The analogy to us 3D beings inhabiting our 3D manifold would be 2D vehicles confined to the surface of the earth. Ships are a crude approximation. They are 3D, but in terms of navigating the oceans, they might as well be 2D. They are confined to the surface of the ocean and can't go above it (or below it unless they sink). Their entire range of motion is essentially in the plane that is tangent to the surface at their location. (One of the mathematical properties of a manifold is that it can be approximated by a "flat" manifold of the same dimension as the manifold we are talking about. That is, if you zoom in anywhere on the manifold, it seems to get flatter and flatter.) So navigators only need two numbers to fix their position (latitude and longitude) and their compass needs to have only one degree of freedom. (They don't need, or can't use azimuth (unless they are aiming their cannons)). Now, forces are a different thing. The ship experiences the force of wind, the direction of which has only one degree of freedom. It can blow from any of the compass directions. (Updrafts or downdrafts could also happen but sailors don't try to harness them so we can ignore them.) The force of gravity, however is different from the force of the wind. Gravity acts in a direction not available to the navigators. In fact the direction of gravity is perpendicular to each and every possible direction on the compass. So every component vector of the force of gravity in any of those directions is zero, so that force can't be used to propel the ship. Yet the force is acting everywhere on the ocean. But the force of gravity is indirectly observable to the mariners because it provides the field in which the water waves are propagated, and the mariners experience the waves. IMHO, one of the biggest mistakes made by scientists is to suppose that if there were astronomically large extra dimensions we should be able to observe or interact with them, and they wonder why we can't. I say it is simply because of the mathematical nature of manifolds and that we are in one. I think Kaluza was on the right track and Klein screwed the idea up even to this day. There is no need to suppose that the extra dimensions are small at all. So the string theorists, who have talked themselves into believing that the particular Calabi-Yau space (i.e. the special manifolds which admit solutions to Einstein's and Maxwell's field equations) they are trying to find must be one of the curled up ones. I think they would have better luck looking at astronomically large ones, like n-tori for example. But I digress.
That would explain one extra dimension, but not 6 extra spatial dimensions. And the reason they supposed them to be so tiny was exactly that otherwise forces like gravity would drop off insanely fast, the distance cubed or hypercubed and so on. Now because gravity is so weak anyway it's very difficult to measure but suppose electromagnetic forces could move in some very large extra dimension, we would have been able to confirm that quite clearly already like a 100 years ago, and yet we still cannot find any evidence of it today. And if you have directions of space where no force or particle can propagate, does that dimension really exist? It starts to sound more like some kind of philosophical dimension that has nothing to do with reality since it really doesn't mean anything to say that it does exist if nothing can propagate in such a direction.
@@stoferb876 No, it would explain 6, or any number more, spatial dimensions. The necessary condition for manifolds is that they are at least one dimension less than the embedding space, but they could be six, or more, dimensions less. For example, in our 3D space, in addition to 2D manifolds (surfaces), we can have 1D manifolds, like a sharp edge or a strand of spider silk. The supposition that forces must act in all dimensions of the embedding space is just that: pure supposition. There is no reason that must be true. There are many possibilities. I tried to describe two of them in my ocean navigation analogy. In that analogy, the manifold is the 2D ocean surface while the embedding space is our 3D world. I pointed out that the force of wind acts as a 1D vector acting in one of the directions in the manifold, while gravity acts as a 1D vector acting in a direction normal to the manifold, whereby all components of the force within the manifold are zero. Therefore we can't say with any certainty how the familiar forces in our manifold (gravity, EM, strong, and weak) act in higher dimensions. They could act in those dimensions or they might not. The fact that gravity and EM obey inverse square laws should be taken as evidence that they do not act in higher dimensions. The fact that we have not observed any evidence to the contrary even today after 100 years of observation should strengthen the case that those forces are strictly confined to our manifold and do not act in higher dimensions. As for "directions of space where no force or particle can propagate", your conclusion is exactly right: it leads directly to a philosophical discussion; it involves semantics and not physics. The real question is, what does it mean to exist? That is a purely semantic question and it depends on one's definition. If by 'existence' you mean that it appears in our manifold, i.e. the 4D space-time continuum of classical physics, then a "direction... of space where no force or particle can propagate" does not exist. But if you acknowledge the reality of large extra dimensions, then the term 'exist' should include the space, along with its contents, that are outside our manifold, don't you think? And if the definition is changed to include existence outside our manifold, then "directions of space where no force or particle can propagate" certainly could exist. Of course we would have to agree that the definitions of 'force' and 'particle' mean only those which appear in our manifold. There could certainly be forces, particles, and directions in higher dimensions that are completely inaccessible to us and our instruments because we and our instruments are confined to our manifold.
Could exist in infinitely small slices of past, present and future at same time. Would allow quantum gravity to be dispersed into three spatial dimensions of each (9 total).
Not sure what smallest measurable slice of time is. Would it be planck time? What is planck time, 10 power -40 or something like? If smallest measurable time is even smaller than planck constant, then even quantum gravity could exist in more than one dimension of time at once.
The smallest measurable amount of time is given by the necessary energy loss of your clock. A clock that has the energy output of a supernova or an active galactic nucleus is not very practical.
Take phase spaces, if indeed the no copy theorem is a good theorem, you need to prove that a phase space of every variable in 3d+t does not enclose all possible phase spaces. Good luck with that 3 is the first number that makes infinite color maps ect. Things change a lot from 2d to 3d that does not change much from 3d to 4d space.
@closer to truth Almost all videos have bad sound quality. This is quite disappointing though the content quality of the channel is fantastic. Could you please please fix that?
It is not if there are extra dimensions but WHY WE EVEN ASK ? We feel ourselves to be in a 3 dimensional world so all our HOW, WHERE, WHEN, WHAT, WHY'S are asked from an awareness of a 3 dimensional world. Einstein said that imagination is more important than just raw knowledge-information. You need to imagine , say, what is it like to jog around a coin, a penny,,,,In so imagining , you need to BE SMALL so relatively the penny would be a large track My Cat, Mik, is cute, very charmingly cute, but when I imagine myself to be a small insect or bird, looking UP at my cat, Mik would be this horrible monster.....Imagine !!!
1) How many multiple universes are necessary for every possible tuning to be fine tuned in the right way? 2) How many creators are necessary to do the same? 1) Infinity v's 2) ONE!
Time doesn't exist so considering time as fourth dimension is negated, next is space and is defined by motion of a body and this is not what one to expect from the mysterious of claiming the existence of fourth dimension. However what has been really forgotten or noticed is the angle beside , length, width, and height, so from this viewpoint then we can call angle is the fourth dimension which without it the other three dimensions are not possible, because it has a tight relation with those threes. One line has two dimensions, two lines has three dimensions , and three lines have four dimensions, now every thing consists of endless combinations of areas, as it is seen in MRI and other technichcs used for seeing through living things and nonliving things.
Very interesting you said that space is defined by a " motion of a body" there's your dimension curve, body of a fish different dimension body of a ant different dimension , body of a human different dimension all do the last mention it find more complicated dimensions, for now i should go back to my rabbit hole and meditate.
SO, because they cant find these dimensions they have to be incredibly tiny and tricky to detect. I'd probably say that about the 3rd dimension if I was a flatland scientist desperate to justfy my 2D world as the practical reality of existence...
When the possible values of a dimension have a max & min, then you can describe that dimension as small or big. In a universe where the third spacial dimension only allows values smaller than 1 nano meter, you will feel as if you live in a flat universe because the third dimension is too small.
If you zoomed into a zero dimensional dot, would it become a three dimensional sphere? If you zoomed into a 1 dimensional line, would it become a fourth dimension shape?
Does the Maths of extra dimensions enter into other Mathematical equations even though we haven't proven they exist? For example, adding the equation of other dimensions into other mathematical models because it solves a particular problem? If so then it may kind of describe how the universe works but it would also be based on false information being that the other dimensions haven't been proven wouldn't it? So in a sense, it wouldn't really be telling you how the universe works in a factual way but rather based off of some kind of thought puzzle and not reality.
If you live in a flat universe and you detect that Mr bean stand and does NOT stand in the same time in the same place, then you either consider absurdity as your way of thought or you let the mathematical equations lead you to consider a third dimension of "UP" where Mr bean stand in the first floor but not in the second.
Feinmann gave the example of Aztecs predicting the position of Venus by moving peanuts between three different sized cups. Accurate to one day in 65,000 years. Doesn't mean they explained the underlying mechanism.
*_M theory,_* the second superstring revolution, started by Witten in 1995, combines five string theories (E8 x E8 heterotic, SO(32) heterotic, type I superstring, type IIB superstring, and type IIA superstring) with 11-dimensional supergravity. M theory unifies (1) electric-magnetic duality in four dimensions, (2) strange symmetries of supergravity, (3) the dualities of string theory, and (4) gauge theory dynamics in four dimensions. 💕 ☮ 🌎 🌌
@@inspiration1883 Edward Witten single-handedly began the second superstring revolution (M theory) at the string theory conference at the University of Southern California on March 13-18, 1995.
@totalfreedom45 And a thousand other amazing things before, after, and WHILE doing that. Ed Witten's intellect is practically superhuman. Even in a casual conversation about anything outside of physics, the sheer cognitive horsepower of his brain is legitimately scary at times - it's the mental equivalent of meeting one of those 6'10" 300lb mixed martial arts champions, you end up scratching your head trying to figure out if you're both REALLY the same species.
Prespective of quantum particle, we are a Quantum Universe which exists everywhere to which no law applies. We can also say this, parallel universe. Because, parallel means parallel. ________________________________ Thinking is a state of consciousness. No law applies to thinking. Thinking means, experiencing.work of consciousness. We are being experienced from the prespective of consciousness. Death is no such thing, meaningless event. After death ? We will find overselves in the whole universe as consciousness. Because, thinking is a state of consciousness. At the moment we are experiencing through this body. Creation has no meaning without experience. Prespective of consciousness whatever is happening is happening in nothingnes. Past present future running in nothingness. Because, no law applies to consciousness. The universe (form of quantum reyality) is experiencing itself. _________________________________ Whatever happens in the world is at the will of humans. Our prayer are fulfilled through God, this too is the thinking of humans. Prayer=form of think, state of universe. Those species which are not in the stage of advance intellect, their desires come out in the form of energy, so their desires are fulfilled. Hunger,sex extra extra........... Thinking is a state of consciousness. Please recognize your thinking ability
Well these arguments are very badly subjective, you cannot say such things. Exstra dimentioms should be necessary if we put them in, the problem is that we dont know every possible 3d+t theoretical framework... so solving a problem is kind of redundant reasoning for justifying it.
Maybe it's because I don't quite understand how I'm supposed to think about it, but I just hate the idea of extra dimensions being these tiny balls of extra dimension stuff, it just seems like such an unimaginative and stupid idea. Maybe I just don't get it at all.
Agreed, maybe because theoretically its used to solve basic physics problems (projectiles etc.) already, but on its own is pretty interesting. I mean have we really observed anything that’s truly two dimensional? Not that I know of. The only think I can think of is a shadow, but thats just the absence of light and not a “thing”. Great observation!
I'm a Physicist by profession and I love mathematics but I think these guys go way too far. Of course you can put space and time together, merge it to a 4dim vector space. The math works very nicely, but that's a mathematical description of the reality, not the reality itself. Space and time are still different things as any child will tell you. Let alone extra-dimensions.
That’s why they call the Lord; God Most High. The other celestial beings are no match for him. He is of a higher dimension. This is also why we can’t overcome these wicked spirits in our own strength. They are higher than us. “what is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and honor.” Psalms 8:4-5 NIV We would seem supernatural to a two dimensional being that has no concept of depth.
We all came from an invisible consciousness that cannot be measured. Scientist's need to measure and use mathematics but no measurement or mathematics can explain a thought.
@@inspiration1883 It's impossible to see everything from one perspective which means whoever is looking through the microscope or telescope. That is one perspective. Try look at the whole tree from one perspective. It would take you an eternity just to see everything in a tree.
Aaron 11 Dimensions seem quite supernatural to me, while scientists have spent about half a decade in pursuit of a belief which seems untestable. This is the belief of the string god.
Aaron Why are you defending this? Are you hoping that it somehow justifies your worldview? I suppose if it wasn’t for string theory then you won’t have the near infinite landscape which is the the only support you have for a multiverse, which is your only explanation of fine tuning. I have seen you in many comments. You are so desperate to justify atheism. Good luck with that.
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 พฤศจิกายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wPd7VFfWHIA/mqdefault.jpg)
![เจ็บที่ยังฮัก - ม่อน วรวิทย์ [ Official Mv ] จอนนี่มิวสิค](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KALIGSRSjFs/mqdefault.jpg)
Nice interview! I love that reality is not just stranger than we imagine, but stranger than we CAN imagine! Seems a pity Physics must hide these extra dimensions in tiny Planck length Calabi-Yau manifolds, or inaccessible Branes... Will we ever be able to set out, like Columbus, (or the Square in Abbot’s “Flatland”) to explore and these 10+ dimensions, or must they remain forever mere possibilities in the imaginations of Physicists? 🥺
He's actually put forward the large extra dimension model so maybe not
People who want to consider the possibility of extra dimensions should learn the mathematical characteristics of manifolds. If you understand that our 3D space (or 4D space-time) is an embedded manifold in a space of higher dimensions, then it is unreasonable to expect to "see" outside of our manifold or that any physical structure in our manifold could interact with anything outside of our manifold depending on the nature of the forces acting in our manifold.
To think about this, drop down a dimension and consider some lower-D manifolds that we can understand. For example, think about the surface of the Earth. That surface is a 2D manifold embedded in our 3D space. The analogy to us 3D beings inhabiting our 3D manifold would be 2D vehicles confined to the surface of the earth. Ships are a crude approximation. They are 3D, but in terms of navigating the oceans, they might as well be 2D. They are confined to the surface of the ocean and can't go above it (or below it unless they sink). Their entire range of motion is essentially in the plane that is tangent to the surface at their location. (One of the mathematical properties of a manifold is that it can be approximated by a "flat" manifold of the same dimension as the manifold we are talking about. That is, if you zoom in anywhere on the manifold, it seems to get flatter and flatter.)
So navigators only need two numbers to fix their position (latitude and longitude) and their compass needs to have only one degree of freedom. (They don't need, or can't use azimuth (unless they are aiming their cannons)).
Now, forces are a different thing. The ship experiences the force of wind, the direction of which has only one degree of freedom. It can blow from any of the compass directions. (Updrafts or downdrafts could also happen but sailors don't try to harness them so we can ignore them.) The force of gravity, however is different from the force of the wind. Gravity acts in a direction not available to the navigators. In fact the direction of gravity is perpendicular to each and every possible direction on the compass. So every component vector of the force of gravity in any of those directions is zero, so that force can't be used to propel the ship. Yet the force is acting everywhere on the ocean. But the force of gravity is indirectly observable to the mariners because it provides the field in which the water waves are propagated, and the mariners experience the waves.
IMHO, one of the biggest mistakes made by scientists is to suppose that if there were astronomically large extra dimensions we should be able to observe or interact with them, and they wonder why we can't. I say it is simply because of the mathematical nature of manifolds and that we are in one.
I think Kaluza was on the right track and Klein screwed the idea up even to this day. There is no need to suppose that the extra dimensions are small at all. So the string theorists, who have talked themselves into believing that the particular Calabi-Yau space (i.e. the special manifolds which admit solutions to Einstein's and Maxwell's field equations) they are trying to find must be one of the curled up ones. I think they would have better luck looking at astronomically large ones, like n-tori for example. But I digress.
That would explain one extra dimension, but not 6 extra spatial dimensions. And the reason they supposed them to be so tiny was exactly that otherwise forces like gravity would drop off insanely fast, the distance cubed or hypercubed and so on. Now because gravity is so weak anyway it's very difficult to measure but suppose electromagnetic forces could move in some very large extra dimension, we would have been able to confirm that quite clearly already like a 100 years ago, and yet we still cannot find any evidence of it today. And if you have directions of space where no force or particle can propagate, does that dimension really exist? It starts to sound more like some kind of philosophical dimension that has nothing to do with reality since it really doesn't mean anything to say that it does exist if nothing can propagate in such a direction.
@@stoferb876 No, it would explain 6, or any number more, spatial dimensions. The necessary condition for manifolds is that they are at least one dimension less than the embedding space, but they could be six, or more, dimensions less. For example, in our 3D space, in addition to 2D manifolds (surfaces), we can have 1D manifolds, like a sharp edge or a strand of spider silk.
The supposition that forces must act in all dimensions of the embedding space is just that: pure supposition. There is no reason that must be true. There are many possibilities. I tried to describe two of them in my ocean navigation analogy. In that analogy, the manifold is the 2D ocean surface while the embedding space is our 3D world. I pointed out that the force of wind acts as a 1D vector acting in one of the directions in the manifold, while gravity acts as a 1D vector acting in a direction normal to the manifold, whereby all components of the force within the manifold are zero. Therefore we can't say with any certainty how the familiar forces in our manifold (gravity, EM, strong, and weak) act in higher dimensions. They could act in those dimensions or they might not. The fact that gravity and EM obey inverse square laws should be taken as evidence that they do not act in higher dimensions. The fact that we have not observed any evidence to the contrary even today after 100 years of observation should strengthen the case that those forces are strictly confined to our manifold and do not act in higher dimensions.
As for "directions of space where no force or particle can propagate", your conclusion is exactly right: it leads directly to a philosophical discussion; it involves semantics and not physics. The real question is, what does it mean to exist? That is a purely semantic question and it depends on one's definition.
If by 'existence' you mean that it appears in our manifold, i.e. the 4D space-time continuum of classical physics, then a "direction... of space where no force or particle can propagate" does not exist. But if you acknowledge the reality of large extra dimensions, then the term 'exist' should include the space, along with its contents, that are outside our manifold, don't you think? And if the definition is changed to include existence outside our manifold, then "directions of space where no force or particle can propagate" certainly could exist. Of course we would have to agree that the definitions of 'force' and 'particle' mean only those which appear in our manifold. There could certainly be forces, particles, and directions in higher dimensions that are completely inaccessible to us and our instruments because we and our instruments are confined to our manifold.
Guys, I don't think this copernican magnifying thingy will go much further. We need a new paradigm.
All hail the amplituhedron!
Could exist in infinitely small slices of past, present and future at same time. Would allow quantum gravity to be dispersed into three spatial dimensions of each (9 total).
‘Maybe, if, can, would, ... possibly. ‘ Why limit the description only to prior experience? “Gravity ‘lives’ everywhere?...” 👍, good one.
Not sure what smallest measurable slice of time is. Would it be planck time? What is planck time, 10 power -40 or something like? If smallest measurable time is even smaller than planck constant, then even quantum gravity could exist in more than one dimension of time at once.
The smallest measurable amount of time is given by the necessary energy loss of your clock. A clock that has the energy output of a supernova or an active galactic nucleus is not very practical.
Take phase spaces, if indeed the no copy theorem is a good theorem, you need to prove that a phase space of every variable in 3d+t does not enclose all possible phase spaces. Good luck with that 3 is the first number that makes infinite color maps ect. Things change a lot from 2d to 3d that does not change much from 3d to 4d space.
@closer to truth
Almost all videos have bad sound quality. This is quite disappointing though the content quality of the channel is fantastic.
Could you please please fix that?
It is not if there are extra dimensions but WHY WE EVEN ASK ? We feel ourselves to be in a 3 dimensional world so all our HOW, WHERE, WHEN, WHAT, WHY'S are asked
from an awareness of a 3 dimensional world. Einstein said that imagination is more important than just raw knowledge-information. You need to imagine , say,
what is it like to jog around a coin, a penny,,,,In so imagining , you need to BE SMALL so relatively the penny would be a large track My Cat, Mik, is cute, very charmingly cute,
but when I imagine myself to be a small insect or bird, looking UP at my cat, Mik would be this horrible monster.....Imagine !!!
1) How many multiple universes are necessary for every possible tuning to be fine tuned in the right way? 2) How many creators are necessary to do the same? 1) Infinity v's 2) ONE!
Creators, you mean like a higher being capable of creating simulations? But then what created them?
Time doesn't exist so considering time as fourth dimension is negated, next is space and is defined by motion of a body and this is not what one to expect from the mysterious of claiming the existence of fourth dimension. However what has been really forgotten or noticed is the angle beside , length, width, and height, so from this viewpoint then we can call angle is the fourth dimension which without it the other three dimensions are not possible, because it has a tight relation with those threes. One line has two dimensions, two lines has three dimensions , and three lines have four dimensions, now every thing consists of endless combinations of areas, as it is seen in MRI and other technichcs used for seeing through living things and nonliving things.
Very interesting you said that space is defined by a " motion of a body" there's your dimension curve, body of a fish different dimension body of a ant different dimension , body of a human different dimension all do the last mention it find more complicated dimensions, for now i should go back to my rabbit hole and meditate.
SO, because they cant find these dimensions they have to be incredibly tiny and tricky to detect. I'd probably say that about the 3rd dimension if I was a flatland scientist desperate to justfy my 2D world as the practical reality of existence...
Maybe planck volume has three small extra spatial dimensions?
what do you mean big or small dimensions? are you confusing dimension with distance/direction?
When the possible values of a dimension have a max & min, then you can describe that dimension as small or big. In a universe where the third spacial dimension only allows values smaller than 1 nano meter, you will feel as if you live in a flat universe because the third dimension is too small.
The extra dimensions are created by his hand gestures.
If you zoomed into a zero dimensional dot, would it become a three dimensional sphere? If you zoomed into a 1 dimensional line, would it become a fourth dimension shape?
Well if it had zero dimensions it wouldn't exist or be viewable from our dimension
Does the Maths of extra dimensions enter into other Mathematical equations even though we haven't proven they exist?
For example, adding the equation of other dimensions into other mathematical models because it solves a particular problem?
If so then it may kind of describe how the universe works but it would also be based on false information being that the other dimensions haven't been proven wouldn't it?
So in a sense, it wouldn't really be telling you how the universe works in a factual way but rather based off of some kind of thought puzzle and not reality.
If you live in a flat universe and you detect that Mr bean stand and does NOT stand in the same time in the same place, then you either consider absurdity as your way of thought or you let the mathematical equations lead you to consider a third dimension of "UP" where Mr bean stand in the first floor but not in the second.
Yes. Look up the amplituhedron
It's simply not true that string theory predicts 10 dimensions. It's also consistent in 2+1 dimensions. He knows that, of course.
Feinmann gave the example of Aztecs predicting the position of Venus by moving peanuts between three different sized cups.
Accurate to one day in 65,000 years.
Doesn't mean they explained the underlying mechanism.
this is basically that tim and eric sketch, but people think it's real.
Question is CAN YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS GO THERE ? WHATEVER DIMENSION IT IS...?
I’m hoping that the answer is yes
If it is within the same fundamental reality, your consciousness is within it already.
He doesn’t know
He's not pretending to
Give him a break, he knows pretty much everything else. 😉
'branes 💫
*_M theory,_* the second superstring revolution, started by Witten in 1995, combines five string theories (E8 x E8 heterotic, SO(32) heterotic, type I superstring, type IIB superstring, and type IIA superstring) with 11-dimensional supergravity. M theory unifies (1) electric-magnetic duality in four dimensions, (2) strange symmetries of supergravity, (3) the dualities of string theory, and (4) gauge theory dynamics in four dimensions.
💕 ☮ 🌎 🌌
totalfreedom45 really? I thought GellMann and John Wheeler also worked on M theory too!
@@inspiration1883 Edward Witten single-handedly began the second superstring revolution (M theory) at the string theory conference at the University of Southern California on March 13-18, 1995.
@totalfreedom45 And a thousand other amazing things before, after, and WHILE doing that. Ed Witten's intellect is practically superhuman. Even in a casual conversation about anything outside of physics, the sheer cognitive horsepower of his brain is legitimately scary at times - it's the mental equivalent of meeting one of those 6'10" 300lb mixed martial arts champions, you end up scratching your head trying to figure out if you're both REALLY the same species.
What is in these extra dimensions?
Fields. The same as in macroscopic dimensions.
Do you hear him jiggling in the background? It is the laughter of the future. The day is coming where all this will be trashed.
I pick this guy's name for my next D&D wizard character I will play ;-)
Time is not a dimension, nor does it exist except as a human concept in human minds....
Time is that which the clocks show and I have found another person on the internet who doesn't know that. ;-)
Are information and mathematics extra dimensions?
No.
My brain went to a couple different dimensions last night in my sleep.
Prespective of quantum particle, we are a Quantum Universe which exists everywhere to which no law applies.
We can also say this, parallel universe.
Because, parallel means parallel.
________________________________
Thinking is a state of consciousness.
No law applies to thinking.
Thinking means, experiencing.work of consciousness.
We are being experienced from the prespective of consciousness.
Death is no such thing, meaningless event.
After death ? We will find overselves in the whole universe as consciousness.
Because, thinking is a state of consciousness.
At the moment we are experiencing through this body.
Creation has no meaning without experience.
Prespective of consciousness whatever is happening is happening in nothingnes.
Past present future running in nothingness.
Because, no law applies to consciousness.
The universe (form of quantum reyality) is experiencing itself.
_________________________________
Whatever happens in the world is at the will of humans.
Our prayer are fulfilled through God, this too is the thinking of humans.
Prayer=form of think, state of universe.
Those species which are not in the stage of advance intellect, their desires come out in the form of energy, so their desires are fulfilled.
Hunger,sex extra extra...........
Thinking is a state of consciousness.
Please recognize your thinking ability
Well these arguments are very badly subjective, you cannot say such things. Exstra dimentioms should be necessary if we put them in, the problem is that we dont know every possible 3d+t theoretical framework... so solving a problem is kind of redundant reasoning for justifying it.
Holy shit Cisco Ramon is a real person
God did it. It was goood. GOD
Maybe it's because I don't quite understand how I'm supposed to think about it, but I just hate the idea of extra dimensions being these tiny balls of extra dimension stuff, it just seems like such an unimaginative and stupid idea. Maybe I just don't get it at all.
Pentose say that no are such thing.
Penrose is old and his mental decline has been obvious lately.
We're so fascinated by extra dimensions, but no one's talking about the consequences of a two dimensional reality.
Agreed, maybe because theoretically its used to solve basic physics problems (projectiles etc.) already, but on its own is pretty interesting. I mean have we really observed anything that’s truly two dimensional? Not that I know of. The only think I can think of is a shadow, but thats just the absence of light and not a “thing”. Great observation!
Except for the folks who like holography. NEXT!
my brane hurts
io321 🥁
This guy reminds me of vincent vega
this dude was blibbity blabbity about susy and once LHC shows no sign of it after years of run he just says they are wrong LOL.
I don’t know 🤔 he is so cute I can’t concentrate on the subject 🤪
I'm a Physicist by profession and I love mathematics but I think these guys go way too far. Of course you can put space and time together, merge it to a 4dim vector space. The math works very nicely, but that's a mathematical description of the reality, not the reality itself. Space and time are still different things as any child will tell you. Let alone extra-dimensions.
OK, so you are not a physicist and you have no clue about math, either. Why announce that on the internet, though?
When oh when will world renown physicists learn that youtube commentors are much smarter than them.
When the best football players learn that the coach potato spectators play much better than them
That’s why they call the Lord; God Most High. The other celestial beings are no match for him. He is of a higher dimension. This is also why we can’t overcome these wicked spirits in our own strength. They are higher than us.
“what is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and honor.”
Psalms 8:4-5 NIV
We would seem supernatural to a two dimensional being that has no concept of depth.
whiff-whaff
String theorists want to force the universe to fit in their fairy tale.
He is not a string theorist.
I bet this video is totally hilarious to lip-readers and people fluent in sign language.
*Extra Dimensions* = mathematical artifacts of some crackpot physics
@@vids595 A crackpot of first order.
used car salesman.
We all came from an invisible consciousness that cannot be measured. Scientist's need to measure and use mathematics but no measurement or mathematics can explain a thought.
No. We need a huge microscope to see everything.
@@inspiration1883 It's impossible to see everything from one perspective which means whoever is looking through the microscope or telescope. That is one perspective. Try look at the whole tree from one perspective. It would take you an eternity just to see everything in a tree.
"We all came from an invisible consciousness that cannot be measured." Prove it.
The new religion in science.
Aaron
11 Dimensions seem quite supernatural to me, while scientists have spent about half a decade in pursuit of a belief which seems untestable.
This is the belief of the string god.
Aaron
Why are you defending this? Are you hoping that it somehow justifies your worldview? I suppose if it wasn’t for string theory then you won’t have the near infinite landscape which is the the only support you have for a multiverse, which is your only explanation of fine tuning.
I have seen you in many comments. You are so desperate to justify atheism. Good luck with that.