So far, I have learned that we live to the naked eye in four dimensions: 1-D [line], 2-D [square], 3-D [Cube], 4-D [Time]. They say the 5th, 6th, and so-on have shrinked to a very [and I mean "very" small size].
In "The Universe in a nutshell" by Stephen Hawking, I read this:
"To The naked eye a hair looks like a line; its only dimension appears to be length. Similarly, spacetime may look four-dimensional to us, but appear ten- or eleven-dimensional when probed with very high-energy particles."
What will appear when we probe those ten- or eleven-dimensions, my guess is "more dimensions". It seems that the dimensions will not end, there will always be some new dimension to discover.
2006-07-13 07:15:05 · 9 answers · asked by German M 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
These dimensions cannot be traversed like the three well known spatial dimensions can. The primary use of these dimensions is to unify forces and explain why gravity is so weak in comparison to electromagnetism and the nuclear forces.
2006-07-13 07:19:27 · answer #1 · answered by MeteoMike 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, a lot of people contest "time" as being a dimension. Time is simply our perception of changes relative to us at any given moment. But it isn't a physical thing. A lot of physicists seem to think time is a physical property of something. I mean you can't say that something is 5 meters tall, two metars wide, 4 meters long and 10 minutes... long? (There is no conversion between time and physical length, so it really doesn't make sense to make an extra "dimension." We should limit our math to what is physically and observable. Math is descriptive in some form, but it doesn't mean that he model is HOW THINGS HAPPEN. IT's just a way to evaluate certain statistics about it. And we still have to verify the math against what actually happens, which astronomers and physicists don't seem to do anymore)
Time isn't a physical dimension. Time simply measures over what interval three physical dimensions change. So, we really shouldn't confuse the issues.
Hawking was dumb when he said that. When we look at a thing it doesn't look 4-dimensional. It LOOKS three dimensions. We can't SEE time. TIME is not a physical thing. We SEE three dimensions (length, width, height), and somehow perceive that those dimensions can change occasionally.
Math investigating extra dimensions is just a theoretical exercise, and doesn't describe anything we know to be physically real. IT was just someone said, hmm, we see 3 dimensions, but we also want to describe how they change over time, so let's make that a 4th dimension. Ohh wait, how do we show that on a 2D piece of paper? Ohh darn! But wait, what if we for the sake of argument went with 5 dimensions. Well, heck if we can have 5 dimensions why not a billion dimensions. The math will be impossible and not correlate to anything we actually experience, but hey, who's counting?
2006-07-13 07:28:30 · answer #2 · answered by Michael Gmirkin 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure that Gmirkin's ideas are completely correct because as far as I know we still use Einstein's relativity laws for modern physics and this means that space and time are not separate quantities as he assumes by making his comments about dimensions. I don't mean this as a stab at him in any way, but I wouldn't want the person asking the question to be discouraged by such an answer. Anyway, many answers have come from science and physics that have helped show that there seem to be more concrete answers about the universe than ignorant comments about god creating everything, and maybe as we learn more about these "concrete" issues we can learn to work together as a human race and continue our quest for knowledge out into space instead of fighting amongst each other here on earth until our planet is a piece of charcoal orbiting the sun.
2006-07-13 15:02:53 · answer #3 · answered by Thomas P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
After 4 it is meaningless to have dimensions. They cant be mutually exclusive dimensions. An example is color
There are only 3 basic colors Mutually exclusive. But we have green, yellow and so on. They are derived form the 3 Base colors. Similarly the other dimensions are derived from the basic 4
2006-07-13 07:18:25 · answer #4 · answered by Dr M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
According to the String Theory, there are 12 dimensions. We don't have to worry. We live in a 4 D world and can very well exist in a higher dimensional one as well.
2006-07-13 07:21:49 · answer #5 · answered by ag_iitkgp 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
dimensions is a term describing proportion and the relationship of descibable entities the entities that surround us and we are a part of... openings in time space plus there are the dimensions of mechanics that produce perspective let there allways be love and curiosity for the universe p.s. time is the study of coordinate motion might help you height width and depth 1st dimension motion within and around 1st dimension is second dimension this includes the dimensions of motion i personally haven't been able to prove that there is a third dimension let alone a fourth 'third dimension appears to be all perspective on first two p.s.2 gmirkin hit on a good point with h*t*w + long ,statement what if area + motion along coordinates equals travel travel of object being consistent with ordinate velocities and distances
2006-07-13 07:35:48 · answer #6 · answered by Book of Changes 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem, in a nutshell, is that no matter how many dimensions are recognizable, we are able to move about in only 4 of them.
2006-07-13 07:23:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe there are infinite dimensions. We are only able to comprenhend a few. As our knowledge expands, so will more dimensions review to us.
2006-07-13 07:28:22 · answer #8 · answered by galactic_man_of_leisure 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
one use i CAN think of offhand is verification of formulas and also find the units of constants
2006-07-13 07:36:47 · answer #9 · answered by raj 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋