English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Forget about the spacetime continumium theory of 3 spacial and 1 temporal (time dimension). I`am referring to the 3 spacial dimensions up-down, left-right, forward-back.
Length, Width, Height..etc. I see no reason to believe that space itself is 3 dimensional do you? People believe that space is 3 dimensional because matter and motion through space is 3 dimensional. This does not prove that space itself is 3D.
1- Thinking on a sub-atomic level.There`s 3 attractions. Proton attracts to Nuetron. Neutron acts as a medium attraction to hold Protons to nuclues b/c protons are postively charged and would repel each hneger. Electron(neg) attracts to Proton(pos) but it kept at bay by nuetron.
2-Sub-atomic particles are the building blocks of all matter in the universe.
3.Matter and motion is 3d b/c if matter could move all directions at once it would break attractions which bind matter.
4.Hence, motion/matter up-down left-right is 3d.
5.There is no evidence space is 3 dimesnional.

2007-06-11 15:46:48 · 10 answers · asked by Future 5 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

Fyi... I`am not a bullheaded thinker. If u can explain to me why space is 3d i will consider this to be an increase in my understand not a negation to my theory.

Almostblacksky- Good answer, but if space and matter are 1 then what seperates matter from matter?

2007-06-11 16:06:41 · update #1

Lindajune- Whats to say space has any dimension. Maybe space is dimensionless?

2007-06-11 16:08:41 · update #2

10 answers

That is incorrrect. Space itself is 3-dimensional...and here's why...

The established binders of subatomic science render
themselves as conversely relational when exposed to physics
that effect temporal integrity, such as quantum foam. This converse relationship to the matter WITHIN space, proves that the "skin" or "containment unit" if you will, of the matter itself (i.e. space) is not apart from the matter, but rather, part OF the matter, and that the illusion of extraneous relation to that therein is just that; an illusion, caused chiefly by our psychological tendency as people to seek Absolute Physical Bounds in order to contextualize infinity (see earth-as-square from generations past)...your question was a good one, but since the early 1980's, the emerging data derived chiefly from quantum-mechanics have debunked the duality of space and matter, and have showed them to be a single cosmological "organism" if you will, for which our minds seek a nonexistence bound to, and hence, render space subconciously, somehow different from matter. I hope this answers your question friend.

2007-06-11 15:58:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Good question. I've often thought about how the atom and it's structure resembles a solar system. Is our universe like that atom, only a part of a minuscule dot in another even larger space?

I know a person can drive themselves crazy thinking about this stuff but it's our ability of ponder these questions is what sets us apart from animals.

It's hard for a being in a three dimensional existence to understand any more dimensions. Imagine the universe before the Big Bang. Total nothingness right? Can we describe nothingness as having dimensions? It's a void, NADA! Does that void only get dimensions when something is introduced into it?

I need a Tylenol.

Eric

2007-06-11 16:18:48 · answer #2 · answered by ericbryce2 7 · 1 0

In Space you are not dealing with height, width, and depth as you are on Earth.

You are on a point with travel possible in 360 degrees of direction, and 360 degrees of elevation (even if some of those are duplicates of each other), and it is assumed that you wish to go somewhere, so distance is the third dimension.
Azimuth = 1
Elevation = 2
Distance = 3

And, since all things in Space are moving somehow, some way, Time is the other relative factor.

You choose to visit Haley's Comet, for example. It will do you no good at all to travel where it is now. What you must do is travel where it will be when you get there. So time is the fourth measurement in space travel that is essential. You might get the idea if you considered shooting at a bird in flight...Never hit it if the gun is pointed at the bird. You must lead the bird some so that the bullet gets there about the same time as the bird does.

Time = 4

2007-06-11 16:32:33 · answer #3 · answered by zahbudar 6 · 1 0

I am no pro but here is what i think. People tend to view space as 3 dimensional partly because like you stated travel through space is 3 dimensional. When you say space do you mean the Interstellar medium? Or the void? If you are speaking of Interstellar medium then i would have to think that "space" is 3-D as even though they are very widely spaced.. hehe.. in space there are ions and atoms and molecules of dust et cetera. So there would be length, width , and height between those pieces of matter. I guess if you mean the void between galaxies or whatever, then since it consists basically of nothing then , can "nothing" have dimensions? Probably not, so that would mean space was not 3 -D? Then of course if we got into Dark matter and who knows what else is out there yet undiscovered then we may change our opinions? Hope that made sense.

zahbudar below explains it much better kudos!

2007-06-11 16:03:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Things don't "have" dimensions. Dimensions are a method of describing a location.

Picture a line. You want to tell me about a certain point on the line; how do you do that? Well, first I have to know about one point; we call that the origin, or 0. Unless I know that, we're out of luck. We also have to agree on some unit of measurement. Now, you can tell me all about your point just by telling me how far and what direction it is from the origin; it's at -5 (five units to the left), or +9 (nine to the right), or something.

Now on a piece of paper, we need to add another number; we'll call it "up." Now you need two numbers to tell me where your point is; it's at 5,-1 (five up and one to the left).

Take it out into space, now; we need a third number, which we can call "out" (from the paper we know all about). 6,3,-9; six up, three to the right, and nine back from the paper.

Since we can describe everything in space in terms of the three numbers, we say that space "has" three dimensions, or "is" three-dimensional. What we really mean is, everything we need to know about something in space can be defined by those three dimensions; up, over, out. When we realized that time was important too, we started calling time the "fourth dimension", so we could describe WHEN something was three down, four over, and two out.

If we find something about nature that requires another number, we'll say that space has five dimensions.

That's all there is to it. Just a mathematical construct.

2007-06-12 03:34:48 · answer #5 · answered by pob14 4 · 2 0

We live in a 4-dimensional world. (3 spatial dimensions + space) and we don't see the 3d earth as flat. Your statement is based on no evidence.

2016-04-01 02:51:53 · answer #6 · answered by Kathleen 4 · 0 0

There are facts and there is speculation. We can all see and measure the obvious 3 dimensions so that is why everyone believes there are 3. Any other dimensions are currently only theory and spring from advanced mathematically models of the universe. We get a glimmer of something beyond the obvious but so far there is no proof which makes it speculation. Your 1, 2, and 3 are factoids unrelated to dimensions beyond 3. You can't think your way to the truth in this case - it's far to complex and beyond normal perception and experience.

2007-06-11 16:57:10 · answer #7 · answered by Michael da Man 6 · 0 1

Good point. But does it really matter - we and everything else moves in space as though it had 3 dimensions. If space doesn't have 3 dimensions, how many does it have?

2007-06-11 15:52:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

A very strong gravity well would bend light around it so the light would be closer to you but not traveling towards you but around the well.

It's one of the theories behind cloaking.

A star BEHIND a solid object. You bend the light half way around the object so you can see the star, even though it's eclipsed by the object.

2007-06-11 16:46:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Red bull and physics don't mix.

2007-06-11 15:50:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers