MacroQuantum Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 This may not be the place for this, but I had a hard time decided where it would appropriately be placed. As I understand it, current theory has it that reality is made up of 11 different dimensions (don't ask me what they are). Does this imply that in order for any object to exist that it touchs on all 11 dimensions, or are some objects not related to the other dimensions (strings for example). In other words, if an object exists in the basic 4 dimensions (3 of space and 1 of time) then must it also touch on the others? Or would it be possible to have and object that exists only in the other 8 dimensions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattd Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 when talking about dimensions higher than time, there are theories that these non visible dimensions are ultra small (sub atomic) and tightly coiled up. keep in mind these are only theories. the idea is that the components of all subatomic particles interact in some form with each of these dimensions, just as everything we see has 4 dimensional qualities. we never encounter any form of matter that has less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timo Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 As I understand it, current theory has it that reality is made up of 11 different dimensions ... Standard physics is 4D. There are theories ("attempts of theories" fits better, I think) having more dimensions than four but it´s not nessecarily eleven. Afaik, none of those approaches with additional dimensions have any experimental evidence, yet. Eleven dimensions is the minimum for String Theories with Supersymmetry, if I remember that correctly. Don´t know about the rest of your questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacroQuantum Posted January 3, 2006 Author Share Posted January 3, 2006 Eleven dimensions is the minimum for String Theories with Supersymmetry' date=' if I remember that correctly.[/quote'] My apologies I was assuming that what's-his-name's book (don't have it handy right now) was the commonly accepted theory. But it did talk about string theory, so I imagine that is why he used 11. So given current theory, the Sci-Fi standard of Hyperspace and Faster Than Light Travel are impossible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Faster than light travel is always impossible. But it might be theoretically possible to take a shortcut across other dimensions, in the form of "wormholes." If there are, in fact, all these other dimensions, it might be possible that 3D space is "folded," in much the way a 2D plane could be folded in 3D space. If a 2D person in that folded 2D plane was able to travel in the third dimension, he could travel a short distance and show up far away on the 2D plane by moving between touching points on different folds of his plane. It's still probably just sci-fi, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now