Is there more than the 3rd Dimension? (Discussion)

[Andrew A]

If I was to take a line, that would be considered to be the first dimension, only travelling in its designated position. Vertical or Horizontal. If I was to take this line and stack them one against another I would create a plane. The second dimension, a point would be able to travel vertical and horizontal. Now if I was to take all of these planes and stack them on top of one another I would create a Prism, the third dimension. Where a point can travel on the y-axis, x-axis and z-axis. But if I was to take this cube and stake it on top of another cube again and again, wouldn't I as well get a line? So what is really the fourth dimension? As there is no new axis created due to the same principles coming into effect. This can also be seen up to fifth dimension, for example, if I was to take this line of cubes and place them on top or next to each other i would just create a bigger plane.

Thanks for reading this, any feedback is highly appreciated.

[ajb]

The problem is that you are thinking rather extrinsically. You have a (straight) line in what ambient space? Maybe [math]\mathbb{R}^{3}[/math]?

 

You are not going to build higher dimensional spaces by looking at subspaces of one that is smaller.

[Nicholas Kang]

What you are saying is actually Hinton`s Cube. Hinton`s Cube is actually one way to visualize higher dimensions by using the analogy you had posted. However, we, humans, are born into his world with 3-dimension judgement. Usually, we only feel length, width and height. Our common sense tells us this piece of information is enough for us to articulate this world. However, we lack the time dimension. By using time as an additional tool, which is the fourth dimension, we can thus write history and keep information flowing from the past to the present. This is done by Einstein in his masterpiece, the General Relativity, which takes time into consideration when dealing with physical quantities like length, mass and time itself.

 

So, according to GR, mass-energy affects space-time. Time, the fourth dimension, might has its geometry altered, just like what we do in our 3D world. We don`t realize it because we are not living at the maximum speed of light in vacuum, c. Only atomic clocks, flying rockets and massless particles running in space, particle accelerators and laboratories reveal the truth of nature.

 

Talking about the plane you mentioned, I agree that the analogy and visualization is good but practically, you are not going to step on it. Really, I mean with current technology. To create such dimension, or more accurately, to traverse through such a high dimension, you need enormous energy, negative energy, which are found on Earth but in trace amount. Do you know about the Casimir Effect? Then you probably know negative energy well. According to some non-fiction articles (but quite technical), negative energy is actually used to stabilize the wormhole, which connects different dimensions. With enough negative energy, you may keep the wormhole open, and presto! You may now travel on the cosmic highway.

 

Also, have you heard of Kaluza-Klein`s Theory or Superstring Theory? They deal with hyperdimensions too. The plane might go infinite. You could have continued stacking one on another to infinity. But if I recalled correctly, only 10 dimensions are needed to describe all 4 fundamental forces in nature. Currently, 3 forces have been united under Quantum Mechanics, leaving the "stubborn" gravity in the realm of general relativity. However, to quantize gravity is no easy task. You can`t just simply attribute a particle for gravity and name it gravitons. In fact, gravitons are not yet found. Contrary to GR, quantum mechanics allow probabilities to exist when Heisenberg`s Uncertainty Principle kicks in. You can`t say gravity exist here but not there. And unlike electromagnetic field, universal gravitational field results in the collapsing of the universe. So, most theoretical physicists speculate superstring theory is the last option, or maybe not (if you are the next Einstein?)

[ajb]

But if I recalled correctly, only 10 dimensions are needed to describe all 4 fundamental forces in nature.

Well, supersting theory says that a single quantum string can only be formulated consistently in 10 dimensions. This is then taken as saying that we must have 10 dimensions for string theory to work. This is only true if isolated strings are a sensible limit of the full theory; quantum interacting strings can be formulated in non-critical dimensions.

[HadronsOnSteroids]

One of my friends told me that-

 

1d -----------------------length

 

2d -----------------------heght

 

3d------------------------width

 

4d- ----------------------space

 

5d -----------------------time

 

ect. is this true?

[Delta1212]

Generally, time is considered the 4th dimension. Space isn't really a separate dimension. The first three dimensions are the spacial dimensions and the fourth is the temporal dimension.

[Strange]

One of my friends told me that-

 

1d -----------------------length

 

2d -----------------------heght

 

3d------------------------width

 

4d- ----------------------space

 

5d -----------------------time

 

ect. is this true?

 

1D = length

2D = area (length x height)

3D = space or volume (length x height x width)

4D = space-time (space + time)