pin size point

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) :ssmile: :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol2: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :roll: :wink: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen:
View more smilies
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: pin size point

by harry » Mon Jan 02, 2006 12:41 am

The funny thing is that we use maths and other ideas to make things fit to a model we want and believe in.

At this particular point in time many cosmoligist sare re thinking alot of the past evidence and observations with a new eye of thoughts.

When the dust settles within the next few years many changes and new theories will be born.



Have a nice Day

by Empeda2 » Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:29 pm

I think in string/M-theory, the points is that these other dimensions are too 'small' for us to see - they use some kind of analogy involving an ant walking on a wire but I can't remember it.... :!: ....*ahem* Anyone?.....

by harry » Fri Dec 23, 2005 11:22 pm

Yes I understand x,y,z and time.

I'm speaking of another dimension existing at the same time.

When time is equal to zero. Now

by S. Bilderback » Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:26 pm

The other dimensions are also need to explain quantum mechanics.

by Empeda2 » Fri Dec 23, 2005 12:30 pm

Well for a start Harry, we definitely live in a 4 dimensional world - x,y,z and time.....

The dimensions are implied by the maths.

by harry » Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:48 am

I can understand 3 dimensiions.

But!!!!!!!!! why do people want to bring more dimensions into a discussion.

by BMAONE23 » Tue Dec 20, 2005 5:45 pm

I think that 11 is a good presumed number (as good as any other) but better than some as it is the first two digit prime number and it is the number 3 in binary counting (also prime) which is the number of known physical dimensions (x,y,z) to plot a point in space.

by S. Bilderback » Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:02 pm

That is right but I prefer the logic of 11, maybe because 11 is hard enough, 27 is too much for me. :shock:

The extra dimensions are also convenient, a place where that X/0 and the square root of (-1) can get us to. :wink:

by Empeda2 » Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:32 pm

gordhaddow wrote: Actually, there is at least one theory out there that assumes 27 dimensions
That's very true - though I was thinking more of the theories that have many followers - but indeed, whatever the number of dimensions, we are stuck in our percepted 4.... :(

by harry » Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:15 pm

I think those thoughts have gone with the wind

by gordhaddow » Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:47 pm

Empeda2 wrote:The problem is that everything we see around us and study is in the 4-dimensional world. If some of the current theories are correct, and there could be as many as 11 dimensions (not that I'm qualified at all to say if/how correct they are!), .....
Actually, there is at least one theory out there that assumes 27 dimensions

by Empeda2 » Mon Dec 19, 2005 4:45 pm

The problem is that everything we see around us and study is in the 4-dimensional world. If some of the current theories are correct, and there could be as many as 11 dimensions (not that I'm qualified at all to say if/how correct they are!), there's nothing stopping and contraction in our dimension, since it could be supported in others.

I think the point is that we don't know! Hawkins recently suggested that as you get closer to a massive crunch (i.e. going back in time towards the bang) the time dimension becomes more and more spatial, so maybe there isn't a t=0...

There's also a load of other theories involving energy membranes at higher dimension colliding and causing it all.

You could also argue that our entire universe is nothing but a quantum fluctuation - my personal favourite as it means that there's no point to it all! :)

more dimensions

by SpacemanLou » Mon Dec 19, 2005 4:36 pm

I'm curious as to how more dimensions make a difference. Could you elaborate on how more dimensions would effect it?? I'd really appreciate it.

by Empeda2 » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:40 pm

harry wrote:Smile,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you are 110% right
In four dimensions yes... but not in more.

by harry » Sun Dec 18, 2005 7:20 am

Smile,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you are 110% right

pin size point

by SpacemanLou » Sun Dec 18, 2005 4:54 am

Ok, this may seem slightly "out there", but that's why we're here right? Why would the universe start from a so called "pin sized point"?? If it was the only thing out there wouldn't it be the biggest and smallest thing there is? Kinda infinite?? oh and to add to that, why would it have to explode/expand for anything to occur?

Top