Re: Imagining the Tenth Dimension

Hi. Let me say this as clearly as I can. This is a science fiction
discussion group, and I am in absolutely no way pretending or claiming
to be a physicist. What I have created is a mind-expanding exercise
which people enjoy watching because it gives them a new way of
imagining something which they previously probably could not have.
Physicists say our reality is created in ten spatial dimensions, and my
"new way of imagining" the ten dimensions arrives at the same
conclusion using a methodology which is different from the one embraced
by modern science. Some people feel a strong affinity for the ideas I
present, and some people will not, but thats all I'm trying to do: this
is a discussion of ideas. I include a "Preamble" link on my site and at
the start of the book which makes it very clear that these animations
do not present the viewpoint of mainstream physics, and which points
people to the popular books from string theory experts such as Kaku,
Greene and Randall... with the hope that my flight of fancy will have
tweaked some people's interest in learning more about this fascinating
topic.

Thanks for asking this important question. I thought this was clear
enough already, but I definitely do not want to appear to be misleading
anyone here.

Rob

ewoh27@xxxxxxx wrote:
Rob wrote:
By insisting that time is a full spatial dimension that the one-way
chemical processes of our bodies force us to experience in a
deceivingly limited way, I have a way to then get to a version of the
tenth dimension which I believe ties a lot of different schools of
thought together: not just in science, but in questions of
consciousness, memes, and spirituality, and the relationship between
free will and quantum indeterminacy.



Uh oh. Red flags pop up. I choose to ask: what are your physics
credentials? Are you a Ph.D. string theorist?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: the two slits versus schrodingers cat
    ... >>2) Experimental physics has nothing to do with applied physics. ... > view from which we can define the goals of science), ... only *very* little) to do with adding dimensions ("very little" because ... that - just the math. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: the two slits versus schrodingers cat
    ... > 2) Experimental physics has nothing to do with applied physics. ... view from which we can define the goals of science), ... dimensions to dimensions to dimensions it *looks like* we're able to unify 2 ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Is physics a science?
    ... science and technology. ... It is whatever physics wants it to be. ... >>>aether would do, as long as it has certain basic properties, and test ... >> physicists to explain it to them. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult? [ scientific methods ]
    ... > That may be true for your science, and for some possibly Post Modernist ... of physics are like that eg the law of conservation of energy is no more ... should not be used - its context is not well defined. ... >> training but not of the type used in philosophy which is along the lines ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult? [ scientific methods ]
    ... > That may be true for your science, and for some possibly Post Modernist ... of physics are like that eg the law of conservation of energy is no more ... should not be used - its context is not well defined. ... >> training but not of the type used in philosophy which is along the lines ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)