Science Forums 2

[Jway]

Originally Posted by Boerseun

But then it struck me that even in a one-dimensional universe, time would be required for two lines to interact.

You are adding in the "interact" part, no? Just to display two intersecting lines, why would (external) time be required?

However you want to experience an n-dimensional world, time is required.

Again, you are adding in the "you want to experience" aspect to the equation. For existence of n-dimension, time is not required. For experience of n-dimension, perhaps (I'd say likely) time is a requirement.

Part of me is pleased as punch you are setting things up the way you are here, as it strikes me how (human) science actually works. Observer adds dimension and phenomenal input to the testable hypothesis, thus changing or influencing the study, unless categorically denying own influence.

But as I understand dimensions and cartesian coordinates, it doesn't assume "experience" and anything beyond this is how things have always appeared in this dimension. Things always appears as single point in the single point dimension and not the point came into being and then is subject to interaction and decimation by the environment.

Information about anything and everything cannot breach the speed of light, in other words, it takes time.

I'm not advanced on theory of relativity and physics, probably not even intermediate in this discipline, but my novice mind is under impression that there is 'communication' that occurs at speeds observed as apparently faster than speed of light. If this is not so, and/or one can update me about this, please do so (in layman terms). Essentially, I thought 2 particles appearing a distance away, have been observed to 'communicate' in way that would be faster than speed of light.

I don't know if this undoes the conclusive statement above - "it takes time" but perhaps that's another discussion.

So a one-dimensional universe cannot be perceived by a one-dimensional observer in the absence of time.

As interesting as I find that, it seems like some logical fallacy at work. I think it's introducing "observe" into equation. How about "exists" as the criteria for one dimensional universe (assumption)?

My far reaching mind thinks that what your point is saying, is like also saying, "a three dimensional universe cannot be observed without judgment by a three dimensional being, in the absence of Spirit."

And I would recognize the "without judgment" part would be my nifty little addition to the assertion, which may be accurate, but may be argued as - is it necessary for say empirical data collection and utilization?

But if Time is indeed the first dimension, being fundamental, it seems as if Time has to exist before any of the other dimensions can unfold. And that the other dimensions (or their existence) is impossible in the absence of Time...

If there are dimensions beyond time (beyond the 4 which we tend to mentally construct reality into), then it would seem like whatever is the "highest" dimension, would be the most fundamental from which the others unfold. I realize there's like around 10 to 11 'known' dimensions based on theory.

Single point dimension strikes me as mental construct to convey understanding, and not a hypothesis that such an universe exists. You might think that we could extrapolate from this idea that 3 or 4 dimensional (only) universe doesn't actually exist, even while we may at times insist this is all we experience. Since we are still coming to terms with dimensions and understanding environment, you might think that what we think we have experienced, isn't actually "all that has been going on" at any given instant. (Oops, there's that time reference again.)

I suppose a lot of interesting conclusions can be drawn from this. For instance, if Time is indeed fundamental, it would imply that Time alone can merrily exist in the absence of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th dimensions - but that none of those dimensions are possible in the absence of time...

Thoughts?

This subject fascinates me for philosophical and spiritual reasons for long time now. And recently, with advent of virtual globes (like Google Earth), it interests me a bit more. Currently, on a more massive level, we experience virtual globes as if 'real time' is not part of the scene (there). But more and more, I see time being introduced into that virtual environment, and so I can see why time is considered 4th dimension. When virtual globes become truly immersive, rather than crude renditions we have now, I feel we will have collectively gone beyond 4th dimension. Perhaps not, but it seems to me that not only will it be a different mental construct, it will be an active way to experience alternative construct of physical reality. Elevate our consciousness really.

Thanks for opportunity to share my thoughts,
Jway