I`m sorry but this is total assumption, you cannot make a rule using only one circumstance, in this case the circumstance being 3d, therefore any thinking about 4d is a complete and utter load of poo.

Patchouly, actually this is a description of the fourth spatial dimension. As shaboinkin said, there are at least 11 spatial dimensions according to string theory. We live in a 3 spatial dimension world with a time dimension. It is true we have a fourth dimension that is time, but it`s not a spatial dimension. That`s why it`s called time AND space.

i did a poject on this last week!!! @ patchouly time IS the fourth dimension but in the title it clearly says SPATIAL dimension so no time is not the 4th spatial dimension

A book called Hyperspace is much, much better at explaining it. This explaination, while accurate, used hard-to-follow examples and images. It could have (and has been) done better.

Funny, you`ve got spatial dimensions as well then? I know there are 10 dimensions, and that the fourth did indeed include motion, not time necessarily. Whatever.

snoop dawg it compares 2d and 3d so you can understand it. All dimensions are related through patterns. ie 1d line has 2 points 2d square has 4 points 3d cube has 8 points

RiotDX: time certainly is a spatial dimension, at least from a 4th dimensional point of view. In this video, the creepy voice describes how a 4D entity would see a 3D space as a series, showing differences (the cube being manipulated). Although the video doesn`t state it explicitly, it is understood that by seeing each state in the progression, the 4D entity would be seeing the progression of time simply as different points on a plane (a spatial perception). Where it gets interesting is when you consider how many points there must be, as time is continuous and can be subdivided quite a lot. That, my friends, is why we have Planck time!

*this lecture brought to you by Scientific American and too much time on my hands*

Absolutely amazing description of what a 4th dimensional being would see and do. Also Kaagan, you`re an idiot. There are an infinite # of dimensions, look at vector calculus for proof.

O.k. I lasted for 4min and 55s before the voice got to me. Also I was completely confused.

Why couldn`t they just have a regular person narrate the video? Surely easier than the fake voice thing.

On a side note the pop-ups are horrible i-a-b. Don`t you love us anymore? If I didn`t have the wonderful AdBlocker on Firefox I would be seriously annoyed.

I love i-a-b, the site kicks ass but don`t ruin it with pop-ups that just sucks...

In fairness I don`t suffer too much habbazoot, only when I have to use I.E. when I`m not on my own P.C. where I only ever use F.F., AdBlocker is great and I don`t know how I managed before I got it :-)

The fourth dimension is easy to comprehend, its all mathematical. What people have trouble with is visualization. A 2 dimensional creature would see variations in the form of a line and perceive 2 dimensional depth, we see variations in the form of a 2d plane and perceive 3 dimensional depth. The next logical step up would be to see the word 3 dimensionally and perceive fourth dimensional depth, which is nearly impossible to imagine.

What if what we perceive as a timeline might actually be 4d+ 4d-? Is that essentially time travel? You occupy the same space as this 4d creature in the third dimension but not in the fourth deminsion.

Now if only this were actually anywhere close to correct. We already know what the fourth dimension is, and can physically see it every day. Time. The fourth dimension is nothing more than flowing time, or more correctly termed, a ripple in the third dimension. It is true that we can see only cross sections of this fourth dimension, as the video said, for seeing all of the fourth dimension would mean you would see every one of the 2,524,608,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 instants of your lifetime (For a person living to be 80 years of age) Yes, this is the true figure, the average number of the smallest possible measurable time intervals (attoseconds) is that number. You would see the instant you were born to the instant you died and live every moment at that time. I could go into explanations of higher dimensions, but http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks... does it better than I can.

aren`t we kind of arbitrarily assigning dimensions numbers? couldn`t we say time is the fifth dimension if we wanted too? is there some rhyme or reason to these numbers, or am i just completely wrong?

Xithor, taking theelgeth and your points further, if there were a fourth (or higher) dimensional being (or beings). Wouldn`t they be theoretically omnipresent? A scientific explanation of what people say a god is? Life and the universe as we know it could all just be some other dimensional video game.

Not exactly, face. Don`t look at the term `dimension` as another `world`, per se. A common misconception.

Height, width, and depth are dimensions, remember. An easy way to look at it is that difference between 2D and 3D is the addition of depth to the picture. You couldn`t have an object with only height and depth -- it`s progressive.

Peloos, theoretically, any being in the fourth dimension would omniscient of this dimension, and by many peoples` standards would probably be considered a "god". However, for a truly omniscient or omnipotent "god" to be real, it would have to be a being from the tenth dimension, a being able to see all possible realities of all possible universes in all possible timelines, whereas a being in the fourth dimension would only be able to the timeline that exists in this exact universe.

So if this was true, everything we see could just be a shadow of a 4D object. But if we can touch it I suppose it would have to be 3D. Unless we`re only touching a slice of it... weird.

Perhaps, but not likely. You`d have to impose additional assumptions on this framework - perhaps including a connection between a 4th (or higher) dimension, and death.

A better way to say it MIGHT be to state that "IF ghosts are 3D cross-sections of 4D beings, that would not be inconsistent with ghosts being able to appear and disappear at will - because they would simply be traveling within the 4D space and outside our field of view."

blackbird7: "So if this was true, everything we see could just be a shadow of a 4D object. But if we can touch it I suppose it would have to be 3D. Unless we`re only touching a slice of it... weird."

See Plato`s Allegory of the Cave for an introduction.

I`m not sure from where the posts focusing on a "tenth dimension" come. So far, no falsifiable hypothesis has been tested and shown to be consistent with a fixed number of dimensions. Most physicists agree that higher dimensionality field theory is a promising avenue but it has its limitations, too. In particular, there`s no way to impose a maximum on the number of dimensions since it`s probably true that any such space could be embedded in a higher-dimensional space (this is not guaranteed, but is "highly likely").

Visualizations such as the one in this video are difficult IMO. This one does a decent job but I think the creators went to far in the inferences. They should have just stuck to explaining higher-dimensional space and left any implications out.

Xithor: "Peloos, theoretically, any being in the fourth dimension would omniscient of this dimension, and by many peoples` standards would probably be considered a "god"."

I disagree. Imagine you (as a 3D being) were able to view a VERY LARGE 2D plane - say... the size of the field in a large stadium. Many many many small 2D beings (say, ants... though not technically 2D, this will suffice) are walking on/in this 2D surface. Just because you were able to interact in a higher dimensional space doesn`t mean you`re omniscient. It just means you have a different perspective. In this example, you may be able to see the ants from "above" - implying that you may even be able to see more ants than if you were 2D. But this would be far from omniscience.

Simbha, it is true that there is no fixed number of dimensions, but our reasonable understanding means that we can conjecture what the first ten dimensions /should/ be, but we are not trluy sure that we are correct. As others have already stated, the string theory goes on to try to explain what the eleventh dimension might be, but as we can only perceive four dimensions, we cannot imagine anything besides our three spacial dimensions and time, much as is explained in Plato`s Allegory of the Cav as you suggested. Therefore we can only imagine that the highest imaginable dimension would be all spaces throughout all possible times, even though the fifth dimension could possibly be something besides all timelines, which would throw all of our theories out the proverbial door. So true, there is no fixed number of dimensions, but as three dimensional beings perceiving a four dimensional reality, we can only imagine the first ten and theorize an eleventh.

I know that "omniscient" was not the right word to use, but it was the best for me to say that any being in the fourth dimension could possible perceive any point of the third dimension that they wanted, and many people would consider any being able to see and know everything to be something along the lines of "omniscient".

There is an unspoken--as well as incorrect--assumption here that because a measurement device, acting in essence as a transducer, operates in only two dimensions (such as our eyes), it constrains the interpretation of the output it generates.

Simply put, a processor`s computation power is not linked to the data stream running into it. It is intrinsic; likewise, humans have the capability of thinking and analyzing in three dimensions, even though they can only technically percieve visually in two of them.

And P.S., for those of you looking for a `testable hypothesis`...are you serious? This is clearly a theory, and is stated as such. NOT as fact. Once we are able to test and even prove the existence of a higher dimension, we (and listen carefully here) have the technology to prove/disprove GOD.

And, perhaps more interestingly, INTERACT with God.

This was very interesting to watch for me, as i am currently writing a fiction book which deals with the 4th dimension (and a few more after that) so i am no stranger to trying to get my head around a feasible explanation for higher dimensions.

Despite this, however, my head is still hurting from trying to understand this one.

Sorry, but I disagree strongly. Please define time and you will find it`s pretty much impossible. We think of things in causal ways, but this is not indicative of any order, or of time. Before us, there was no time. No one to think of it. Because, there is no time. It`s just an illusion.

The most commonly repeated mistake in Science. Time is Dimension *1* not 4, an idea, for example, has no physical width, height or depth, but it has a duration. The dimensions therefore are:

(1) Duration; (2) Length; (3) Width; (4) Height

This is why time travel will always be impossible - you can only travel in 4D space; you can`t, for example, travel along a line which has only duration and length, but width and height are 0.

Lionhart, That`s Not correct. the 3 dimensions are x, y, and z. x being left and right, y being up and down, z being forward and backward (relatively speaking). the 4th dimension really is Time. Think about it. We (being 3 dimensional objects) can only time one point at a time. We can`t move freely through time. We subjectively move in one direction through it. If you think of the 4th dimension as time and watch the video again, it all works and is consistent with what we perceive.

It just gets kind of weird when you think about drawing in time.

"so then some 4-d guy watches me masturbate!?!" just what i thought first xD BUT! i, as a 3D being have never seen a real 2d thing, so i doubt that 4d things would be able to see us..

hellz yeah i always thought about not only being able to move up down left right back fowards.. but also in and out. say if i go 4d+ i start appearing to get bigger and disfigured a bit till i dissapear completely and 4d- i get smaller vice versa.

the best example was the vision one. How we can only see things that fill up a 2D area, and we cannot see through things (lets just say everything is opaque), but a 4D entity can see past these opaque objects and see the things behind them. I surprised i got it, considering im only 17 and i don`t take physics!

I think that dimension 1 is just a line- if you work backwards from their definition of dimension 3= an infinite number of planes laid on top of each other, then 2-d must be an infinite number of lines laid side-by-side. Maybe? I don`t think that ideas have duration. How can you mark when an idea starts? And if you believe that there is no original thought, then all ideas have existed since the beginning of time, and they will end at the end of time. And Time as the 4th dimension is not really what the video is talking about- it fits well, but this is one of the best *mathematical* models for a possible fourth dimension. Of course, my brain is laying in pieces, exploded on the floor, so... nothing makes sense anymore.

As for the "viola" thing, fancylad must`ve changed my description around. I have taken French in school for 12 years so i *might* just know it was "voila" even though that is kinda of a bastardization of the real french term.

It`s true that the space in which we live is composed of three spatial dimensions, and one time dimension. However, this video is about a fourth SPATIAL dimension, and has nothing to do with time as the fourth dimension.

And for those of you who don`t believe time is a dimension, research Special Relativity. It`s been scientifically proven to be accurate, and relies on time being considered as another dimension, albeit one which we have no control of.

I personally believe that the 4th dimension is time. always have. This video was actually very confusing, but I guess that is understandable, considering how difficult it would be to think in 4D

This was a bunch of words and pictures with little meaning.

In physics there is something called the 4 Vector which describes space-time it can be described by the matrix

where i is the square root of negative 1 and c is the speed of light in a perfect vacuum and t is time. This describes the 4-dimensional reality we live in.

basicly its saying that if you could look at ur monitor in front of you right now u could see all sides top bottom left right and behind just by looking at it, it would be as if u had a unhinged camera that could float around but be in 4 places at the same time to put it in a better way of understanding

*sigh* after reading about half these post I see that you ppl are stuck on the thought that time is a dimension .... time is relative, time was created by people as a way of planing things if you didnt know what time it was you wouldent know when the shipping needed to be done or when the money needed to be payed its just a way of orignization its not really a dimension a dimension is were an object exsits time is not an object its a fabrication -_- tired of this time is a dimension crap

Time `could` be a dimension, but this would imply that our universe is actually a static, unchangeable 4d shape or collection of 4d shapes. And that would also mean a 3d world without time, would also be a static collection of objects. Ultimately this would mean that (perception of) time, life, death, consciousness and free will, Are all the result of an illusion that the forth dimension casts over the other 3. (Let that one sink in for a while.)

- Do you want your head blown away with fourth dimension theory? Viola!
Now how can we harness the power of the fourth dimension for world domination?

Idiots. Everyone knows that time is the fourth dimension. Now the fifth dimension...

@ patchouly time IS the fourth dimension but in the title it clearly says SPATIAL dimension so no time is not the 4th spatial dimension

completely bullsh*t

Time is not a spacial dimension. If there is a fifth spacial dimension, a fourth spacial dimension is also necessary.

*this lecture brought to you by Scientific American and too much time on my hands*

*oh yeah also my massive BRAAAAAINS*

Male, 13-17, Eastern US

14 Posts Sunday, March 29, 2009 2:19:52 PM

This voice makes me wanna punch a baby

-----

Agreed. I could only watch so much before it started to agitate me. I noticed the anonymous symbol, they`re still around- Eh?

And Sean162, the world ISNT going to end in 2012. Cripe.

I like "Imagining the 10th Dimension" better anyways.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkxieS-6W...

I`m actually quite up on string theory and have been reading about it for the past ten years or so now.

also because I`ve seen vids like this before and the narrators` voices were not nearly as annoying.

Why couldn`t they just have a regular person narrate the video? Surely easier than the fake voice thing.

On a side note the pop-ups are horrible i-a-b. Don`t you love us anymore? If I didn`t have the wonderful AdBlocker on Firefox I would be seriously annoyed.

I love i-a-b, the site kicks ass but don`t ruin it with pop-ups that just sucks...

:-)

click the link that esopillar put up

or search it on IAB, it was posted like a year ago

well.. thats impossible as we are 3d. the same as a 4d lifeform would find it hard to imagine the perspective of a 5d lifeform

its still pretty good though.

I have no trouble thinking in 3D. This whole thing was like a poor re-hash of "flatland" by someone who didn`t understand it very well.

--

No, but it does explain ninjas.

We can`t see them because they`re in the 4th dimension...

....but they can see us.

WHY IAB, WHY!?!?!?!?!?!?

Cool!

Video is too looong.....So I did not watch it all. Plus, the Mac Speech function thing gets old-FAST.

I`ve always found this subject absolutely fascinating.

Man, this stuff is instant mind orgasms.

Height, width, and depth are dimensions, remember. An easy way to look at it is that difference between 2D and 3D is the addition of depth to the picture. You couldn`t have an object with only height and depth -- it`s progressive.

I would do anything to know the answers to these questions....

::stares into space::

Perhaps, but not likely. You`d have to impose additional assumptions on this framework - perhaps including a connection between a 4th (or higher) dimension, and death.

A better way to say it MIGHT be to state that "IF ghosts are 3D cross-sections of 4D beings, that would not be inconsistent with ghosts being able to appear and disappear at will - because they would simply be traveling within the 4D space and outside our field of view."

See Plato`s Allegory of the Cave for an introduction.

Visualizations such as the one in this video are difficult IMO. This one does a decent job but I think the creators went to far in the inferences. They should have just stuck to explaining higher-dimensional space and left any implications out.

1D- no two things can occupy the same point on a length

2D- two things can occucupy the same point on a length, just not on the same width

3D- two things can occupy the same length and width, just not the same height

4D- two things can occupy the same length width and height, just not at the same time

I disagree. Imagine you (as a 3D being) were able to view a VERY LARGE 2D plane - say... the size of the field in a large stadium. Many many many small 2D beings (say, ants... though not technically 2D, this will suffice) are walking on/in this 2D surface. Just because you were able to interact in a higher dimensional space doesn`t mean you`re omniscient. It just means you have a different perspective. In this example, you may be able to see the ants from "above" - implying that you may even be able to see more ants than if you were 2D. But this would be far from omniscience.

God, this stuff is so boring and old. I learned this back forever ago. And dear lord that voice is annoyinh

Simply put, a processor`s computation power is not linked to the data stream running into it. It is intrinsic; likewise, humans have the capability of thinking and analyzing in three dimensions, even though they can only technically percieve visually in two of them.

And P.S., for those of you looking for a `testable hypothesis`...are you serious? This is clearly a theory, and is stated as such. NOT as fact. Once we are able to test and even prove the existence of a higher dimension, we (and listen carefully here) have the technology to prove/disprove GOD.

And, perhaps more interestingly, INTERACT with God.

D:<

Despite this, however, my head is still hurting from trying to understand this one.

I could see myself from the corner of the room, yet I was sitting down in the opposite corner, all in real live time!

I AM MUTANT WITH A 4TH DIMENSIONAL SIGHT!!!! WOOHOOO!!

Sorry, but I disagree strongly. Please define time and you will find it`s pretty much impossible. We think of things in causal ways, but this is not indicative of any order, or of time. Before us, there was no time. No one to think of it. Because, there is no time. It`s just an illusion.

(1) Duration; (2) Length; (3) Width; (4) Height

This is why time travel will always be impossible - you can only travel in 4D space; you can`t, for example, travel along a line which has only duration and length, but width and height are 0.

It just gets kind of weird when you think about drawing in time.

Time is not an illusion.

We (being 3 dimensional objects) can only percieve one point in time at any given moment.

just what i thought first xD

BUT! i, as a 3D being have never seen a real 2d thing, so i doubt that 4d things would be able to see us..

I think I get the drawing bit, and infact if a 4d person draws in 3d it can make objects that we can interract with?

I think that dimension 1 is just a line- if you work backwards from their definition of dimension 3= an infinite number of planes laid on top of each other, then 2-d must be an infinite number of lines laid side-by-side.

Maybe?

I don`t think that ideas have duration. How can you mark when an idea starts? And if you believe that there is no original thought, then all ideas have existed since the beginning of time, and they will end at the end of time. And Time as the 4th dimension is not really what the video is talking about- it fits well, but this is one of the best *mathematical* models for a possible fourth dimension.

Of course, my brain is laying in pieces, exploded on the floor, so... nothing makes sense anymore.

Me too. This used to make sence to me before, but now this video had completely trashed what I used to think I understood.

I`m going back to bed.

I just keep going from being confused as f*ck to actually understanding things.

time is a measurement

just like inches or centimeters

he said anal xD

And for those of you who don`t believe time is a dimension, research Special Relativity. It`s been scientifically proven to be accurate, and relies on time being considered as another dimension, albeit one which we have no control of.

In physics there is something called the 4 Vector which describes space-time it can be described by the matrix

where i is the square root of negative 1 and c is the speed of light in a perfect vacuum and t is time. This describes the 4-dimensional reality we live in.

Irrelevant much?

And that would also mean a 3d world without time, would also be a static collection of objects.

Ultimately this would mean that (perception of) time, life, death, consciousness and free will, Are all the result of an illusion that the forth dimension casts over the other 3.

(Let that one sink in for a while.)