The 4th dimension - General

[QUOTE=aVoN;20081269]@Op: I have to disagree that a 4-dimensional space has to be Euclidean. If your metric is not orthogonal and isometric, you don't get an Euclidean space. General Relativity for example works on non-Euclidean spaces.[/QUOTE] Don't take it up with me; Take it up with Wikipedia

[QUOTE=Waze;20079697] [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/#"]View YouTUBE video[/URL] [URL="http://www.youtube.com/v/UnURElCzGc0&hl=en&rel=0&autoplay=1&fs=1&hd=1"][/URL] [URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0[/URL] [/QUOTE] Carl Sagan does it again.

[QUOTE=MegaJohnny;20079945]I once heard a fairly good analogy of how a fourth spatial dimension would work. It's like how if someone lived in a 2D plane and a sphere passed through it, he'd see a circle grow and then shrink again. If a 4D sphere thing passed through our 3D plane we'd see a sphere grow and then shrink again.[/QUOTE] That made me laugh. Just imagine a sphere flying through the air ;D But anyhow, that makes a bit of sense, but seeing as the sphere would have to move in the 4th direction it's really hard to imagine anyway.

I understood not one single word in the OP.

This shit is breaking my brain

Put this in your OP [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_GQqUg6Ts[/url] your cube picture doesn't help explain anything at all. [editline]03:12PM[/editline] What the hyper cube is, is a shadow of a 4D object, a 4D objects shadow is 3D just like a 3d objects shadow is 2D but the 3d shadow of the 4D object is represented as 2D on our screens so It really doesn't help explain it.

I don't think time really exists. To me, time is something we have imposed on the universe to explain how we progress.

No, time exists, you're thinking of god.

Shouldn't it be simple? 0D is a point, multiple points make a 1D line, multiple lines make a 2D shape (eg square), multiple 2D shapes make a 3D shape (eg cube). Therefore, shouldn't multiple cubes make a 4D shape? In any case, our mind is only cable of perceiving three dimensions, it is impossible to try and perceive more.

These threads always mindfuck me. I feel raped.

[QUOTE=Hoboharry;20080076]:iiam:[/QUOTE] :iiaca:

[QUOTE=dookster;20079613]I always thought it was time. Guess I was wrong.[/QUOTE] Only in Minkowski space, which to me is a helluva lot easier to grasp than Euclidean space. Minkowski is mostly mental projection while Euclidean is almost all math.

[QUOTE=rathat48;20086131]Put this in your OP [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_GQqUg6Ts[/url] your cube picture doesn't help explain anything at all.[/QUOTE] That video isn't really that good imo.

Carl Sagan is awesome, but he sounds like Kermit the frog.

[QUOTE=mynames2long;20079582]I can grasp the 4th dimension theoretically, but what really boggles my mind is how it would look.[/QUOTE] I always thought of it as if you were in 4d looking at a person in 3d. You would be seeing everything at once. Every single cell in their body, their flesh bones. jaw skull. Every single perspective that exists of them. All at once. Either that or if you were to look at a person and they would look like a vtf of a model in gmod or something. Where you see all parts of their body on one flat image. But there's no way to be sure.

@Theguydude: A four dimensional being looking upon a three dimensional being such as ourselves would see all sides of the organism, front, back, top, bottom, everything. They would also be able to see everything inside our bodies. Lungs, bronchi, intestines, poop, everything.

[QUOTE=Savaril;20087935]Carl Sagan is awesome, but he sounds like Kermit the frog.[/QUOTE] Carl Sagan: [IMG]http://www.ananova.com/images/web/49648.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Raxas;20088124]@Theguydude: A four dimensional being looking upon a three dimensional being such as ourselves would see all sides of the organism, front, back, top, bottom, everything. They would also be able to see everything inside our bodies. Lungs, bronchi, intestines, poop, everything.[/QUOTE] Yes exactly. Also you can save the trouble of typing "@theguydude" by just pressing reply. Here I'll post a picture of what I mean in my second statement.

ahem [img]http://img466.imageshack.us/img466/4282/cube2wj1.jpg[/img] Everything you need to know.

Ah, found it. [url]http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php[/url] Everything you need to know about Minkowski space. All 10 dimensions. As for Euclidean space, can't help you. I've yet to partially comprehend the math involved there. And even if I did, there's the issue of explaining it...

What the hell 4th dimension?? Ain't 3 enough for ya?

My mind is bent :S

[QUOTE=vBullshit;20079563] And a lovely [B]PICTURE[/B] :3: [media]http://youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_GQqUg6Ts[/media][/QUOTE] Cool! I rated you wrench so you can fix the obvious error above. But really...that was a intersting vid! •thread subscription added•

I am really high, so I was browsing GD, and I saw this 4th dimension thread. So I thought I would come tell you guys I'm currently in the 4.20th dimension. It's really swirly in the 4.20 dimension. When I close my eyes, I see sea flowers. My coherence is probably questionable.

On a four dimensional planet, you could move in three dimensions without leaving the ground.

[QUOTE=mynames2long;20079582]I can grasp the 4th dimension theoretically, but what really boggles my mind is how it would look.[/QUOTE] You can't possibly imagine how it would look.

I need my eyes to see in 10D now.

There can only be one [b]FLATLANDER![/b]

This kind of stuff is my counter-argument for mankind being innately stupid. [editline]10:44PM[/editline] However this thread would be a good counter-argument for my counter-argument.

It is not possible to think in 4D so there is no point in trying.