/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11264156
It's sci fi shit.

>>11264156
10,000% sci-fi bullshit.

There are multiple models on physics, from quantum theory to string theory, for how we perceive time. For example, if a certain timeline runs more or less concurrently with another and we don't perceive any differences in the two paths, but still perceives the origin of a certain event, this suggests that time is not consistent. We perceive the events differently because of the hidden influence of other dimensions. There are many descriptions for the different models of the continuum, but all describe and predict the same thing: parallel universes.

>>11264156
The galaxy rotation problem points to a 4th spatial dimension defined by gravity.

Take your 3D model of a galaxy, remove depth from the z-axis and swap in the 4th spatial dimension.

This'll restore the galaxy rotation curve, whilst increasing the luminosity and apparent size of objects the closer they are to the galactic centre, indicating greater mass than we currently observe.

>>11264415
Henry Segerman shows off this 4th spatial dimension stuff really well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbUOScpu0ws

You can see how the size of the shadows increases exponentially as a proportion of the model size, the further away from the centre they are.

If we had a model showing concentric orbits, we would see that the further out from the centre you are, the larger the orbits get.
With consistent orbital periods, the orbital velocity should INCREASE exponentially in the projection (going middle-out).
This will cancel out with the exponential DECREASE in orbital velocity, that we predict from the inverse-square law alone.
Giving us the flat rotation curve for galaxies that we observe.

>>11264415
>>11264491
What is this pseud nonsense

>>11264622
Which bit is pseud?

All the components are scientific fact.
The outcome matches our observations.
There is no less direct evidence for this than other theories with extra dimensions. The closest they come to evidence is philosophical navel-gazing and mathematical wankery.

Is it that the process isn't written in a text book that makes it pseud?

>>11264491
Anyway.
Making a 3D model for a handful of objects at differing velocities seemed like a hassle.
https://youtu.be/LOVzytir7bM
Let alone thousands of objects that ideally you want to vary independently.

Those models work by projecting a 2D pattern, wrapped around a 3D object, onto a 2D surface.
You get the same effect by projecting a 2D pattern, stuck on to a 2D surface, onto a 3D surface.

Then you can change the z-axis by moving the light source up and down, although that's kind of a cheat.

Using a pattern of concentric circles or just dots, you can see that a 4th dimension would (given enough gravity) result in a flat rotation curve or an under-estimation of mass.
We observe that in (most) galaxies and galaxy clusters.
Therefore, our observations of galaxies are evidence of a 4th dimension.

Sadly there's no evidence of any weeb dimensions though.

>>11264824
Skipped a few points.

The point of projecting a 2D pattern onto a 3D surface, instead of the other method, is that there's actually a device that can do that.
A projector.
Then you can have thousands of objects and vary their velocities to your hearts content.

I also said that moving the light source in the z-axis is a cheat.
What you actually want to do is deform the 3D surface you're projecting onto instead, whilst keeping the light source in the same place.
Ideally the surface will be able to go between concave, flat and convex. And you want it to deform according to gravity.
Fortunately another guy, Albert Einstein, did some work showing that mass distorts space-time, giving us the rubber-sheet experiment, which deforms from flat to concave according to gravity.

Obviously you can imagine projecting a 2D model of a galaxy onto flat surface compared to the surface in the pic related.
In the pic related version, objects near the centre would appear smaller and dimmer compared to their flat counter-part. The apparent size of the orbits would also appear smaller whilst the orbital period remained the same, resulting in a lower observed velocity.

>>11264655
The bit that says they're real

>>11264156
If there are extra dimensions, they're curled up and pretty small, and don't work at all the way you're imagining from scifi.

>>11265370
>The bit that says they're real
Can you clarify this?
Do you mean it's pseud to say that dimensions are real?
X, Y, Z and Time, you accept that they're real?
Do you think Kaluza-Klein theory is pseudo-science?

>>11264156
there's nothing saying it can't exist

>>11264156
Yes, sort of. First, as >>11264345 pointed out, there're several types of multiverse, more than one of which may apply to reality.

I'll just talk here about the multiverse of many worlds quantum mechanics.

The thing with that is, at least to me, it appears to be the "default option". That is, taking a look at the math of quantum mechanics, it sure does at least look like you need to add extra questionable assumptions to get rid of the extra worlds.

So it sure seems as if, by default, the quantum multiverse is actually real, in that it seems to require the least amount of additional assumptions. There're still mysteries, though. But, for now, at least to me, single world models would seem to be even harder to believe than many worlds, because single world models seem to require extra things to be "just so" that we have less evidence for.

(Note that "worlds" are not exactly fundamental objects here. It would be more like... hrm, how should I put this? A... "blob", I guess, of quantum amplitude that is far away from any other nontrivial amounts, so effectively is an independent world that isn't going to be interfered with (in the sense of quantum interference) by external stuff.)

Now, if you mean the idea of traveling to alternate quantum branches, that's just sci-fi. At least, I myself don't know of anything remotely hinting that would be an option. (Not even sure what that would "look like"... you'd have to somehow, er... factor yourself out of the local "blob" of reality, and.. impose it on another elsewhere? no, even that isn't quite right.)

>>11265394
>inciting Kaluza-Klein theory as if your own incomprehensible ramblings are on equal footing
It's a defunct model but it's still based on solid mathematical grounds unlike the nonsense you spout

>>11265626
>incomprehensible ramblings
Aww, you're just kind of thick and like to bitch. That's okay, you aren't alone :)

>>11265380
>>11265394
>Kaluza-Klein theory
there's no proof for other than speculation

>>11265626
Oh fuck. You actually are thick.

The pattern here >>11265394 is that each question is trying to establish what the contention is with the idea of dimensions.
NOT, I assume, to draw comparison between an attempt at a physical model describing the galaxy rotation problem, and a mathematical description aiming to unify gravity and electromagnetism.

As far as I know, the mathematical grounds for objects appearing smaller, the further away they are from an observer, is at least as solid as that of Kaluza-Klein theory.
Not that I'm an expert, but it seems bizarre to claim otherwise, and stranger still to dismiss any contrary opinion outright.

>>11265884
>there's no proof for other than speculation
What if the galaxy rotation curve can be explained with a 4th dimension, but not without fucking up physics or purely speculative particles?
Would that count as proof?

Kinda with you on the rest of it though.
As much as I might like a universe that exists outside of this one going from big-bang to big-crunch/heat-death, there's no way establish that at the moment.

>>11264156
just a trope, however artificial intelligence and realistic virtual reality has a realistic chance of simulating these worlds for you.

>>11264158
We are becoming timeline 902

>>11264156
Where's the giantess timeline

>>11264156
There is good circumstantial evidence, for example string theory (the best and so far only plausible attempt at theory of everything) has 6-7 small extra spatial dimensions. F-theory (a subset of string theory) even includes something like a second temporal dimension.

>>11264156
No, but for hypothetical sake:
Use 2 points to get into universe #63 from our universe, this will let you choose your gender easily for any future universe travel.
Use 1 point to connect #63 to #993 this will let you become a being of goodness and wisdom
Use 3 points to create a gateway from #993 to #844, this will let you access advanced technologies that should extend your lifespan.
Use 1 point to attach a gateway to #444 at low elevation in our world and high elevation in their world. Or if that's not allowed, just low elevation overall. Use up to 2 more level 1 portals between our world and world #444 in order to create an infinite energy turbine. As an added bonus, world #444 is relatively innocuous and has a high technological advancement/capacity.

Use the last 1 or 2 portals to connect #22 and #308 to #63 with 1 point portals.

Now for the plan:
Access 63 as a male, you will not want wisdom yet because it might stop you from choosing immortality. Access 993 from 63 then 844 from 993. Use and obtain and life extending technology from 993 as possible. Now go back to 63 and choose to be a woman. Go back to 993, you should be a normal woman. But now go through the 3 point portal to 844 and then back through the 3 point portal to 993 from 844. You should now be a being of wisdom and good who has a technologically extended lifespan. Now return to our world and design an infinite power generator cycling water between #444 and our world. Use your power and knowledge/wisdom to gain influence in all 5 worlds already accessed.

Finally, create a portal to #22 from #63. Use this gateway and your infinite power/advanced technology to free the males and bring fertility treatments to the females.
If you have a gateway left, use it to connect #63 and #308 to free the animals as well and obtain powerful gene splicing technology.

>>11267118
Consult with the women of #993 as necessary to make your plans to bring justice to the multiverse a success. Enjoy being a person of longevity, infinite power, and great kindness/wisdom with access to 6-7 worlds.

>>11264156
This is all fetish shit. That said, give me my A-class portal to trap world so I can find me a good nice cute trap and marry him back in this world.

>>11268255
What do you mean

>>11264156
Why did he have to write his femdom faggot fetish into 90% of these? They're all basically the same, with only minor twists on why the women bully the men.

>>11268866
because it's a fetish cyoa and the guy sadly has only a single fetish

go over to
>>>/tg/70218403 if you want generally non-feishy examples of the same thing, or to >>>/trash/27477323 and >>>/aco/3712389 for the porny ones

>>11269711
what kind of autist do you have to be to shill your porn genre like this?

>>11269711
why would you link to the porn threads

>>11271498
his complaint could either be that fetish content at all is present, or maybe just that it's all the same single fetish

>>11271507
no his complaint is that you and whoever made that are incels and pathetic

>>11272995
if it's not you then you can't know that