/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5069799]

So do you guys really believe that there are more than 3 dimensions? Holy shit you people really are fucking morons lol. I also like how the only way you can explain more than 3 dimensions is by using a bunch of stoner talk that you don't even understand. Naw but you have 9001 iq, why would you be wrong?

[Anonymous No.5069805]

>>5069799
I don't think you know what "dimension" means.

[Anonymous No.5069813]

>>5069805
I don't think you know what "theory" means. It means some guy got high and came up with a bunch of bullshit that people believe because it makes people think their dark and edgy.

[Anonymous No.5069814]

>>5069813
I think you threw a straw man at me.

[Anonymous No.5069816]

>>5069813
Why do you believe in evolution if its just a theory (a geuss)

[Anonymous No.5069818]

There are at least 4 dimensions.
Time is a dimension. It's pretty easy to demonstrate by thinking of a Lorentz transformation as a rotation of coordinates.

As for 5+ dimensions, you're free to not believe in them. They work mathematically but there is as yet no convincing evidence for them.

[Anonymous No.5069824]

>>5069816
Evolution has progressed passed theory, all those who deny it are delusional. Nice try tho brah.

[Anonymous No.5069831]

>>5069818
Ya man like totally, the coordinates are like rotating man.

fuck off

[Anonymous No.5069838]

>>5069799
OP, consider an n-dimensional vector <span class="math"> v = [v_1, v_2, ... v_n] [/spoiler]

What is it that makes you think n is restricted to being <span class="math"> \leq 3 [/spoiler]?

[Anonymous No.5069839]

I saw a documentary earlier that said without mathematics it's impossible to visualise what an extra dimension would be like. They then went on to saying any extra dimension could be tiny but even this talk grounds it in our 3D perception as size and proportion.

[Anonymous No.5069846]

0/10 mods are asleep

[Anonymous No.5069854]

>>5069839
>without mathematics its impossible to visualise mathematical ideas

What a high quality learning film. Did it have a section on how without mathematics it would be impossible to count?

[Anonymous No.5069857]

>>5069854

Way to go quoting something he didn't even say.

[Anonymous No.5069858]

>>5069818
Time is a system of measuring what happens between two events. You can write a formula for just about anything sure, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't exist, because if you insert the theory of time not existing into any formula, you will get the same results as if it did exist.

[Anonymous No.5069868]

>>5069831
ct' = gamma( ct - vx / c )
x' = gamma ( x - vct / c)

Holy shit dude there's x in my ct' term and ct in my x' term when I change inertial frame, ct must be a dimension just like x, y and z.

Does that sound like "stoner shit" to you?

[Anonymous No.5069874]

>>5069799
Religion is basically on par with all these new bullshit scientific theories. Multiple dimensions, string theory, etc. It all requires faith in nothing and comes about from people looking for meaning to life that was never there. It keeps the autists busy though, so it doesn't really bother me.

[Anonymous No.5069877]

>>5069868
It sounds like autistic shit to me

[Anonymous No.5069885]

>>5069858
> if you insert the theory of time not existing into any formula, you will get the same results as if it did exist

speed = distance / time

right, now time doesn't exist?

speed = distance / something that doesn't exist

k.

It's correct that time measures separation of events... exactly like space does.
Something can happen in Paris, something else can happen in New York. These events are separated by some space and time. Why is one thing describing their separation a dimension, but the other not?

[Anonymous No.5069887]

>>5069877
physics may be autistic shit, (and many physicists may be autistic) but when its equations describe observations, you can't just ignore it and say it's false because you don't like it.

[Anonymous No.5069900]

>>5069877
>autistic shit
>basic mathematical idea
/sci/

[Anonymous No.5069903]

>>5069799
OP, your thread is an excellent example of how sciencefags believe retarded shit that pisses off mathfags.

[Anonymous No.5069915]

>>5069885
Time is a man made concept. It works in theories because it describes the when something happened after or before another in the same dimension. Naming it as a dimension itself is nothing more than over complicating it

[Anonymous No.5069922]

>>5069915
>after or before
>implying that isn't the same as saying above or below or to the left or to the right

[Anonymous No.5069930]

>>5069915
treating time as a dimension makes relativity a lot less complicated to deal with.
it really isn't an over-complication at all.

[Anonymous No.5069989]

mathfag here.

I think the heart of the problem is that OP both doesn't agree with the definition of dimension used by conventional math/science people and probably doesn't agree that time is independant of other dimensions.

From a experimental/statistical standpoint 'dimension' is typically just used for other variables used in data plotting. From a physics standpoint dimensions are typically categorized by type (spatial, temporal) and ocassionally by subtype (curled, uncurled, flat). From a mathematical standpoint they're all interchangable depending on the abstraction. You can integrate accross an object ovar an extra dimension for it's density for example. You can talk about temperature, time, whatever all as dimensions in interchangable ways. There are mathematical abstractions for dealing with polygons in higher dimensional spaces, even infinite dimensional space. There are spaces where the interpretations for dimensions aren't anywhere near something we'd recognize in the real world.

All that said, the one thing all of them have in common is that they're typically independant of all other factors. There are techniques in machine learning for taking huge datasets and finding redundant dimensions to reduce the size of a dataset (these typically have hundreds of thousands of dimensions).