Purple Capuchin Monkey (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
purplecapuchinmonkey) wrote2022-06-01 05:17 pm
purplecapuchinmonkey) wrote2022-06-01 05:17 pm
Entry tags:
4D
I wrote this a long time ago:
It's about three and four dimensions. Like 3D
DIMENSIONALITY
12-15-91 The word "memory" has inherent within it the idea that it is a record of something which has already happened- something from the past. Memories can only contain that which WAS presented to the memory-forming mechanism. A memory is a RESULT of the memory-forming mechanism. Our brains are geared to, or fashioned in a manner which results in, operating with data obtained in the PAST. The very chemical reactions occurring within our bodies require the PASSAGE OF TIME. this is our view of them, anyway. We are "engineered" to perceive the past, but not the future nor alternate realities. REAL is that which we perceive, and which we perceive as having a continued existence "in time," such that, having experienced it several times, we can say it will surely be there when we come upon it again. Something experienced only fleetingly which is not there when we look for it again is dismissed as hallucination or dream.
The fact of the matter is that we have only our perceptions and memories to go on. There is nothing we can do in the present to verify that what we remember is real. Everything in our logic depends on the forward-movement "in time" IN A LINEAR PROGRESSION. To even consider otherwise requires one first to delve into the structure of the universe as we see it. Before even this, it is necessary to have investigated, at length, how things are. How things behave. What is the pattern? In order to comprehend things, we look for a pattern. Things which happen the same way over and over again. So, having investigated the universe and having learned what is already known, we can say that complex things are built from more simple things. The "building-block" concept. It seems that almost nothing springs forth into being already assembled, complete. Therefore, the universe can be said to be one giant Chinese puzzle, built from many simple pieces, in a CERTAIN ORDER. Recall the passage of time in a linear progression, with one second following another, "as sure as clockwork." There is an order, a sequence of events, an assemblage of parts, a STARTING POINT. Odd that we should come upon that particular phrase, "starting-point."
In the consideration of "dimensions," whether it be length, breadth, height, or the fourth, we should begin at the beginning. So would that be something with just ONE dimension? No, that would be a line, which can contain an infinite number of points. It seems the point is actually the starting point. Dimension ZERO. A point has no dimensions. It is unique. It is odd. A point. ONE point. It is a singularity. It is UNITY. There is nothing else. One IS the loneliest number. Forgive my rhetoric, but it is essential to point out (pun intended) that, until you have more than one point, you have nothing. Now, with a second point (it reproduced. How do I know how it got there?) in addition to the first, you have the basis for a PATTERN. After all, what IS the shortest distance between two points? Yes, now you see it. A straight line. Now, another point outside that line, and the shortest distance gives you another line perpendicular to the first, and the delineation of a plane. Etc. ad infinitum.
Please gain the comprehension that it is the existence of the second point, outside the first, that forms the pattern, and that when this occurs, we go from unity to infinity. All at once.
So. What does distance have to do with it? And the shortest distance, at that? Well, before we had two points, there was no such thing as distance. A distance is a separation. The original point WAS unity. Unity strives to avoid separation. Imagine the first point reaching toward the second. (I know that, theoretically, there is no distance between two adjacent points on a line, but that their existence non-coincidentally sets up the pattern of distance and the concept thereof. It is a property of space, which is also necessary before you can have "distance." Imagine two bowling balls placed next to each other, with no space between them. There is distance between their centers. And besides, the second point can be ANYWHERE, it is not necessarily adjacent.) You might well inquire as to how we arrived, logically, at a SECOND point in our universe of no dimensions. To which I might reply, "That is pointless," which would be a pun. Well, the original point, in its universe of unity, had nothing to "think" about, except itself. The very act of forming a mental image of oneself results in a mental twin, a "mirror image." But seriously, we aren't really studying cosmology here, but the PATTERN of the way things ARE, although the resemblance to the cosmic conciousness of God is overwhelming. And one (excuse me again) might consider the original first conciousness considering itself.
Dimensionality is the subject here. We have observed that distance is what occurs when we have more than one point. I might note as an aside that distance is related somehow to the speed of light AND the amount of energy contained within any given quantity of matter. WHAT?!!
Yes. E=MC2 (squared). C squared is the speed of light, which has distance as one of its factors. More specifically, the amount of time it takes for light ot move from one point to another. But I'm getting ahead of myself. Time requires four dimensions. See, if you have a thing existing at a certain POINT in the past, it occupies (spatially) three dimesions. For each succeeding point in time, we need another complete set of three dimensions, each point of which is adjacent to the previous ones.
But recall the point and the line. These are our primal, basic patterns. A unique thing, and an infinite succession of the same thing repeated over and over again, in a linear fashion. The line is the pattern. Formed by a point outside the first. A point outside the line forms a pattern for a plane, which contains an infinite number of lines. A point outside this plane forms a pattern for 3-D space, which contains an infinite number of planes. A point outside 3-D space forms a pattern for four dimensions, which CONTAINS AN INFINITE NUMBER OF 3-D SPACES!
Like a motion picture film could theoretically have an infinite number of frames, with the film running forever, motion only occurs with more than one "frame" of 3-D space. The same with time. And time and motion occur in a linear fashion: "an object in motion will continue in motion IN A STRAIGHT LINE unless acted upon by an outside force."
And so we perceive time as occurring in a linear fashion, because theline is the pattern. Like our reel of motion picture film, unrolled, it is a stack of volumes of three-dimensional space arranged in a straight line. Why a line? It is the framework. Frames are made with straight lines. Curved lines require being acted upon by an outside force, and we haven't laid a framework for force yet. So far we have only inertia, objects at rest.
See, there's an infinite number of "sets" of three-dimensional space. No limit. So, something "moving" in another direction occupies a different "set," a separate frame of 3-D space. (We are ALL moving, nothing is stationary except with reference to something else.) Now, to SHIFT an object from one set to another (thus causing it to "move" in other than a straight line) requires the "action" of an outside force." Such as the collision of two objects. Two different pieces of matter cannot occupy the same "space" at the same "time." (unless they're travelling greater than the speed of light relative to each other, in which case they don't "see" each other. But that's another story.)
---------------------------------------------------------------
===============================================================
We must also consider the possibility/probability that there are also an infinite number of four-dimensional "frames" within a thing called the fifth dimension, and so on. And somewhere, the force of gravity fits into the equation.
Addendum
Next part added May 22, 2003
I once hypothesized that objects separated by distance are also separated by time. This was the result of a conjecture that light might be travelling at effective instantaneity.
Now, in consideration of the fifth dimension, which can contain an infinite number of sets of 4-D "space," it can be hypothesized that separation by virtue of distance may be the result of the occupation of a totally different set of fifth dimensional space. Thus it would be offset not only in time, but also in a direction we don't yet have a name for. Thus the difficulty of a photon travelling between distant points at an effective instantaneous rate, yet apparently requiring the passage of time to bridge the "distance."
String-theory physicists have stated that the extra dimensions that the universe posesses seem to be microcosmical in nature, so it is possible that each point in the universe occupies a different fifth-dimensional set.
Note that experiments have shown that photons can have a "metaphysical" (non-understandable) type of connection even though they may be separated by quite a distance. Through extrapolation one may conjecture that there may be a similar connectedness not only through distance, but also through time. (That axis of the fourth dimension, rather)
Our investigations into the universe in which we find ourselves has so far been very limited, since we are restricted to this one very local area of space that we call the earth. And on top of that, we have restricted equipment, we can't very well see the atomic particles that we discuss and theorize about, because our instruments aren't good enough. All we have is indirect observation, the effects that the particles create. So it is entirely possible that we have misinterpreted a few things here and there.
For instance, the axis of the fourth dimension is perpendicular to all three axes of the third dimension, which is a thing we cannot picture, since we can only imagine in three dimensions. So if there were fifth dimensional components to the structure of the universe, we would be hard put to come up with analogies to describe thier relationships. But we can say that the axis of the fifth dimension is perpendicular to all four axes of the fourth dimension, and that the fifth contains an infinite number of sets of four dimensions going off in all sorts of directions.
This reminds me of the mathematical construction known as the fractal. There are very small components which have exactly the same structure of the larger components, which are made up of the smaller components. Etcetera ad infinitum. Like a bottle that was made up of smaller bottles that were made up of smaller bottles...
Note that between one frame of whatever, and the adjacent one, there can be a slight difference. Something in the first frame may be in an incrementally different position in the next. You know, like movement occurs across the frames of a motion picture film or video.
There are probably some seriously strange places in distant parts of the universe.
And yet, we are all connected somehow with all the other parts of the universe, even those in the past and future, because there's an axis along which they are one and the same, a moving-yet-not-moving frame of reference.
The formula for a three-dimensional thing is a*b*c. For a fourth-dimensional thing it is a*b*c*d. Fifth dimensional, a*b*c*d*e. And so on. Each dimensional axis is just a factor in an equation. But some of those equations result in a thing called a human being.
It's about three and four dimensions. Like 3D
DIMENSIONALITY
12-15-91 The word "memory" has inherent within it the idea that it is a record of something which has already happened- something from the past. Memories can only contain that which WAS presented to the memory-forming mechanism. A memory is a RESULT of the memory-forming mechanism. Our brains are geared to, or fashioned in a manner which results in, operating with data obtained in the PAST. The very chemical reactions occurring within our bodies require the PASSAGE OF TIME. this is our view of them, anyway. We are "engineered" to perceive the past, but not the future nor alternate realities. REAL is that which we perceive, and which we perceive as having a continued existence "in time," such that, having experienced it several times, we can say it will surely be there when we come upon it again. Something experienced only fleetingly which is not there when we look for it again is dismissed as hallucination or dream.
The fact of the matter is that we have only our perceptions and memories to go on. There is nothing we can do in the present to verify that what we remember is real. Everything in our logic depends on the forward-movement "in time" IN A LINEAR PROGRESSION. To even consider otherwise requires one first to delve into the structure of the universe as we see it. Before even this, it is necessary to have investigated, at length, how things are. How things behave. What is the pattern? In order to comprehend things, we look for a pattern. Things which happen the same way over and over again. So, having investigated the universe and having learned what is already known, we can say that complex things are built from more simple things. The "building-block" concept. It seems that almost nothing springs forth into being already assembled, complete. Therefore, the universe can be said to be one giant Chinese puzzle, built from many simple pieces, in a CERTAIN ORDER. Recall the passage of time in a linear progression, with one second following another, "as sure as clockwork." There is an order, a sequence of events, an assemblage of parts, a STARTING POINT. Odd that we should come upon that particular phrase, "starting-point."
In the consideration of "dimensions," whether it be length, breadth, height, or the fourth, we should begin at the beginning. So would that be something with just ONE dimension? No, that would be a line, which can contain an infinite number of points. It seems the point is actually the starting point. Dimension ZERO. A point has no dimensions. It is unique. It is odd. A point. ONE point. It is a singularity. It is UNITY. There is nothing else. One IS the loneliest number. Forgive my rhetoric, but it is essential to point out (pun intended) that, until you have more than one point, you have nothing. Now, with a second point (it reproduced. How do I know how it got there?) in addition to the first, you have the basis for a PATTERN. After all, what IS the shortest distance between two points? Yes, now you see it. A straight line. Now, another point outside that line, and the shortest distance gives you another line perpendicular to the first, and the delineation of a plane. Etc. ad infinitum.
Please gain the comprehension that it is the existence of the second point, outside the first, that forms the pattern, and that when this occurs, we go from unity to infinity. All at once.
So. What does distance have to do with it? And the shortest distance, at that? Well, before we had two points, there was no such thing as distance. A distance is a separation. The original point WAS unity. Unity strives to avoid separation. Imagine the first point reaching toward the second. (I know that, theoretically, there is no distance between two adjacent points on a line, but that their existence non-coincidentally sets up the pattern of distance and the concept thereof. It is a property of space, which is also necessary before you can have "distance." Imagine two bowling balls placed next to each other, with no space between them. There is distance between their centers. And besides, the second point can be ANYWHERE, it is not necessarily adjacent.) You might well inquire as to how we arrived, logically, at a SECOND point in our universe of no dimensions. To which I might reply, "That is pointless," which would be a pun. Well, the original point, in its universe of unity, had nothing to "think" about, except itself. The very act of forming a mental image of oneself results in a mental twin, a "mirror image." But seriously, we aren't really studying cosmology here, but the PATTERN of the way things ARE, although the resemblance to the cosmic conciousness of God is overwhelming. And one (excuse me again) might consider the original first conciousness considering itself.
Dimensionality is the subject here. We have observed that distance is what occurs when we have more than one point. I might note as an aside that distance is related somehow to the speed of light AND the amount of energy contained within any given quantity of matter. WHAT?!!
Yes. E=MC2 (squared). C squared is the speed of light, which has distance as one of its factors. More specifically, the amount of time it takes for light ot move from one point to another. But I'm getting ahead of myself. Time requires four dimensions. See, if you have a thing existing at a certain POINT in the past, it occupies (spatially) three dimesions. For each succeeding point in time, we need another complete set of three dimensions, each point of which is adjacent to the previous ones.
But recall the point and the line. These are our primal, basic patterns. A unique thing, and an infinite succession of the same thing repeated over and over again, in a linear fashion. The line is the pattern. Formed by a point outside the first. A point outside the line forms a pattern for a plane, which contains an infinite number of lines. A point outside this plane forms a pattern for 3-D space, which contains an infinite number of planes. A point outside 3-D space forms a pattern for four dimensions, which CONTAINS AN INFINITE NUMBER OF 3-D SPACES!
Like a motion picture film could theoretically have an infinite number of frames, with the film running forever, motion only occurs with more than one "frame" of 3-D space. The same with time. And time and motion occur in a linear fashion: "an object in motion will continue in motion IN A STRAIGHT LINE unless acted upon by an outside force."
And so we perceive time as occurring in a linear fashion, because theline is the pattern. Like our reel of motion picture film, unrolled, it is a stack of volumes of three-dimensional space arranged in a straight line. Why a line? It is the framework. Frames are made with straight lines. Curved lines require being acted upon by an outside force, and we haven't laid a framework for force yet. So far we have only inertia, objects at rest.
See, there's an infinite number of "sets" of three-dimensional space. No limit. So, something "moving" in another direction occupies a different "set," a separate frame of 3-D space. (We are ALL moving, nothing is stationary except with reference to something else.) Now, to SHIFT an object from one set to another (thus causing it to "move" in other than a straight line) requires the "action" of an outside force." Such as the collision of two objects. Two different pieces of matter cannot occupy the same "space" at the same "time." (unless they're travelling greater than the speed of light relative to each other, in which case they don't "see" each other. But that's another story.)
---------------------------------------------------------------
===============================================================
We must also consider the possibility/probability that there are also an infinite number of four-dimensional "frames" within a thing called the fifth dimension, and so on. And somewhere, the force of gravity fits into the equation.
Addendum
Next part added May 22, 2003
I once hypothesized that objects separated by distance are also separated by time. This was the result of a conjecture that light might be travelling at effective instantaneity.
Now, in consideration of the fifth dimension, which can contain an infinite number of sets of 4-D "space," it can be hypothesized that separation by virtue of distance may be the result of the occupation of a totally different set of fifth dimensional space. Thus it would be offset not only in time, but also in a direction we don't yet have a name for. Thus the difficulty of a photon travelling between distant points at an effective instantaneous rate, yet apparently requiring the passage of time to bridge the "distance."
String-theory physicists have stated that the extra dimensions that the universe posesses seem to be microcosmical in nature, so it is possible that each point in the universe occupies a different fifth-dimensional set.
Note that experiments have shown that photons can have a "metaphysical" (non-understandable) type of connection even though they may be separated by quite a distance. Through extrapolation one may conjecture that there may be a similar connectedness not only through distance, but also through time. (That axis of the fourth dimension, rather)
Our investigations into the universe in which we find ourselves has so far been very limited, since we are restricted to this one very local area of space that we call the earth. And on top of that, we have restricted equipment, we can't very well see the atomic particles that we discuss and theorize about, because our instruments aren't good enough. All we have is indirect observation, the effects that the particles create. So it is entirely possible that we have misinterpreted a few things here and there.
For instance, the axis of the fourth dimension is perpendicular to all three axes of the third dimension, which is a thing we cannot picture, since we can only imagine in three dimensions. So if there were fifth dimensional components to the structure of the universe, we would be hard put to come up with analogies to describe thier relationships. But we can say that the axis of the fifth dimension is perpendicular to all four axes of the fourth dimension, and that the fifth contains an infinite number of sets of four dimensions going off in all sorts of directions.
This reminds me of the mathematical construction known as the fractal. There are very small components which have exactly the same structure of the larger components, which are made up of the smaller components. Etcetera ad infinitum. Like a bottle that was made up of smaller bottles that were made up of smaller bottles...
Note that between one frame of whatever, and the adjacent one, there can be a slight difference. Something in the first frame may be in an incrementally different position in the next. You know, like movement occurs across the frames of a motion picture film or video.
There are probably some seriously strange places in distant parts of the universe.
And yet, we are all connected somehow with all the other parts of the universe, even those in the past and future, because there's an axis along which they are one and the same, a moving-yet-not-moving frame of reference.
The formula for a three-dimensional thing is a*b*c. For a fourth-dimensional thing it is a*b*c*d. Fifth dimensional, a*b*c*d*e. And so on. Each dimensional axis is just a factor in an equation. But some of those equations result in a thing called a human being.