@@feltongailey8987 “The boundary of a boundary is zero” - John Wheeler en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-dimensional_space

Nicely done! I really like what your “shape within a shape” adds to the repeating patterns we’re playing with in this visualization, which follows the logic of the point-line-plane postulate. With that, each time we arrive at a plane, that plane then resides within an additional orthogonal dimension. That new dimension can then be perceived as a point, which gives us a way to keep repeating dimensions, all the way to the infinite dimensions of Hilbert Space if we choose to keep extending this logic. So our third dimension is a timeless Planck frame snapshot of the universe in a certain state, a particular “now” which we can think of as a point, or a dot. “To get from dot to dot would require a line”, that’s the fourth dimension, a line extending from the beginning of the universe to its end. The fifth dimension, where our universe’s quantum wavefunction is calculated, becomes a shape, all possible pasts and futures that causally connect to a particular “now”. In the sixth dimension we see that as a “shape within a shape”. In this case this is the 6D phase space of all possible states, all possible “now”s for our universe, so this includes the “now”s that we can’t get to from our fifth-dimensional vantage point because those are not causally connected to this version of the universe - even though there should be a universe where it’s 2024 and Elvis is now approaching his 90th birthday, we can’t get there from here. Now, just as we did with 0D and 3D, we have to think of that timeless 6D phase space as a point. That point is on a line of other possible universes in the seventh dimension, and an 8D plane of other potential universes that have nothing in common with our universe and its unique locked-in physical constants. The ninth dimension as a “shape within a shape” can be thought of as a 9D hypersphere. It turns out that with any more than nine dimensions, a hypersphere’s boundary is exceeded by the space between internally packed spheres, they call this the sphere packing paradox. So anything beyond the 9D hypersphere that our 3D universe resides within brings to mind Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems- the tenth dimension (and beyond, if you choose to keep going) is “outside the system” in Godelian terms. Thanks for thinking deeply about these ideas! medium.com/@adam.dejans/sphere-packing-paradox-cce7e35e3983

@@10thdim I had a theory pertaining to quantum jumping. If we were to work backwards; 7D- We'd begin here at Infinity,Picking a Timeline through the 6D⤵️ Which is Choice(5D) That particular decision would have a duration(time until-> experience->time since;4D) The entirety of that duration would play out into our point of awareness/now(3D). That's the way I understand it. Questions: 1. Do we really do cause movements in the dimensions below and above us? If so,then my formula could be an equation with which we've been choosing our very own experiences via unconscious and conscious intent/decision. 2. Are we limited to 7 Dimensions? It sounds as if 8D is the point of meeting amongst every possible universe,however we are only ever experiencing the multitude of timelines in our own universe....right? 3. In what Dimension does 'Thought' reside? What is thought? May be a tad off topic forgive me.

@@AISG-0 In my video/blog entry Imagining the Ninth Dimension, I show a picture from physicist Brian Greene’s book The Hidden Reality of what he calls The Landscape Multiverse. Greene tells us if we were in this Landscape we could use quantum tunneling to arrive at a position representing our universe. I have proposed that this can be thought of as the “point” we start from, and it can also be seen as our 6D phase space, viewed at an unchanging position within the seventh dimension and beyond. imaginingthetenthdimension.blogspot.com/2011/09/imagining-ninth-dimension.html Since our universal wavefunction is calculated in five dimensions, we can’t change anything beyond that. If I have eggs for breakfast today, then the universe where I have cereal today becomes part of the six-dimensional “you can’t get there from here” list. But according to Everett, both possibilities are equally real, and I would say are part of this timeless 6D phase space of all possible states for the universe. Likewise, if I have a point on a line, but that line is on a 3D object, does picking up the object change the position of the point on the line? I would say it does not. In the same way if I go to an office building at 123 Main Street, I will always be at 123 Main Street regardless of whether I’m at the first floor or the 20th. Asking about “thought”, I would say, is the same as asking about consciousness. Many of the pioneers of quantum theory became convinced that consciousness is fundamental. “The universe behaves differently when it is observed” - as seen in the double slit experiment. Since we know our quantum wavefunction is resolved at the fifth dimension, I would say that is where life and consciousness are actually operating. But that, of course, is a controversial topic.

@@tyecorp7891 Very nicely put! The idea that our universe is designed starts from the apparent fine tuning of our universe’s physical constants. The Anthropic Principle says the reason we’re observing this exceedingly unlikely set of constants that allow life to form is because there would be no life to observe those others non-viable universes. Those other possible universes exist within the Landscape Multiverse, they’re just not what we’re observing. Likewise, Everett’s insistence that every possible outcome for our unique universe is just as real as the one we are observing gives us a way to say that every good and bad choice we could possibly make is already “out there” within Everett’s Many Worlds. As you say, this leaves us with a way to understand that free will is an illusion because each choice has already been made, while still allowing us to choose one of those paths over another. Schrödinger said “We never in fact have any experience anywhere of a plurality of consciousness but always and everywhere only of consciousness in the singular. This is the one and only perfectly certain piece of knowledge”. Physicists like Sean Carroll say “there are not separate wavefunctions for every particle, there is only the wavefunction of the universe”. A religious viewpoint contends that the existence of a creation demands a creator. Schrödinger had a lifelong fascination with eastern mysticism, seeing connections between the Vedanta and the singular consciousness he was describing as he helped to develop quantum theory. If you are part of this universal consciousness (as is every other living thing) then would you be interested in viewing a chaotic universe where life and matter could not exist? As a designer, I think you’ll appreciate the mystery of the tiny reversible electric motors that drive the flagella of single cells. At the molecular level these look like beautifully engineered nano-technology. As a conscious observer, would you be as interested in viewing a universe where this extremely unlikely structure didn’t arise? Watch this mind-blowing video from Smarter Every Day: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jIG2nmydf9CDrrc

Hey Rob, Thanks for the reply. I checked out that video from Smarter Every Day. That is very interesting indeed, and as a designer that is curious about the Universe it only really hunkered down on some points within a few of my own theories about what this is and how those organic motors came to be: Entropy. Entropy which would be a constant forward motion of design and upgrade in a Universe would ‘find a way’ to create its own orangic motor in order to move around, otherwise it would die. Which would serve zero purpose to even be created or exist. I like to look at the Universe as a machine, everything in it that happens has a reason, laws or purpose including us. If the universe just happened because it happened, then there are still laws that govern it. If we are nothing but a fever dream of a Boltzmann Brain, then our purpose is to experience ourselves. If divine creation is at play, it still required an intricate design - such as that flagella motor above. And in our block Universe what would push that flagella to even find a way to move? Entropy - the forward motion of design. While maybe Entropy pushes the forward motion of bioengineering and design throughout the universe, the next requirement would have to be: Consciousness- in order to navigate (see my rules above) Maybe once a certain level of consciousness is achieved; (excluding insects, animals, plants, etc )It transcends to a higher dimension , where it becomes its own wave and behaves like a wave - creating even higher dimensions of probability that all could exist, based on choices/chance. That could be many worlds? Would they HAVE to be tangible? Or just inaccessible? Fascinating. It is well known that the Universe is indifferent to suffering, since what you mentioned above about consciousness being singular and not experiencing every you everywhere at once, maybe consciousness shifts to the next version in the 5th dimension where all the alternate possibilities exist like a vending machine and YOU are unaware. Always fun, to just theorize about anyway. I will still eat my favorite breakfast today, and go about my daily routine grateful for my existence. One of my favorite quotes: “If you look at nature really carefully, and keep pulling at the intellectual threads and keep going, and just kept delving down into what nature seems to be trying to tell us. Then, if you’re lucky and persistent, you can catch a glimpse of something deeply hidden. A deep, underlying structure of nature, the deep underlying structure of reality itself..” -Albert Einstein Cheers, Ty Ps: Shout out to being from Canada too!

@@bx6p166 I’ve talked in my book and these vlogs about my “gopher hole moment” I had when I was 8 (a few months before I turned 9, this was in 1963). Running through a field I stumbled on a gopher hole. At that moment I felt like a significant event had occurred, and I envisioned the branching possibilities, where rather than getting up and being fine other much worse outcomes existed around me. Reading Madeleine L’Engle’s A Wrinkle in Time back then introduced to the idea that “time” is a line which can be bent, stretched, even folded. Imagining these other branches as being “outside” of my 4D “line” was what started me on this approach to envisioning spatial dimensions, with each new dimension enfolding and including the ones that have come before. For many years I was convinced seven dimensions were all we needed to describe every possibility for our universe. But in 2004, when I read Kaku’s book Hyperspace and the Tenth Dimension, I realized the orthogonal logic of spatial dimensions which I was using could be extended through a third “triad” to reach ten dimensions. In 2006 I released the book and animation that explained my reasoning, which went viral through services like Digg and StumbleUpon, and my fascination with these ideas continues after having published 450 videos here on my channel. Thanks for writing!

@@theultimategodofgaming3200 Nice! Here’s another interesting idea to throw into the mix - in his 2014 book The Science of Interstellar, Nobel-winning physicist Kip Thorne describes the multiple causally connected “4D world tubes” available to us in the fifth dimension using similar logical reasoning to what you present here, and to what my project has been showing since its 2006 launch. Thorne then says it’s fair game to lump any dimensions beyond that together and call that “The Bulk”. With the visualization I present here, each additional dimension beyond the fifth does indeed move us further and further “outside” of the reality we are observing. Why? Because these are all spatial dimensions, so each new dimension adds another set of possible information patterns that are orthogonal in a new way to the dimensions that have come before. I have insisted that any formulations where some dimensions are spatial and some are not is mixing apples and oranges, not logically consistent. As 3D creatures, we only get to see into the 4th and 5th dimension one 3D Planck frame at a time, this is why we don’t see the timeless nature of the 4th dimensional world tube that causally connects us to the beginning and end of the universe, and could be an explanation for why some theories propose that the fifth dimension is “curled up at the Planck length”. That interconnected quality of our 5D reality you describe so well becomes even more obvious when we remember that there are not separate wavefunctions for every particle - there is only the wavefunction of the universe, calculated in five dimensions. While Hawking talked about this occurring in “imaginary time, at right angles to spacetime”, that’s just another way of describing the fifth spatial dimension. This, of course, is what we see happen to Matthew McConaughey’s character in the movie Interstellar, which had Kip Thorne as executive producer and science advisor. In that movie we see him elevated to a fifth dimensional viewpoint, where he can see those branching possibilities of Everett’s Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics, extending out from each other in the orthogonal 4D geometries of the tesseract.

@@spluff5 Tell me about your beef.

@10thdim This video has been incorrectly taken as scientific fact by the powers calling community to make definitive statements about the strength of various characters. For example, an entity capable of traveling between timelines being regarded as 5-dimensional and therfore infinitely more powerful than a 3 or 4-dimensional entity.

​@@spluff5 This project, started in 2006, is about visualizing ten spatial dimensions. It uses the logic of the point-line-plane postulate, the accepted methodology for visualizing any number of spatial dimensions, which has been taught in schools from long before I was born. In 2014 Nobel laureate Kip Thorne published The Science of Interstellar, in which he depicts the fourth dimension as a timeless “world tube” (same concept as the “4D long undulating snake” I describe here). Then, as in my videos, he depicts the fifth dimension as encompassing multiple 4D world tubes, the many potential pasts and futures of Everett’s Many Worlds. He then labels any dimensions beyond that as being irrelevant to the reality we’re observing, calling that “everything else” The Bulk. With my videos we move further and further “outside” of our observed reality with each additional dimension beyond the fifth. That’s the nature of spatial dimensions, each new dimension enfolds and includes the ones that have come before. Comparing a 1D line to a 2D plane, or a 2D plane to a 3D cube, we can see how the complexity of information that can be represented grows dramatically each time we add another orthogonal spatial dimension. As creatures made of 3D atoms and molecules, imagining what it would be like to be a fourth, or fifth dimensional awareness is of course going to be a completely hypothetical exercise. If a fiction writer wants to visualize a dimension that is unconnected to our reality that’s their prerogative, but that’s not how spatial dimensions work. We do know, however, that the sphere packing paradox shows us that with anything beyond nine spatial dimensions the space between optimally packed hyperspheres breaks outside of itself. In that sense, I propose that the tenth dimension can be thought of as the unknowable “outside the system” of Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems, or equivalent to infinite-dimensional Hilbert space and Thorne's The Bulk, or even Tegmark’s Ultimate Ensemble. Tying that to ancient wisdom that also has assigned heavy significance to the number ten makes for some interesting discussion as well, which I've also explored in some of my videos.

And if a fifth dimension is a second temporal dimension? I'd be frank enough to admit I have no idea how that works out in mathematics, all I know is that it muddies up the whole "worldline" hypothetical model in cosmology.

@@TasmanianTigerGrrr I think the 4th dimension is easier to understand when you remember Einstein’s words: “the distinction between past present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion”. In his 2014 book The Science of Interstellar Kip Thorne describes the 4th dimension the same way I’ve been describing it since the launch of this project - he says the 4th dimension can be called a “world tube” (in my 2006 video I described the 4th dimension as being like “a long undulating snake, with your conceived self at one end and your deceased self at the other”- same concept of a timeless 4th dimension). He goes on to say that in the 5th dimension a hypothetical observer would see many connected 4D world tubes in the warped geometries of the tesseract, these would be the potential pasts and futures of Everett’s Many Worlds. This, of course is stunningly visualized in a scene from Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar, which had Kip Thorne as science advisor and executive producer.

@@andrewsciandra4848 "my kids will be watching this in 2034" is a beautiful thought. I turned 70 this month so your forward-thinking words really touched my heart, thank you!

@@opoaotoroiocoko There are infinities within infinities, and there are multiverses within multiverses. According to Kip Thorne, it’s okay to lump any dimensions beyond the five where our unique universe’s quantum wavefunction is defined and call everything else The Bulk. According to the sphere packing paradox, when you go beyond nine spatial dimensions, the system breaks outside of itself, so the tenth dimension and beyond becomes the unknowable “outside the system” described by Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems. So yes, while there may well really be infinite-dimensional Hilbert Space beyond our nine dimensions, I would argue that effectively with ten dimensions we have reached what Thorne calls the Bulk or Tegmark calls The Ultimate Ensemble, or you can use whatever labels various mystical and spiritual systems through the ages have used to refer to the timeless eternal “everything”, and this is why the number ten has such significance within many of those different forms of ancient wisdom.

@10thdim thank you so much! This is quite a comprehensive response, I'm sure I can learn more.

@@funnyperson4016 Exactly! Just as there can be infinities within infinities, there can be multiverses within multiverses. www.bipm.org/en/measurement-units/si-defining-constants Our universe is defined at a point in the seventh dimension by seven defining constants. We are currently observing a 3D universe that exists within a 6D phase space, a multiverse of possible outcomes resulting from that particular set of constants, change any of those constants and you move “outside” to an even bigger set of possible universes. In videos like this one, I’ve talked about Raphael Bousso’s suggestion that there are ten to the power of 500 possible universes: kzbin.info/www/bejne/i6unl3yIgsqCobssi=mFTV6_vl9lcgApkB In videos like Imagining the Seventh Dimension, I talk about Max Tegmark’s hierarchy of multiverses, and suggest that his “Level IV Multiverse” is equivalent to my depiction of the tenth dimension, and I add Gevin Giorbran’s suggestion that we reserve the term “omniverse” for this “multiverse of possible multiverses”. kzbin.info/www/bejne/aHe6g6Gae5Vkrqssi=3qUf6oazQuu1H-kP In “Our Universe as a Dodecahedron”, I talk about the now-proven Poincaré Conjecture, and explore ideas connecting that to the five dimensions of our quantum wavefunction: imaginingthetenthdimension.blogspot.com/2010/05/our-universe-as-dodecahedron.html Thanks for your comment!

@@TurielTyrael44-bf1ld6zu6s Yes. Nobel prize winning physicist Kip Thorne was science advisor and executive producer on that film. In his 2014 book The Science of Interstellar, Thorne describes the fourth dimension as a timeless “world tube”, same concept I’ve been promoting since I launched this project in 2006, where I described the 4th dimension as being like a “long undulating snake, with our conceived self at one end and our deceased self at the other”. In the movie, Cooper is able to see how the multiple possible pasts and futures of Everett’s Many Worlds exist in the 5th dimension. As creatures made of 3D atoms and molecules we only get to see into one 4D world tube at a time, but at any instant the next possible outcome is being selected from the dimension “at right angles to spacetime”, which is how Hawking described the 5 dimensions where our universe’s quantum wavefunction is defined. That is what Cooper is seeing in the scene you mentioned. No doubt about it, Interstellar has become one of my favourite movies!