There's nothing beyond the 4 dimensions of spacetime | Peter Woit and Lex Fridman

[@EvilMAiq]

Reminds me of the Futurama episode where they visit the edge of the universe on vacation and wave to the "Cowboy Universe" versions of themselves. Fry: "So there's an infinite number of parallel universes?" Farnsworth: "No, just the two."

[@steveunderhill5935]

They were before their time. 😹

[@you_beg_my_pardon]

@Steve Underhill were they though? Or do they know scientists in the 1% of the 1% of the freemasons?

[@David.C.Velasquez]

@@you_beg_my_pardon lol... funny! You are joking right?

[@BranchOfSin6]

@@you_beg_my_pardon Matt groening does. Predicted the Tom hanks government thing in the simpsons, just another thing to add to the list of stuff he’s predicted with deadly accuracy

[@stuffilikeyt]

hahaha there's also an episode where doc creates a new universe in a box. why not blue zoidberg?

[@areafifty]

And tomorrow we'll learn that there's 87 dimensions. This stuff is tiring

[@paulensor9984]

Those who have made the greatest contributions to science have almost all expressed views of reality being much greater than that which we normally experience.

[@jonathanpopham5483]

imagine if you could see all the radio waves around you right now. you could see this message zap in at the speed of light, just some colors shooting through your wall

[@paulensor9984]

@@jonathanpopham5483 I posit that it is also much greater than all the current scientific devices can measure as well.

[@finchisneat]

@@paulensor9984 well besides math, but it seems to start getting more arbitrary the more dimensions up you go

[@hunterkudo9832]

@@finchisneat its because we have no points of reference. imagine a 1 dimension being trying to understand the 3rd dimension, what can it compare such a reality to in its world.

[@MrMexikin]

@@hunterkudo9832 black holes maybe 🤔

[@kanyewest6539]

alex jones occupies the 5th dimensional space

[@Nick-mg5xl]

we are merely witness a projection of his existence

[@peterlund4501]

Alex Jones is the product of people that take their time here and waste them with conspiracy. But maybe 🤔 this is what we are here for. Experiencing that nothing is made out of something. 😅

[@TwoKnowingRavens]

In all seriousness Alex Jones is like an incredibly sensitive instrument used for very specific experiments. Like LIGO or the proton decay detector. You don't want to use an instrument like that to check up on any old thing, because it's going to pick up the microwaves from someone making a Hot Pocket across town and set off all the alarms. But when you need to run that 10-20 year experiment about some totally arcane , convoluted government plot. You fire up the Alex Jones machine and you get some good data. Alex Jones might be crazier than a snakes armpit when speaking generally. But when shit is actually going totally crazy-upsidedown he is like a Jedi of insanity seeing moments into the future.

[@cassiusgolgotha2347]

@@TwoKnowingRavens He gets legit information more than half the time, he just translates it from English to Jonesian

[@BorisCosier]

Yup the spot i already taken

[@alexfrolov7546]

Joe Rogan travels there every DMT trip. Alex Jones gets broadcats from there even without any DMT. Eddie Bravo is not sure 'bout all this stuff, he's being skeptical.

[@sa.8208]

Tim dillion goes to the dmt realm and sells loans and condos to the aliens

[@thekingofbohemia1]

That's the first thing I thought. After DMT you have to at the very least be curious about the other dimensional shit you just witnessed! I was. Still am.

[@StopItGarrison]

If you like a single one of those people you suck 😂

[@DaRyteJuan]

This hypothesis is exactly the thing something a creature living in a 2-D world would think.

[@kaneaverillo8607]

What kind of life have you found living in 2D?

[@jordansapp2822]

@@kaneaverillo8607 microscopic life

[@rishonelgolzmann4817]

@@jordansapp2822 source?

[@iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii2458]

@@kaneaverillo8607 Anime waifu

[@uranumbnuts]

​@@jordansapp2822 microscopic life may look 2 dimensional but they do exist within an x/y/z environment and even interact with items in an x/y/z frame of reference.

[@samik83]

"There's nothing beyond the 4 dimensions of spacetime" Maybe the problem is that our brains can only comprehend a "spacetime dimension". After going past the 4th dimension, you lose time, which is essential to how our brains process information. Think about living in a timeless state, what does that even mean to our monkey brains?

[@whitenoise509]

I don't think we would lose time. We don't lose the second dimension living in the third. It just becomes perceivable in a way that is unfathomable, or at least completely unintuitive, to those living in the lower dimension.

[@samik83]

@@whitenoise509 Yes, agreed. Time would still exist, but I guess we would not be constrained by it? Maybe time would be just different "locations" that all exist at the same time and we could freely move anywhere in time.

[@ghostpiratelechuck2259]

@@whitenoise509 Yeah we lose the limitations of the lower dimension. So a fifth dimensional being would likely see our four dimensions in some kind of superposition. But our brains still can’t fully grasp relativity in our 4th dimension, even when we have the math to prove it.

[@lucastheworm4945]

We wouldnt lose time we gain time.

[@mikexhotmail]

@@ghostpiratelechuck2259 we can't fully grasp relativity even when we see an animation about it (train entering tunnel at light speed) let alone math >_

[@pepperjack6749]

This doesn’t mean any more to me than if a fish tried to lecture me about the joy of flight

[@duanegarrett4900]

Bingo

[@Rorsch23]

Technically speaking, fish are usually navigating in 3D. There is no real difference between fish swimming and birds flying apart from the viscosity of the two mediums (air vs water).

[@duanegarrett4900]

@@Rorsch23 riiiight

[@paulbritten1914]

A flying fish jumped in my boat one night, l wonder if it thought it was in another dimension. I cut it up for bait, l feel bad now

[@robm5241]

Why does that come across as a hitchhikers guide quote?😂

[@Official.demetrio]

Same mistake so many experts have made and will continue to make: thinking there is nothing more than what we can currently comprehend / see / measure / etc. Not saying he’s wrong, but the most honest answer is we don’t know. To not explore alternatives is to limit possibilities . To definitively say other wise is misleading our level of understanding. Which he apparently has issue with..

[@conorhennell2623]

yeah as soon as you think something is a certain and there's nothing more then you stop looking

[@JohnnyTwoFingers]

Streetlight fallacy, Scientific Materialist fundamentalists are trapped within it like a matrix.

[@galarius]

True

[@damienhansen7553]

We create extra dimensions because we're bound, it's akin to thinking up superman to dream about escaping & going beyond, there's much more going on than we understand I'm sure but it likely doesnt involve humans on Earth.

[@bigguy7353]

Create? I'd ask for proof but I know you have none.

[@MrJack556]

Create as in make up

[@QuixEnd]

I started with studying theology and epistemology, now 10 yrs later I'm finally studying geometry. Surprisingly geometry is like the black belt test for understanding life as we know it.

[@-.____________________________]

How do you find the angles of a right triangle if all you know is the length of the 2 shortest sides

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

@@-.____________________________ Make a scale replica out of banana peels and measure them, of course.

[@jonathanhorvat2452]

@Hey does anyone here play runescape?? also, it is impossible to determine. Space isn't flat enough on either local or macroscopic scales for Pythagoras digital concept of triangles to hold exactly correct in any physical case.

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

@@jonathanhorvat2452 Nothing is exact. Life is about approximations.

[@jonathanhorvat2452]

@John Rooster on the contrary, friend, indeed some things are exact. And you don't know what life is about, at all. How does it feel to be a hopeless approximationist and an absolutist at once? Quite curious 🤔

[@sethskullsberg7787]

We are video game characters that know we are in a video game but can't even comprehend that we are also inside a TV set and whatever is in the 4th dimension watching us can see the beginning and the end of the game, all at the same time.

[@yellow01umrella]

How do you know our devs aren't in a video game also?

[@alecksonnyamwayavlogs6803]

@@yellow01umrella they could be

[@alecksonnyamwayavlogs6803]

@@yellow01umrella it's likely they can come in and out as they please

[@alecksonnyamwayavlogs6803]

Being outside of time is so crazy to me

[@abdokorayem9478]

I really appreciate your content man keep them coming

[@Hugging_Cactus]

‘we all have a limited amount of time. we have to decide what we spend our time on.’ - the most brilliant statement ever

[@xTheReapersSpawn]

Gandalf beat him to it. and I'm sure someone else has beaten him to that. :P "All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us." (Different context, but still...)

[@hypno5690]

It's a pretty simple observation brother.

[@zacara8469]

​@hypno5690 my thoughts exactly, it not exactly a ground breaking idea.

[@rowdybme4584]

Brilliant and humble. Rare combo

[@alexandermcbride197]

"Our consciousness interacts with another dimension. Our physical sensors only show us a 3-dimensional universe. What exists in the higher dimensions are entities we cannot touch with our physical sensors" - Bernard Carr, professor of mathematics and astronomy who studied under Stephen Hawking and earned his doctorate at Cambridge.

[@deanazcoolzi4382]

But does it mean it or they are correct? How do we check the work?????

[@deanazcoolzi4382]

Proof of stake?

[@alexandermcbride197]

@@deanazcoolzi4382 This is all black box. But all reality is like an infinite black box. To argue the small white box of what we know inside the black box is the totality of everything like the guy lex is interviewing is inherently absurd. Most of reality is completely imperceptible to us I mean look at dark matter for example or anything on the electromagnetic spectrum outside of visible light till recently in human history. We know so little, more than we ever have but reality points clearly to bigger and stranger things than we can maybe not even imagine or comprehend. Let’s hope we can approximate what is called “the divine” or the holy unknown. Not everyone is aware of the veil but if you look at the recurring patterns in reality you can kind of see the signs pointing towards it.

[@sjzara]

Of course our consciousness doesn’t interact with another dimension. If it did our biological brain would break known physics and it doesn’t.

[@landspide]

Anyone can come up with unverifiable ideas... it's pointless drivel unless it is predictive, testable, and falsifiable.

[@murphyitsyou9169]

I’m willing to listen to a whole weeks worth on understanding how dimensions work and come together. Lex make it happen

[@floydnelson92]

I understand multiple dimensions. An extension of Pythagoras theorem is the formula for distance, however for spacetime, I am still trying to comprehend because essentially time is an imaginary dimension as in square root of negative one; another way of saying that is that instead of adding the square of the time interval like all three spatial intervals, you subtract the square of the time interval. That's for special relativity, but for general relativity, the equation for distance is more complex because it involves calculus and the squares are replaced with something like dxdx and then there is also dxdy etc, all combinations, it's interesting.

[@joshpatterson4973]

sadly no one on this planet really knows how they work, may be you will figure it out?

[@floydnelson92]

Polyhedra are interesting. In three dimensions, there are 5 convex regular polyhedra: tetrahedron, octohedron, icosahedron, cube, dodecahedron. If you put a point in the middle of each plane on a cube, eliminate the original cube points, and connect the remaining points, then you get the octohedron. The tetrahedron, also called a 4-simplex, along with the cube and the octohedron have analogues in every dimension. A four dimensional cube analog is called a tesseract. There is also the 5-simplex, using the minimal number of points required to make a 4 dimensional figure. In four dimensions there are 6 convex polyhedra. But, after that, remarkably, those three I mentioned are the only ones which are covex polyhedra in multiple dimensions. Today, I learned there are not just convex polyhedra, but "star polyhedra" and hyperbolic compact convex, hyperbolic compact star, hyperbolic paracompact convex, and compound polyhedra. There are ten 4 dimensional non-hyberbolic star polyedra and four 3 dimensional non-hyberbolic star polyhedra. I should add that I am pretty sure that the way to get hyperbolic geometry is to have a dimension or more which are imaginary dimensions (square root of -1), because that's how you get flat space-time which is hyperbolic.

[@floydnelson92]

If you imagine a wireframe cube in 3 dimensions and then imagine a smaller wireframe cube within it, then connect every corresponding corner with a line... then you get a 3-d image of what is called a tesseract, a 4d analog of a cube. All the lines on a regular tesseract are the same length even if in the model image they are not the same length; the reason they aren't the same length in the 3-d image is because this is a perspective image and the smaller lines, if it's a real 4-d object, are moving into the forth dimension. The same phenomenon happens when drawing a two dimensional image of a cube; a smaller square within a larger square, with each corner connected. All those corner connections are parallel even though they are not parallel in the image. And this is just one image; the whole thing can be rotated giving us different perspectives of the same object. These images can be mathematically calculated.

[@floydnelson92]

In computer science and programming, you can access data a single number located in 0 dimensional space, or you can access a number from a list of numbers arranged in 1 dimensional space. Or you can access a number from an arrray of numbers which are located in 2 dimensional space. 2 dimensional space, an array, is just an list of lists. 3 dimensional space is a list of arrays. 4 dimensional space is a list of 3 dimensional spaces. 5 dimensional space is a list of 4 dimensional spaces. For n-dimensions, it requires n numbers to describe a location in that space. And Pythagoras theorum for distance, extended for multiple dimensions, can be deduced after knowing this, while assuming that a distance traveled one unit parallel to any axis is the same. It also assumes 90 degrees between any two axes. and that from an origin, a point x units away on one axis to a point x units away on another axis is proportional to x for all x except 0, in other words space is flat and does not expand unnaturally as you move out from the origin.

[@mikelincoln8395]

I don’t get the idea that a DMT experience is perceiving another dimension, more tuning into a different program or station in our ‘created’ reality.

[@Greyalien587]

Your created reality is a dimension..

[@thomaskirkpatrick3870]

I just felt like I was being poisoned to death… honestly

[@thomaskirkpatrick3870]

I’ve had more profound experiences from mushrooms

[@Greyalien587]

@Rodrigo Barraza if we have two laptops playing sims in the same room. For the sim player, that’s their universe. They couldn’t communicate with each other, even tho their chips may be 1cm away. And their world would feel physical to them, since it’s from their perspective. Why would it be any difference e here?

[@Greyalien587]

@Rodrigo Barraza and we can take it one step further. Let’s say the sim characters create their own sim capable computers… and they create their own sim game, which is a reality for the games inhabitants..etc etc

[@hochha]

Three spatial dimensions plus one temporal component with a positive vector is what human beings can detect and investigate, but that took thousands of years for science to understand, imperfect as our understanding is.

[@Borked_Bits]

and gravity warps them all.

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

Temp... Humidity... All dimensions

[@hochha]

@@TheLoadedLongboard Spacetime is a manifold independent of atmospheric conditions like humidity since there is no atmosphere, and of course space is cold.

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

@@hochha You got this all wrong. Dimensions, man...

[@Drathrin]

Space is an illusion

[@ehenningsen]

The most common correction I'd love for people to make is the difference between dimensions and realities. People think of an alternate reality as an alternate dimension, when it's the many dimensions that define the location you are in a particular reality, the time, which particular reality and which of it's timelines. Dimensions are like arrays which contain their own defining property or purpose. Think of multidimensional arrays going through loops etc Furthermore, there are more dimensions that define more exotic positions.

[@richardpictures7522]

Thank you for pointing this out. I have been making this mistake.

[@diegoyotta]

“You can’t be bald and have hair at the same time” Peter Woit: my hair is in a superposition of states

[@75hilmar]

Are there any hints about the odds of finding those extra dimensions in like the strong and weak force which are at work on the subatomic level?

[@justsayin3600]

@Larry Medina more so, visible or invisible. If invisible then to your point.

[@jonarmani8654]

@@Malouco tide comes in, tide goes out...

[@EugeneHaroldKrab]

This is completely moronic

[@ZlatnoPeroTV]

No

[@dancingdoungnut]

That’s not how it works my friend. Quantum mechanics doesn’t make any predictions about extra dimensions. So as far as we are concerned no need to care. If you’re a string theorist on the other hand, the mathematical framework predicts 11 dimensions and that those dimensions are curled up in super tiny spaces in which strings vibrate

[@johncipolletti5611]

Hey, this person is so knowledgeable. He knows EVERYTHING! So, of course, we must believe him!

[@visitante-pc5zc]

If you believe him, then so am I

[@johncipolletti5611]

@visitante 2050 No, I have a lot of knowledge and degrees but guess what, I have also a background in probability and statistics. So, I can say that there is no 100% fact or truth. Even a scientific fact is just a theory that has to be constantly tested. Nothing is written in stone! Unless this man is GOD, he is just speculating. Oh, even God made mistakes! Can you say don't put that tree in the Garden of Eden and tell Adam and Eve not to touch it!?

[@Pianoscript]

Ever consider fractional and irrational dimensions? An irrational dimension is indivisible into equal parts like the circumference of a circle or a prime number.

[@laszlokiss483]

Like imaginary numbers and the Mandelbrot set but for dimensions of reality.

[@loose4bet]

It's been done already. If you read about fractals you will find that they indeed have non integer dimensions.

[@caseyford3368]

There are many things beyond and all around just the 4th dimension. We simply need to upgrade more of humanity, in order to traverse and understand more than what we can now. We are already upgrading people, so I hope it happens very soon.

[@solarkid]

Look what the jews have the bots commenting now

[@jankossl9155]

I think what you have to acknowledge to understand what he means.The idea about dimensions is a very fundamental thing and they are all like a big window things can be measured in basically. Everything to the 4th dimension can be experienced and measured. Space and Time. Everything out of that is not nessecary for human calculation and prediction so we shouldn't consider it. Mathematically it is possible to calculate the sheer numeric change when viewing a cube or the correlations of cubes like "grahams number" showcases. But this is hypothetical and not nessecary for the development of our understanding of this world per se.

[@GiganFTW]

So ignore the greater universe out there? Overlooking the ocean for the pond.

[@rainertheraven7813]

"Everything to the 4th dimension can be experienced and measured" 4D spacetime allows the beyond but all of that research is top secret and used for ugly crimes.

[@warren286]

In reality, there exists no single dimension by itself. We break them down to understand them better. Three spacial, one time, is all there is in reality. The rest only exists metaphysically.

[@peterolvecky]

Space and time are just the manifestations of the change (vibration) of matter, information and measure

[@simongross3122]

Without change there is no time

[@sntk1]

So few and far between are the occasions for forming notions whose specializations make up a continuous manifold, that the only simple notions whose specializations form a multiply extended manifold are the positions of perceived objects and colors. ~Riemann The characteristic of an n-dimensional manifold is that each of the elements composing it (in our examples, single points, [...] colors, tones) may be specified by the giving of n quantities, the "coordinates," which are continuous functions within the manifold. ~Weyl

[@stringtheory8090]

I remember back when Joe Rogan Use to actually talk about science! I mean I still love his podcast but it does not give me my physicist fill anymore. I think I’m gonna have to come here for that

[@DanHammersViewOnThings]

The physical/materialistic perspective is basically dead. Even within scientism itself. Not to say that there isn't intellectual joy to be found in the Newtonian perspective. It's just not the kind of universe we find ourselves in. It's more like a Rorschach blob. A dream. A hologram.

[@stringtheory8090]

@@DanHammersViewOnThings I will give up every worldly possessions I own for a holo-deck from Star Trek next generation and just live in there forever

[@alexnahan969]

Compared too what? Are you a astrologist? Believing in some bulllshit higher power. You have any evidence for your claims. Or you into some new age grift

[@johnchristopher3032]

@@stringtheory8090 Zuckerberg is going to give you your holo deck. The price is everything you've got and everything you'll ever have.

[@Just.A.T-Rex]

Where have you been? rogan has become nothing but a right wing dog whistle under disguise of exploring “all” sides. I don’t see him having anyone representing the left or his anti views nearly as often as someone who either agrees with him or spouts the same rhetoric him and his buddies do.

[@ryanadcox2654]

Time means impermanence. Does a thought exist? We are a moment but is it gone already? When all that there is now is present in front of you there is existence. This continues the hierarchy until all that there is exists in you. Thoughts cease. There is only experience now. Radiating. We wake up, open our eyes but think our existence is more than anything else's.

[@equilibrium5280]

1st dimension = a single point, a dot, one 2nd dimension = two points which connect, a line 3rd dimension = Depth, volume, mass, autonomy, life/death, the transformation of flat plains (cosmic expansion) 4th dimension = Time, spacetime, the passage of time, conceptual present (have, is, will, won't, past, present, future, only now) 5th Dimension = Unity, love, peace, transcendence of suffering?

[@nicholaspowers4782]

5th dimension, outside of time not limited by its construct?

[@dannydewario1550]

Seems to be a lot of confusion over what "dimension" means. Whatever definition you're using for dimensions, it seems to be incredibly inconsistent. Dimension just means amount of numbers to describe where you are. If you're 2D, you need 2 numbers to describe where you are (like on a graph or plane). We exist in 3D SPACE because we need 3 numbers to describe our location: length, width, height. The reason why we say SPACE-TIME is 4D is because we need 4 numbers to describe where we are and when we are. So length, width, height, and time are 4 numbers to describe where and when things are. There, very simple. So this is a more accurate list of dimensions: -0th Dimension: a dot (don't need a number for location cuz everything's already here) -1st Dimension: a line (very simple but not too many shapes you can make within a line) -2nd Dimension: a plane (classic euclidean geometry and how our eyes actually see, like a pair of screens) -3rd Dimension: a space (lots of room to move around in and what we are all used to existing in) -4th Dimension: a hyperspace (not possible to visualize no matter how smart you think you are, but if you could then 3 dimensions would begin to feel quite cramped) -5th Dimension: still hyperspace (just infinitely more spacious than the last) -and so on... Nothing magical about adding dimensions. Adding another axis just adds more shapes and more complex geometry, but in the end it's just us playing with numbers.

[@pinkenbajedi2119]

I’ll watch this before I start yelling.

[@Dominus-Noctis]

I was randomly thinking about this at work the other day. But we can merely conceptualize the idea of a 4th dimension we’d have to be present in that space to have the faintest idea of the next one over!

[@seriousseriosity4055]

The 4th dimension is Time. So you're in it now.

[@Intentspunk19]

​@@seriousseriosity4055 seriously, why doesn't anyone else know this!

[@yellow01umrella]

@@seriousseriosity4055 Time is different algother ; 4th space dimension would be something like a tesseract which in 3 dimensions is a cube and in 2 dimensions a square.

[@seriousseriosity4055]

@@yellow01umrella In physics the 4th dimension is time.

[@yellow01umrella]

@@seriousseriosity4055 Describe time without using the word "time".

[@nickduplaga507]

There is a 5th dimension. The reason why is because you can’t freeze time, as you would also freeze gravity interaction with it that would therefore unfreeze time. Your perspective will continue seeing light incoming at the same velocity, and instead extending into the future. Universe has a limit of observing a clock freeze, while the clock doesn’t. This creates a quantum superposition, that is also quantum entangled because the real progressing universe that we still exist in lags behind from it’s limited perspective, and when time dilation ends we are sucked back into that universe through a traversable by perspective of time wormhole into that limited by 0 resting time dilation universe. With it future information, and with it also causality becomes an illusion of time, and the future becomes changeable.

[@bryanatkins2488]

First, love this guy, just his evident sincerity and intelligence. Not in his intellectual league, but re his statement; "...you end up not being able to explain why you see only four anyway." This may be a stupid response, but it made me think of cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman who says our senses were developed, i.e., evolved to sense: fitness, not truth. So, three dimensions & time are our "desktop interface", our selected fitness interface for navigating reality? Also, Hoffman says that physics is now understanding that spacetime is not fundamental. I have no idea who's "right." Hoffman has a 38 minute talk on youtube called: The Death of Spacetime. It's dense and beautiful.

[@dankmemes7658]

Neither of them really know if they're right. We cannot know if there's anything beyond the fourth so both theories are equally credible until one if proven

[@hyperreal]

Hoffman himself says he is most likely wrong. Can also check out a video called Donald Hoffman's Anti Reality Absurdity.

[@davidconnelly]

I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

[@Borked_Bits]

The more I listen to theoretical physicist and mathematicians, the more they remind my of of my 20's tripping on acid and shrooms. Has Lex interviewed one that has bridged the gulf between the two? A skilled physicist/mathematician and then take a heavy round of psychoactives and expounded on the experience? Please reply with a linky if so.

[@mr.giggles4995]

@@forrestmoon2 psilocybin and other pschedelics fuel scientific and intellectual curiosity.

[@tommyhopkins6431]

you might like this, kzbin.info/www/bejne/oqCmc6mXn5mYick . Unfortunately many mathematicians/physicists are less open to these types of ideas than philosophers are, in my experience. many mathematicians/physicists simply view the subjects as means to an end, using them as tools to solve whatever specific problem, rather than for questions of ontology. just my 2 cents

[@rayhill5767]

Have you discovered Terrence McKenna yet?

[@blackpsychedelic]

@Paul Turnbloom I work with eyeglass equations and I damn near lost my mind one time trying to deal with a weird one. Math and psychedelics are the only things that have ever pushed my mind to that point, what a weird sensation.

[@FearTheSirens]

@Paul Turnbloom lol that's what's it felt like on my DMT trip. Complete lose of self. I was infinite. Had left the space time contiuum for but a time. Edit: not left it but was unrestricted by it. In some ways it's equivalent to a day dream only inside an unfolding envelopement of crescendoing shapes and sounds and feelings. And what felt like waterfalls of omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience consuming whatever you are for a split second, like a super nova explosion and within another few inconceivable lengths of time, it all gets sucked into the black hole as I return to sentience and forget much of all of it. Limitless space devoid of any matter or time restraints. If i we're describing a higher dimension beyond space/time the word spirit comes to mind. In that experience I was an observer of the mind I believe. Meaning when I was there I had no body no form. No self. But was still observing which is just so fascinating to me. What was I as the nothingness observer observing what I can only describe as all potential unpotentialed. Light in progress to form. Something like that haha. The movie AntMans take on the microverse. How dynamic and flowy and fluxy it is.

[@AKI111]

Space 4 Points (X,Y,Z) - The Mind 3 Points (X,Y) - Time 2 Points (X) - The Undefined 1 Point () This is how the cosmos was viewed shortly before the Dark Ages began and it is likely one of the last steps humanity makes before the next age can begin. When do YOU think you are? :)...o

[@MrS-pe6sd]

Pop science has been muddying the water for a long time.

[@artlife6210]

Only Ren and Stimpy have seen beyond the 3rd dimension, and their heroic sock finding expedition was a turning point for mainstream science, who immediately invented a whole new equation to describe it.

[@willcowan7678]

Can anyone elaborate on this part for me: "There have been some recent developments in number theory have been to realise that these ideas we are looking at naturally fit into a context where your theory is 4 dimensional" Thanks in advance :)

[@fettmaneiii4439]

Sure! I can translate: "I am juust smart enough to understand some math and command a good control over linguistics, so I can masturbate into your ear all day long and at the end of the day zero meaning will have been translated, but I will feel intellectually superior to every one." Hope that helps!

[@eenkjet]

@@fettmaneiii4439 4D ontology implicates profound metaphysics.

[@Likerholicz]

@@fettmaneiii4439 LMAOOOOOOOO

[@busterhikney6936]

You are referring to the conspiracy to hide the evidence of flat earth. Big NASA does so much lying.

[@syriouskash537]

@@fettmaneiii4439 THAT MY FRIEND........ is spot on.

[@Sam-ud7dt]

Ending on the note that, it’s all understandable it just takes time to understand is great and more true than people realize. As a tax attorney, I deal with complex stuff, but it’s all relatively simple or at least understandable if you take the time to learn it. No high IQ is needed. Just time and patience. Albeit, I think he’s underselling the complexity of what he’s dealing with.

[@Knifymoloko]

Joe Rogan should take Lex on a DMT trip or someother psychedelic. I reckon ol Lex will experience something interesting. Dennis McKenna experienced the processes of photosynthesis firsthand for example.

[@iggswanna1248]

Im an Urologist. Please dont give me DMT.

[@Knifymoloko]

@@iggswanna1248 lmao 🤣

[@firstlast2762]

I’m skeptical of anyone that has an “answer” to anything. We know nothing but think a lot. ✌️👁️

[@gouravmitra9737]

What if Peter Woit and his fellow scientists brain is not evolved enough to conceptualize higher dimensions and moreover the mathematics available is not advanced enough to invalidate their existence

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

It is true that their brains are, in fact, too small to understand temperature, and the like, as dimensions.

[@aleksszukovskis2074]

Maybe he meant spatial dimension by that

[@loose4bet]

He has absolutely no problem of conceptualizing higher dimensions. What he expressed is his believe about space-time dimensions. Keywords "believe" and "space-time".

[@loose4bet]

@@TheLoadedLongboard Interesting. If you google "dimensions in physics" the first thing that pops up is: "The primary dimensions are: mass, length, time, temperature, electric current, amount of light, and amount of matter.". So I guess you're full of shit buddy 😆

[@kaellum4260]

Not one of your more exciting, motivating or inspirational chats to be certain. I believe he is also going to be proven mistaken as well as typical of his type in the future.

[@Jah_Kobi]

I once loved physics, astronomy and always was naturally good with math as a kid, but for whatever reason(s) I never pursued these studies, is it ever too late to start learning these advanced studies if one wants to become something like an astrophysicist?

[@dr.doppeldecker3832]

It's never to late to learn something new;) go for it!

[@Jah_Kobi]

@@dr.doppeldecker3832 I feel like the demand for professionals in these fields has and will increase significantly for positions even at entry level

[@lorenzop.8249]

@@Jah_Kobi do what you like, not whats getting paid

[@Jah_Kobi]

@@lorenzop.8249 Indeed 👍🏽

[@okipo3443]

No,but you would have to start back from the beginning

[@beaches2mountains230]

MAKES ME THINK BACK TO A POSTER ON THE WALL OF MY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LIBRARY. " THE MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE, IT WORKS BETTER WHEN IT IS OPEN ".

[@Tobyyy369]

After careful studying all the great minds and belief systems in the world; I came to the realization that nobody really knows anything. It's all theories, and opinions.

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

Not true. None of what you said is true. I know that, for sure! Keep studying, ol' boy.

[@paulfrederiksen5639]

Except, of course, your statement that “It’s all just theories and opinions.” Everybody thinks they’re the exception.

[@10418]

@@TheLoadedLongboard what do you know ?

[@Tobyyy369]

@@TheLoadedLongboard why so? How can you prove that none of what I said is true? You can't. . . How can you prove that you're right? You can't. . It's all just theories and opinions. Boy oh boy you got a lot more studying to do. Lol

[@Tobyyy369]

@@paulfrederiksen5639 exactly, I gave you my theory and opinion. Therefore, my statement is true no? Haha

[@mouseshadow5828]

I cannot take someone seriously when they claim to know that which they could not possibly know.

[@Zeno2Day]

Honest, regarding the matter at hand.

[@BBoldGaming]

Question: how do you know that there is nothing past the 4th diminsion?

[@nicholaspowers4782]

Opinion

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

They don't...

[@busterhikney6936]

Fortunately, the flatness of our earth allows quantum experimentation that cannot be duplicated on the fake moon landings. Big NASA does so much lying.

[@ricomajestic]

How do you know angels are not responsible for the stability of the solar system?

[@VanishingNomad]

6 dimensions 1 Length 2 Width 3 Height 4 Time 5 Velocity 6 Frequency The first 3 are where something is in physical space. The 4rth dimension is "When" the something exists. 5th dimension is how fast its moving. Then the 6th dimension is a dimension of vibration, or oscillation. For example, the frequency of light, determines its color. Another example would be a radio frequency. Are we listening to WGN sports radio? Or WBBM news radio?

[@RurikLoderr]

Pretty sure there are six, minimum, probably eight or twelve, but three of those are crushed down into one dimension of time. In a black hole time and space switch, with our three dimensions of space becoming one time-like dimension while what used to be time becomes three space-like dimensions. I have a feeling the extra dimensions are how we get the vector fields, in what direction to they oscillate?

[@fernandorendon8618]

Sounds interesting, so the 3ds of time would be past present future? The 3ds of space would collapse into a singularity, but even that has mass and 3 dimensions i would guess.

[@fernandorendon8618]

But present would be irrelevant i guess, like going north from the north pole

[@worker-wf2em]

Oh you’re ‘pretty sure are you?’ You ‘have a feeling?’ Well I’d say you certainly sound like a string theorist

[@rainertheraven7813]

One dimension of time causes inertia in 3D. But what causes TimeDim 2 and 3?

[@RurikLoderr]

@@fernandorendon8618 Wouldn't work like that in our universe. All directions in what we consider time point towards the future, in the same way all directions in what we consider space point towards the center of a black hole past the event horizon. I have a feeling the inside of a black hole, past it's singularity, is just another universe where the old dimensions of space and time have flipped roles.

[@nathanliszewski1824]

I'm a simple man. I see the words 'Lex' and 'spacetime' - I click.

[@QuicksilverSG]

Woit is speaking of the physical universe as being comprised of just four real-valued dimensions of spacetime. The underlying wave function of quantum mechanics is defined as a complex-valued field of unlimited dimensions, whose eigenvalued solutions are projected into 4D real-valued spacetime.

[@spitfirefrench]

Yes

[@nutshang]

Wrong

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

I want to agree with Jon Stewart, but I want to agree with you. Temp is a dimension just as time and space are.

[@3jasonwebb]

You almost got it.

[@JohnBlackMD]

This is exactly what buckaroo Bonzai used to think...

[@michaelgarrow3239]

Calling what we live in 3 dimensional is a misnomer. Three dimensions is one way to measure space, but in no way begins to convey reality.

[@blengi]

I doubt reality at its heart is some mathematical construct just waiting to be neatly summarized. Mathematics in of itself can't exist without some sense of time and causality to order logic and needs a notion of space to contain the information which embodies abstract truth. Nothing in mathematics other than the implied axiomatic illusion to these things exist per se. And therein lies the issue. It all kind of implies Math and physics are symbiotically emergent from something deeper and much more subtle. This reasoning is not an excuse to cunningly invoke mysticism, but my intuition is, at some level there is some something transcendentally odd about it all that the hyper myopic human consciousness could nary grasp, even though some deludedly infer the awesomeness of human intellectual achievement when all we've done till now, is just the byproduct of an oversized, million years removed, monkey brain.. The Fermi Paradox is probably not much of a paradox once you "wake up" from the relative vegetative state of existing in a 100 billion neuron mental cage lol....

[@tommyhopkins6431]

our inability to conceptualize the "correct" construct doesn't necessarily mean such an objective structure doesn't exist. are there truly random processes? is there something that can exist without being constrained by logical consistency? do mathematical structures exist in a platonic sense? if not, then what do those mental models describe, and do those "things" exist in some other sense, intangible? i also get the sense that we are far too certain of ourselves though lol. I really like the points you bring up, but I think there's room for things like Tegmark's mathematical universe hypothesis and such, and we shouldn't just chuck out platonic-type solutions just cuz our subjective phenomenology is very bounded

[@davidnichol4735]

Aww you tried so hard to sound intelligent! Did you rip this from a Michael Eric Dyson tirade?

[@blengi]

@@davidnichol4735 lol, cheers!

[@-.____________________________]

Name one upper division math class and a topic you learned in it

[@theyshouldhavenevergivenme5439]

I guess he checked it himself. Say 'Hi' to Ant Man's mother in law for me

[@bkinstler]

Why do we classify time as a primitive and then just throw in in with the three spatial dimensions and call it a fourth?

[@tommyhopkins6431]

try to come up with a system that can predict things and give insight into relationships that have cause and effect without using time as an independent variable and you'll see why l0l. in other words, cuz our brains def feel like time is passing, but quantifying that isn't easy. there are def people trying to create these systems though with a different perspective on time. also, historical context dictates a ton of the pedagogy

[@Lethgar_Smith]

And when you die your soul makes a wonderous discovery. That your conscious self was so wrong about so many things. Death is like waking up from a really intense dream. For a brief moment it all seems very real and then it isnt. It was just a phantom reality. Fully functional as long a you're in it, but once you step outside, the field collapses. That's the true nature of reality. Fully dependent upon our perception of it.

[@vajrapromise8967]

Extra dimensions may be related to speed/distance or not spatial, including entanglement and parapsychology, like intuition, remote viewing, or morphogenic fields, the placebo effect, etc., Which points more to the possibility that we really are living in a 2-dimensional world or matrix, and we are somehow perceiving things in 3 dimensions as we move in time.

[@frankiesprul5046]

Wtf

[@remad1777]

But the whats outside the matrix?

[@you_beg_my_pardon]

So what you're saying is that we are basically already in a virtual reality world where they just created a virtual reality world? Rick and morty? The miniverse? And they created a multiverse and so on. Not specifically in that order but...

[@omnipotent1992]

@@remad1777 More dimensions

[@syriouskash537]

YEP!!! But you cant say that to a scientist cause they HATE not being able to measure something or predict an outcome. I had a precognition once. AFTER THAT...... I had to put a lot of these scientists in a box. They were constantly telling me what didnt happen bases on their math equations. But sorry...... There was NO WAY IN HELL they were going to convince me that I didnt experience what I did. It was a TRUE TO LIFE PRECOGNITION. Only happened once back in 94. I can say this tho. From others I spoke to that said they had the same thing happen to them? It seeeeeeems like it happens when you DO something. One guy said it seemed like when he sat down, the act of sitting down on THAT particular chair is what did it. For me?? It seemed like my putting my arm through my shirt sleeve is what triggered it for me. Wasnt like using the force or something. It was something that just happens to you out of nowhere. And you feel it in your whole body. Not like Deja Vu. This was like I KNEW BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT!!! Which made me really think about one thing!!! "IS THE FUTURE REALLY ALREADY SET!!!" That every choice we are going to make? We already made but just dont know it yet. Weird I know. But is the future already set? Cause if its not? Then there is no way I can KNOW whats going to happen next without a cause/effect. So imagine rollin a dice and you KNOW its going to be a 5. Not think. BUT KNOW!! There will be NO OTHER outcome!! Its going to be a five! How can that be..... unless..... unless...... it was already GOING to be a 5? No chances. Its going to be a FIVE!! PERIOD!! The law of causality is flawed. TRUST ME!! ITS FLAWED. Something is really funny about time itself.

[@FobbitMike]

Can anything other than these two together make a better soporific?

[@craigdaurizio686]

Yes there is. Hasn't he watched the Dragonball? There's other universe and timelines out there. Most people don't realize that the show is actually based on the second possible timeline and not the original 🤯

[@Q_QQ_Q]

??

[@andrewrivera4029]

“You have to understand Neo, some minds are not ready to be unplugged”

[@Dylans503]

Yeah like Dr Seuss. Or teletubbies. Just imagine, in some universe the cat in the hat is throwing Kamehamehas and its being broadcasted through a telletubbies belly TV from a higher dimension....but it's not really the cat in the hat....the cat in the hat, is you!

[@bobancikic7458]

@@Dylans503 how can i be a cat ewhen i dont even have a tail like a cat

[@JohnSmith-wu6yx]

What fascinates me is that there are completely undiscovered forms of higher math that would probably change everything. But it’s true that we are not yet at the place to move beyond our current forms.

[@christopherellis2663]

Various " forms of higher mathematics " are the tools for inventing fantastical probabilities, not investigating actuality.

[@loose4bet]

@@christopherellis2663 Very often the math concepts were discovered first as purely abstract entities just to be found useful decades or hundred years later to explain actuality...

[@vchemka2]

Can you explain the forces of dark matter and dark energy as something from above dimension that we can’t detect but that’s something that affects us?

[@TheLoadedLongboard]

No

[@busterhikney6936]

Yes. It is precisely what caused our earth to flatten.

[@atomicsmith]

Dark matter and Dark energy are inventions to cover that we don't have any clue about the behavior of light and gravity at the intergalactic scale. They don't really exist. Beware of anyone that places mathematics ahead of observation, and calls it science.

[@busterhikney6936]

@@atomicsmith Oh, BIG NASA knows but they cover the truth with psudo-science to deflect other countries from tagging onto their learnings so they can maintain the space dominance and communication contract maintained with extra-terrestrials

[@nateb3679]

No. That would solve everything.

[@JKDVIPER]

1st dimension. Legth. 2nd. Height. 3rd. Depth. 4th MOLECULES 5th ATOMS. The reason is. They break down the building blocks releasing energy and SHRINKING THE BALL so to speak. 1. BASEBALLS (MOLECULES) 2. ATOMS (Golf balls) see the curvature creates space. The addition of empty space is the trick. Empty space counts for something. It is an integral part of the overall composition of the universe. Used really well. Empty space makes things happen. Empty space is a liquid to the universe. The earth is a hole to space. How deep depends on how much mass. It may be the case that, solid objects and stars, black holes. They’re really holes in space. That’s why we spin down the drain. 😎💥

[@monkerud2108]

Lol that is like saying there is nothing beyond terrestrial food, there is no food in the universe outside of the earth. Look buddy, you are making a claim based on the absence of knowledge of an alternative, which is bad logic. i’m not saying it’s false, i’m just saying its not a valid conclusion or even a testable one.

[@travisray2934]

I'm confused as to what the difference between something being false or something being an invalid conclusion. You say that, "it may be false, but it's not a valid conclusion", and all I can think is how contradictory those two ideas are.

[@realCharAznable]

@@travisray2934 "false" is testable. "not a valid conclusion" is answered shortly before it was mentioned, with "bad logic". Seeing things that point in the direction of something you can't understand (math, quantum mechanics, etc.) and saying that since you can't, as a human, comprehend what they are pointing towards, is bad logic and not a valid conclusion. History is literally brimming with people who have had the same mindset before such and such discovery was made. Certainty is a fool's ideal when it comes to these things. They may or may not end where we think they are going, hence why it cannot be said to be true or false.

[@travisray2934]

@@realCharAznable So a long ass way to say it's a distinction without a difference. Which the latter is the important part, wouldn't you say? But if you want to believe in 10 dimensions or even 1000, go for it. It seems as ludicrous as telling people there's a man in the sky that made everything though.

[@realCharAznable]

@@travisray2934 It isn't a matter of belief. It is the difference between thinking you know it all and not. I'd argue being a hard materialist is just as close minded as anything else. There isn't any actual evidence that points towards a man in the sky, just things people experience that currently can't be explained, and people attach those to the idea of a man in the sky. With what we're talking about, there are specific and limited indicators in that direction, that can't be further explored at the moment. So the logical conclusion is that there may be more to it, not a religious belief that it is definitely the case, nor a materialist belief that it isn't. If you want a label for it, you could say "logical agnosticism".

[@travisray2934]

@@realCharAznable That's a fine opinion, but in my eyes, scientist are skirting the lines between reality and science fiction just as much as the zealots are nowadays. You may not see it that way. That's fine. All I know is there is no actual proof or anything definitive to suggest that there are as many dimensions as some scientist dream up. There just isn't. There's more tangible evidence for Bigfoot than these dimensions you believe exist or believe"might" exist. So to show ire towards someone pointing that out seems adjacent to religious devotion. When you could just say that you personally believe we will discover more even though we haven't yet. But saying this guy is an idiot? Where do you get off doing that? What if we do discover the truth and he's right and your dimensions don't exist? Do you put on the dunce cap or do you hide behind your logical agnosticism?

[@bryanclarke1927]

Theories change every five minutes. Sometimes you have to open you're mind to other possibilities rather than calculus

[@maxtaylor1026]

Higher dimensions and anything "quantum" is just runaway mathematics.

[@davidnichol4735]

Praise Jesus Amen

[@freedomdividendnews5042]

The fifth dimension is events that could of happened in our dimension but didn't because of choices we made that led to this dimension

[@dredebile]

Peter, put your lectures online. Thanks in advance, the rest

[@fettmaneiii4439]

"There's nothing..." aaaand you lost me. haha smart people can be so so dumb.

[@alexnahan969]

Any evidence ?

[@michaelstone7514]

The multiverse is a complex piece of Oragami that employs energy and spacetime to constantly shape and reshape itself by tinkering with the proportions of the mix. Counciousness arises from the universe but is not bound by it.

[@alexandermcbride197]

Bruh I’m sure the great mathematician John Lennox could run circles around this guy without breaking a sweat explaining higher realities and dimensions.

[@travisray2934]

Okay but can he show us one of them? Can he show that they exist in reality or just in his equations? I mean there's literally more tangible evidence for Bigfoot than all these extra dimensions I hear of, and I'm guessing you don't believe in Bigfoot.

[@heisenbergwhite5036]

@@travisray2934 FYI bigfoot as a interdimensional being is one of the explanations used in the bigfoot community to explain the lack of hard evidence.

[@dpfutbol]

@@travisray2934 i could should you but it'd take a while.

[@chloeellis4117]

I count 5......we also have time, and size. Both need to be present also.

[@aaron_martin]

Spacetime is by definition 4 dimension right??

[@dpfutbol]

yes but time and space can be manipulated

[@greylatern]

4th is location at any give moment. 5th is possible locations. Think slit experiment. Observation is measuring, collapsing the possibilities into it's 4th demisional position. Conceptual math is limited by this mechanic of our reality by the act of observation itself. Not a hard concept to understand. Quantum mechanics is exploration of the 5th. So a course geometry can not "perceive" anything above the 4th by it's very nature😊

[@cirquedude123]

I’ve always gotten the impression that the flash of DMT is a bit like experiencing the 4th dimension. Everything, ever, all at once.

[@Maffmatix]

bingo

[@MrHominid2U]

Damn it people, the 4th dimension is TIME

[@godofdogs6198]

There are higher dimensions, up to 10, 12, and 15.

[@MrHominid2U]

@@godofdogs6198 No evidence for that whatsoever and the only evidence we do have, the gravitational waves from the colliding black holes we measured recently, strongly suggests there are no dimensions higher than the 4th (time). It seems to me adding higher dimensions was just a fudge to get string theory to work which is supported by how the math works for both 10 and 26 dimensions.

[@mencken8]

“We KNOW of nothing besides the 4 dimensions of space-time.” There, FTFY.

[@armandosimon9780]

Yes so when I astral travel I am imagining or only dreaming? And when my mom appeared to me after she died...where did she come from? And the other countless stories that prove that there is something out there....hmmm categorically there is something we can not detect with our nomal senses and instruments...I wished we had more open minded scientist to explore that...hope the quantum mechanics and physics demonstrates that soon....

[@josephpie2000]

To be fair while I believe, eye witness account prove nothing, they are the least reliable form of evidence.

[@robertsouth6971]

If there are only the four dimensions then what dimension does spacetime bend into?

[@rainertheraven7813]

Spacetime^2

[@cyberceasar8620]

hell

[@tommyflynnmusic]

This statement is absolutely outrageous

[@larrpan]

Go ahead, and use mathematics as a fishing net to throw beyond the horizon of the imagination. But not at the cost of missing the rhymes of the tides as saltwater dances with the moon.

[@clapdrix72]

What gibberish is this? Are you just saying don't neglect art but in a painfully pretentious way?

[@larrpan]

@@clapdrix72 there's a balance of rootedness in the pursuits of the beyond. Diving deep underwater of subjectivity, even an adult dolphin would drown if not to resurface for a breath.

[@wotagoodname]

@@larrpan lol

[@skepticdrunk8850]

"Pee can be stored in the balls but balls cannot be stored in the pee"

[@larrpan]

The spirit of physics is a joyous play with objective reality. The fruits on these branches become crazy poetry.

[@lawsonharris1393]

Fantastic clip

[@georges4061]

I'm not sure a mathematician is qualified or honestly capable of speaking on theoretical physics. The entire principle of mathematics is set provable rules. The entire world of theoretical physics is finding new rules for mathematicians to follow so to speak.

[@tommyhopkins6431]

i think that's an odd, boxed-in way of looking at the world, plus you're appealing to authority. are there really any questions which are purely mathematical in nature, or purely of the subject of physics? and aren't both of these "subjects" ultimately based on logic and perception of the world? plus any expert can have a wrong opinion about their field, and any novice can happen to have a correct opinion about the experts field. you should say why you disagree w his specific ideas, not that he isn't qualified to spout them. imo the difference between math + physics, professionally, is almost entirely semantic at this point. there are mathematicians doing research in physics and vice-versa. if you pigeonhole yourself into thinking about these subjects through the lens of solving academic hw problems, you may be limiting yourself

[@Jon-pw2ik]

Question: isn't, just like how we are all constantly moving thru time as a 4th dimension, conversely, the expansion of spacetime itself constantly moving outward and expanding against gravity, aren't we all moving thru that as a 5th dimension too? Ive just always wondered since I learned of dark matter and energy and the fact that space can move much faster than light and that this causes our universe to be constantly expanding outward as to why this isn't considered another dimension outside of 4d spacetime

[@SnotFroth]

i don't think the expansion of spacetime represents a 5th dimension. dark energy is the explanation for the universe expanding. dark matter is the explanation for the behavior of galaxies. space isn't expanding into anything that's "outside" of space, it's just expanding

[@mchapman2424]

His cadence is very similar to Elon. Also I think hexagons could be the most relatable shape when talking about the universe

[@kingsleyoji649]

Are hexagons the geometric building blocks of the toroidal force expression?

[@mchapman2424]

@@kingsleyoji649 Abe - "better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt." Me - "......"

[@-.____________________________]

@@kingsleyoji649 wtf is that? And why not triangles

[@kingsleyoji649]

@@-.____________________________ toroids are everywhere in the expression of force especially gravity and electromagnetics. I think triangles are more basic than hexagons.

[@damienhansen7553]

I think that's "tetrahedrons", but youre right that the beahive shape pops up alot

[@gtgodbear6320]

We are actually 2D mental beings on a blackhole. Being projected out in 3D into the universe.

[@SerPapus]

Facts

[@KaliFissure]

3 dimension of space and a compact dimension one single Planck second in size, time. There is no past and the future didn’t happen yet

[@MsCristian04]

at least we know that is something out there beyond us, even if now we couldnt reach for it, no one knows what future can bring.

[@alexandredatlanza5914]

When my dog ​​farts, he turns his head behind him and looks around and tries to see beyond him. Pretty sure that for him, an almost metaphysical mystery has to be solved in his mind at some point.

[@johnnylefthand6628]

I don't think its impossible to envision the universe as it is. Higher dimensions, and time, all can be visualized, and drawn so everyone understands the universe's true nature.

[@alexnahan969]

It can’t be “visualized” if can be written down in math and a picture of it is just a 3D representation

[@sa.8208]

Dmt / mushrooms

[@johnnylefthand6628]

@@alexnahan969 If I have a cardboard box that represents all that was, is, and ever will be. It contains all matter, and energy in 4 dimensions for all time. The question is, does that box contain everything there is?

[@alexnahan969]

@@johnnylefthand6628 "It contains all matter, and energy in 4 dimensions for all time." The question is, does that box contain everything there is? According to your statement yes it is.

[@johnnylefthand6628]

@@alexnahan969 If so, then we. dont need math or 3d representations. We will have its true essence, we will have what it is. And what it is can be drawn.

[@Grrrnthumb]

What about quantum entanglement? One particle being in 2 distant places at once, or if you like, instantaneous FTL matching changes to two distant parts of the same particle. Isn't that the very definition of another dimension? The explanations I've heard always start with "No, that's simply...", and then they go on to describe a condition that exactly matches another dimension.

[@bjornragnarsson8692]

It’s a violation of locality, but not to do with another dimension. How do we know? Bell’s Theorem. The question of “hidden variables” within the EPR paradox has been disproven repeatedly in many different ways. Why entanglement occurs hasn’t been answered. It’s believed to have something to do with actually defining the spacetime manifold, but there are no certain proofs for this yet. What we do know is that entanglement occurs in different ways whenever particles get close enough to each other. And their wave functions there on act collectively as “one” particle in regards to the phenomena of their entanglement (spin, momentum, position, polarization, etc.). They remain entangled as long as quantum coherence is maintained. Naturally though, quantum systems tend to decohere over time. One example of quantum decoherence is the act of taking a measurement on a component of the quantum system. The wave function collapse is quantum decoherence in action. Quantum entanglement is a necessary tool for quantum computers. It is hypothesized that the spacetime manifold is a consequence of natural quantum error correction, similar to what we attempt to utilize with quantum computers.

[@Grrrnthumb]

​@@bjornragnarsson8692 I know ALL of that. None of it even hints that another dimension is not involved in entanglement. In fact just the opposite. Bell proving non-locality only reaffirms no one has any idea why this entangled connection at a distance works at faster-than-light. So: 1) The very word "non-locality" is literally another way to say another dimension is involved. Imagine a 2-D person seeing the results of 3-D travel... it would look like someone jumping around (or FTL travel) on their plane, they would call it "non-locality". Imagine a 3-D person without the 4th dimension of time experiencing someone pop out of the world and move to another place during the hidden dimension of time... they would also call it "non-locality". You admitted yourself no one knows why entanglement occurs, so how can you possibly rule out the most obvious answer??

[@bjornragnarsson8692]

@@Grrrnthumb you seem to need this conclusion in your life for personal reasons rather than remaining open to less exciting possibilities on a topic that is unlikely to be resolved in our lifetime. But I also get the strong impression that you feel you understand this all better than anyone else before or currently. The ironic thing about that is, we have no way to conclusively test for, and demonstrate other dimensions. Also, your examples don’t really work. On the one hand, you would have to pop straight up out of a 2D plane, move forward in one of the two spatial dimensions without the observer seeing your projection change positions in the 2D they can observe, and then drop straight back down. That would be a difficult task to fulfill, because even if you moved directly forward at a higher or lower two dimensional plane, the observer would still see your movement forward, just not upward and downward. The only way that could be is if that extra spatial dimension was somehow made up of discrete planes rather than continuous planes orthogonal to the other two dimensions. If you imagine a blackhole as a hyper dimensional phenomenon in a two dimensional world, that curves downward in the third dimension until its curvature entirely exists in the third dimension, then a distant observer would see you slowing down in the two dimensional plane and eventually laying still, because your 2D projection remains stationary while your 3D projection would be free falling faster than light in the hyper dimension. Your second example is more problematic because a 3D spatial observer without time wouldn’t even be able to recognize that you changed positions in the first place, as that would constitute the existence of time from their non-temporal perspective, which doesn’t make sense unless both observers were in three spatial and one time dimension to begin with. Also, I’m surprised that quantum entanglement was the phenomena to convince you of additional dimensions and not just basic quantum mechanics itself. How do you interpret the double slit experiment? The measurement problem? The uncertainty principle? Individual particles spread out in space all the time until their position is measured or the system decoheres from it’s environment. Isn’t that just as concerning to you as quantum entanglement? What about other uncertainty relationships like in signal analysis, which have the same fundamental relationship as subatomic particles do in spacetime, yet can exist as purely mathematical phenomena?

[@Grrrnthumb]

​@@bjornragnarsson8692 I am VERY open to other possibilities, but I am tired of being told this one is impossible without evidence or even a cogent reason. For instance, read all your posts above. There is nothing there at all in evidence or even a logical reason why you think entanglement can't be related to another dimension. Your only attempt was to say 'because Bell', which I explained why Bell shows *just the opposite* and if anything lends support by proving non-locality. Non-locality is very, very, very similar to just being another dimension. So in my original post I said someone would tell me "No, that's simply...", and then bizarrely go on to describe a condition that *does* describe another dimension. You did exactly that! So thanks for making my prediction come true when you said "It’s believed to have something to do with actually defining the spacetime manifold". It's like you're not even listening to yourself. You really can't see that what you said is another way to say extra dimension? Yes I am very interested in those other aspects of QM, but for this discussion about dimensions, none of them so simply and clearly point to the possibility of another dimension. I am in good company, I think. Einstein chose this point (entanglement) especially as the biggest sticking point for him with QM, and called it "spooky action at a distance". He was wrong about the solution (hidden variables), but he was right that it's a huge problem that leaves QM incomplete. If he were alive today to see Bell disprove hidden variables, which direction would he go then, since he was so adamant that these vastly distant entanglements seem to catastrophically violate the speed of light? Which direction is there left? Isn't it only adding a dimension, or so radically changing our existing dimensions that it's just word games to say you're not adding a dimension?

[@bjornragnarsson8692]

@@Grrrnthumb I understand your frustration, but try not to get emotional about it. Emotions only interfere with objective reasoning. While I don’t exclude the possibility of extra dimensions, it is hard to formulate a coherent theory that matches experimental evidence. None have succeeded thus far. That withstanding, how would you describe a model of the universe with extra dimensions that can be reduced to our 4D spacetime within acceptable limits, yet describe that which we cannot measure? One discovery that may or may not be promising is the AdS/CFT correspondence. This implies the “Holographic Principle” in which the gravitational bulk of the universe is a projection of a lower dimensional quantum field theory. Interactions between particles on the surface of the bulk topology correspond to the weaker gravitational effect we observe. That isn’t quite the same as implying extra dimensions though. In fact, entanglement that we measure in our universe is the result of a lower dimensional interaction of quantum fields. The most critical aspect for a modern theory is to describe gravity at the quantum level. I am uncertain what route to follow. The AdS/CFT correspondence works for Anti-de Sitter space, but our universe doesn’t correspond to an an AdS universe as measured from the global geometry and estimating the global topology, ie it appears to be flat or at most, closed - as in a sphere. The Standard Model is a recipe for a universe like ours, neglecting the phenomena of neutrino oscillation and gravity. Solutions based on the AdS/CFT correspondence are that quantum error correcting codes define the spacetime manifold, and its relationship between entangled states define the effects of gravity. Whether this will be correct or not, I do not know. We still need to be able to experimentally verify this relationship. I will leave you with the fact that if we didn’t exist in a 4 dimensional [spatial (+ time)] world, the inverse square law of electrodynamics and gravity would not hold. That is to say, if we were 2 + 1 dimensional beings in our universe, we would be able to detect the energy of a sound or particle interaction escaping to the 3 + 1 dimension. Much research has been done on this and particle accelerators have tested it constantly, yet energy is always conserved and no falsities have been uncovered.

[@lowkey213]

I love these talks. I kind of see things very differently then what’s discussed. I feel as though mathematics might be holding us back rather then helping us forward. Most all of math has been a creation of man to explain something, anything. We had to create our version of a measuring stick in order to measure things. And most of it is based on not the best way, but rather on a traditional way. Numbers are very different then objects. The number 5 can mean so many things, -5, or whatever. Or it can simply mean 5 apples. So this creation stems from a much different place then what stems from geometry. Geometry is sacred for it doesn’t change. You can call a right angle a right angle, or say it’s 90 degrees, you can call it 1000 degrees, its still a right angle, the numbers are mumbojumbo that we created and are still tweaking. Now he was talking about spacial dimensions and that there are 4. This is perspective. You take a pair of dice. You can say they are 3 dimensional cubes. Or you can say they are six sided. Now imagine walking in a square white room with the numbers on the dice painted on all 6 sides of the room. You can move in 6 directions. Place a ladder and go up, or come down. Forwards and backwards, side to side. Then you can say it’s the sixth dimension we are in and time 7. Religious people think he’ll is down for some reason, a down that they can’t reach unless maybe when dead. Heaven up somewhere, somewhere they cannot reach. You can think of dimensions in that light, that you believe it exists but aren’t capable of reaching. These are very simple ideas that are very deep in depth. Like the measuring stick. You have to be very precise in the explanation of the basics so not to mess anything up. Are we talking metric or standard, 3 dimensions or six dimensions. Are we talking squares, circles and triangles, or are we talking about zero, 11, 13, or minus 21 squares or cubed. Our fundamentals just might not be so fundamental is what I’m saying.

[@TurboB5]

Numbers are the reason we know anything and have advanced in any way. It's not bs just because you can relate the number five with negative five or see them as the similar when they are not in any way. Your "point" is basically pointing towards the irrelevance of numbers, math, calculations along with the ability to test and theorize, even though they prove to be our fundamentals time and time again. The existence or the "idea" of numbers and what you call simple is really just part of the formula known as reality. Without the practice of mathematics we would understand nothing.

[@coreymartinsen4450]

You need to delve deeper into mathematics. Geometry is not at all sacred. The moment you step outside the Euclidean assumptions you get into the wonderful world of parallel lines intersecting, sum of interior angles of a triangle not being equal to 180 etc. It also turns out you get better models of natural phenomena like gravity (general relativity). With regards to 6 dimensions inside your hypothetical cube, you are double counting linearly dependent vectors. More simply, we define a dimension to be all possible ways you could travel along your ladder in either direction for as long as you please. You can come up with your own definitions of the word "dimension" or the number "5", but the abstract objects you are describing exist outside of human words and symbols, and they follow rules. For example, cicadas probably don't know what a "prime number" is, or that the least common multiple of two primes is their product, and yet they emerge in prime intervals for that very reason. How you describe mathematical truths is irrelevant. They are still inescapable laws of the universe.

[@megmc80]

Ffs I could only get halfway through. It’s ‘than’ not ‘then.’ Nothing exists without mathematics, so yes, that’s the measurement.

[@lowkey213]

@@coreymartinsen4450 I’m not disagree at all. I’m using the word sacred as self evident truths across the galaxy, or laws. I fully understand the depth of mathematics. I don’t think anyone here is watching these videos to learn mathematic, I think we’re all here to hear perspectives rather then beliefs or facts. I’m aware that mathematics can explain allot, including how parallel lines can meat across space and time, that triangles can have a sum greater or less or than 180. As far as, do I believe the current state or form of mathematics we are currently using to be like the alphabet of the universe. No I don’t. I don’t think our math has progressed to birth that language yet. But the farther we venture into space. As our math grows, in some ways, if our perspectives change. We might eventually get such a language. We use math in all the other sciences as well, and all of them are evolving as we speak. That’s why I mentioned the six axis perspective. Pilots have adopted it over the common mans 3D perspective a long time ago. Though the same thing, we had put more information into it for better communication. So it’s not that I disagree with math being the law of the universe. I’m saying the perspective might matter more then we know. Hypothetical question. An alien ship lands on your lawn and contacts you. How would you use math to communicate?

[@lowkey213]

@@megmc80 grammar police, relax, I’m not writing a dissertation paper. I’m just typing with two thumbs and no fucks. Math was here before us and will be here after.

[@NolanManteufel]

5th dim is knowledge : abstract representations of phenomena within and between the first four dimensions.

[@iyziejane]

Standard disclaimer: physics dead ended in the 1970s because of the high energy culture that is too focused on treating Einstein's ideas as fundamental and dealing with quantum mechanics as a correction. QM is much more revolutionary to physics than relativity is.

[@iyziejane]

@@kh2716 Quantum Field Theory and General Relativity are inconsistent with each other. From what we know experimentally Gravity may be an emergent phenomenon, but that's underexplored because of the cultural road block of treating gravity as a fundamental distortion of spacetime.

[@Raziel1818]

Captain here: This is not an expert explaining a fact. Woit is expressing a personal view, this is what he wants to be true so take this with a gram of salt. If Lex had a string theory expert/researcher he would argue the complete opposite point of view. Just so we don't use the authority fallacy here. Just having quantum entanglement shows there more than 4 dimensions. The whole quantum field/structure/framework, whatever it is, it interacts with us via something outside our known 4 dimensions. Now, that means there is something outside our 4 dimensions, that is not made up of our own 4 dimensions. We can only define it by a bigger, our mother universe, or host universe, that has n number of other dimensions where n is bigger or equal to 1. We DO know there are extra dimensions, we just can't interact with them in a meaningful way, even if string theory experts would argue, we do. In conclusion, if you are confused about dimensions, because every expert has a different opinion on them('tis quite fashionable in hard science academia and or high intellectuality, so we can't really blame them) here is what science knows: 1. There must be other PHYSICAL dimensions 2. We don't know how many and how they work, organize, interact, they are a singularity 3. We already have, create, interact with, MATHEMATICAL/VIRTUAL dimensions, on a daily basis(everyone knows a square rot of a negative number is an imaginary number, or the mathematical dimensions generated by the virtual world and the internet of things, stock trading etc)