Page **1** of **2**

### 4D

Posted: **Thu Jan 19, 2006 8:02 pm**

by **Count Chocula**

Has anyone ever tried to think of what 4 Dimensions would look like?

Thinking about it makes my brain expand. xD

My thoughts: Technically, 4D can not be time, as scientists and whatnot have claimed. 4D would need to be a physical object following the "# D rule", right?

0 dimensions... a point

1 dimension... a line

2 dimensions... a square

3 dimensions... a cube

4 dimensions... a headache

Posted: **Thu Jan 19, 2006 8:49 pm**

by **Rattrapmax6**

Well,. depends on how you look at it... =)

http://www.freebasic.net/forum/viewtopi ... ght=#14391
That link has some info on the topic...

Posted: **Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:59 pm**

by **{Nathan}**

What would it look like? It would just be another way to move. Another axis. Why can we not imagine the feat?

Because humans are stupid.

Posted: **Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:02 pm**

by **Guest**

Its called a hypercube. If you google it, you can see the 4 dimensional cube. This is now a part of high school physics...

Posted: **Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:02 pm**

by **Count Chocula**

Then I'll be getting into it very soon.

I can't make sense of it now though.

Posted: **Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:13 pm**

by **Deleter**

of course its not time...a 2d animation pretty much shows that

. If you instead image a 2d animation being slowly "pulled up" to create a 3d figure from its animation, then maybe you are one step closer to imagining 3d to 4d.

Posted: **Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:28 pm**

by **Kyle**

I was confused at first too. This page

http://www.traipse.com/hypercube/
and this animated diagram

http://ploug.eu.org/stock/hypercube-jaune-dyn.gif
really cleared things up for me.

Posted: **Wed Feb 01, 2006 1:45 pm**

by **Agent_Firestalker**

The movie Cube 2: Hypercube tries to explain what a hypercube would be like. It would be a cube made up of thousands of rooms, with rooms folding in on each other, and rooms repeating. Not sure about the reverse gravity or variable time speed rooms, though. Oh, and parallel universes, maybe?

Quantum theory is too complex for my small mind. If a hypercube was ever created, I think it would have a negative effect on the surrounding area, like a black hole effect or something.

Just my .05 cents,

Agent_Firestalker

Posted: **Wed Feb 01, 2006 5:26 pm**

by **Xerol**

The best way to wrap your head around it is to think of it just as the projection of dimensions. Start with a point (0d) - project this into a line(a bunch of points "stacked up"). A bunch of lines stacked up will make the square. Stack squares for the cube. Now the hypercube is just a stacking of cubes in a direction perpindicular to all other 3 dimensions.

### the 4th dimension is time

Posted: **Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:22 am**

by **zanzibar**

All these past posts only show 3d cubes manipulated, not a 4th dimensional objects.

Dimensions are just directions or, ways we measure distance.

For example, I want to meet my girfriend but where? I might say the 3 floor of the buliding at the corner of 3rd and main. For the sake of arguement, 3rd st measures x, main follows dimension y, and the 3rd floor would be an the z axis. So there thats the 3 spatial dimensions...

The dimension of time is representiong by saying we would meet at 3:00.

remember,

1) dimesnions extend in 2 directions

x - left and right

y - back and forth

z - up and down

Time - before and after

2) dimensions have no smallest increment. There is no smallest increment of length, nor is there a smallest measure of time

PS: There are actually 11 dimensions! Try and wrap yout head around that one...

PSS: Hypercube is a retarded movie.

Posted: **Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:28 am**

by **Z!re**

Time is not a dimenions, or a unit.

A simple check.. what time is it now?

I bet we'll get as many answers as users on the forum (assuming everyone reply)

It's just a popular sci-fi influenced wrong that the 4th dimension is time.

As time for one doesent exist.

Posted: **Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:18 pm**

by **rdc**

As Einstein said, time is relative to the observer, so time has to exist as a dimensional extension of the three spatial dimensions (or has a high order dimension encapsulating the three spatial dimensions).

As you approach the speed of light, time seems to slow down for the traveler as observed from a point outside the traveling frame of reference. The same thing happens when you get close to a black hole. To the outside observer, the person close to the black hole appears to freeze in time (ignoring the fact that they would be ripped to shreds due to tidal forces).

Since space can be described in terms of quanta, and time is integral to space (hence the term space-time) time is probably a quanta value that has yet to be discovered (although it may never be discovered, if it exists as a higher order dimension). Just as the hypercube is a four-space extrusion into three-space, time may be an extrusion into three-dimensions from a 4+ dimensional space.

Btw, time-dilation has been proven emperically by experiments in the particle accelerators and by observations of heavy atronomical objects, so the effect is real.

Posted: **Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:34 pm**

by **zanzibar**

thank you!

I knew I wasn't the only time that read "A Brief History of Time"

and no, time is NOT a UNIT. it is a dimension. we measure time like we measure width, depth, and height. But time is a direction in which objects exist

ie: time is measured in hours, minutes, millenia and distance in feet, inches and miles.

and another thing...

Anybody who says time doesn't exist is wrong. saying itme doesn't exist is saying that length doesn't exist. Yes, we create measurements of time but that doesn't mean time is nonexistent

Posted: **Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:19 pm**

by **RyanKelly**

The notion of a "dimension" is not limited to a direction or space or any physical object. A dimension is not "real" in any conventional sense. It is a mathematical notion concerning well ordered sets. My favorite example is a bicycle, which can be considered a four dimensional object (angular position of the front wheel, angular position of the back wheel, angular position of the pedals, and angular position of the handle bars). You could expand this to an arbitrary amount of dimensions by adding details.

A one second, quantized recording of sound at 44100 samples per second can be thought of as a one dimensional object located in a space of (44100 * maxamplitude) dimensions, or as 44100 two dimensional objects, each located along a one dimensional space, or as one two dimensional object located no where.

Fractals can be viewed as mathematical constructs with non-integer dimensionality.

The relative simplicity of generating imagery that appears to have depth with 3 dimensional calculations tempts us to view the world in these terms, and this is a temptation that grows stronger when we observe that left of left is left of right, closer than close is closer than far, and above above is above below. At a human scale, the world appears Euclidian in three directions, but merely facing two mirrors on two plumbed walls of moderate distance from each other is enough to destroy the apparent orthogonal nature of up and down versus left and right. The first resort of those still infatuated with geometry to take into account the curvature of the earth, and posit the entire coordinate system of the three dimensional room as a transformation of a global coordinate system of 3 other idealized dimensions, but even before we more forward to account for the curvature of space and time, we have already destroyed the "up, left, forward" that inspired us in the first place, for in the global or universal coordinate systems, these directions that have meaning only relative to our perspective, have no meaning at all. Meanwhile the flux of experience has turned merely cerebral, and none of it has had much inpact on how we actually perceive our surroundings.

The irony here is that this 3 dimensional notion of space came to fruition when artist first began to develope the laws of perspective and thereby, for the first time in history, portray an object as it might be seen by an individual, and thus displaying a particular image rather than merely a symbol of a general predicate. Over time, however, culture has done what culture has always done. The three dimensional view of space has been developed into a universal view point, blotting out the aspect of individuality that inspire it.

So the question need not be "what would the fourth dimension look like?" Much more apt is the question, "How can I interpret the world with four dimensions?"

Posted: **Tue Mar 07, 2006 7:07 am**

by **Z!re**

rdc wrote:As Einstein said, time is relative to the observer, so time has to exist as a dimensional extension of the three spatial dimensions (or has a high order dimension encapsulating the three spatial dimensions).

As you approach the speed of light, time seems to slow down for the traveler as observed from a point outside the traveling frame of reference. The same thing happens when you get close to a black hole. To the outside observer, the person close to the black hole appears to freeze in time (ignoring the fact that they would be ripped to shreds due to tidal forces).

Since space can be described in terms of quanta, and time is integral to space (hence the term space-time) time is probably a quanta value that has yet to be discovered (although it may never be discovered, if it exists as a higher order dimension). Just as the hypercube is a four-space extrusion into three-space, time may be an extrusion into three-dimensions from a 4+ dimensional space.

Btw, time-dilation has been proven emperically by experiments in the particle accelerators and by observations of heavy atronomical objects, so the effect is real.

How long is 1meter?

How many meters wide is your room?

Now.. answer me accurately, what's the time?

Also the blackhole or speed of light argument wont hold as it's theories.. For all we know time could speed up when you travel the speed of light. It wouldnt be the first time scientists were 100% wrong.

Back in the day radioactive materials were considered to be the cure of all, and the best thing ever. They feed cattle with it to increase growth. Think about that the next time you throw around scientific theories that are unproven.

Posted: **Wed Mar 15, 2006 6:48 am**

by **zanzibar**

yes time is contestable: it is 3:00 in london and 5:00 somewhere else and when traveling at the speed of light, time stands still.

but in the same way, when traveling at high speeds, length,width, and hight contract.

so by saying time is a matter of perspective, you really aren't proving it isn't a dimension

Posted: **Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:06 am**

by **Z!re**

darklink246 wrote:yes time is contestable: it is 3:00 in london and 5:00 somewhere else and when traveling at the speed of light, time stands still.

but in the same way, when traveling at high speeds, length,width, and hight contract.

so by saying time is a matter of perspective, you really aren't proving it isn't a dimension

You missed the point..

How do you measure time?

What IS time..

Taking out our stupid modern human ways of time = 1hour etc..

You're left with: Time = The decay of atoms (radiation)

So, you take the decay of an object and set that as a dimension?

Then I declare that shattering a glass is equal to traveling along the 2873844th dimension parallel to the plate shattering dimension of 23488577.

Also, too bad you can only go one way, damn.. crappy dimension you have there.. that'd be like.. nothing really.. as a dimension has to be able to go both ways into infinity..

However, sci-fi is fun, but stupid.. and it's sad how it's getting absorbed into real science without any explanation or logical proof whatsoever (Stephen Hawking being one of the more loud sci-fi enthusiasts)

Science used to be about finding proof.. not accepting wild theories and create formulas that work around them..

Posted: **Sat Mar 18, 2006 10:51 am**

by **{Nathan}**

Time can AND cannot only go 1 way.

It has been proven that every time a space shuttle goes through the atmosphere, the speed makes it jump in time 3.5 seconds. Therefor, time travel is possible.

It is almost like a bullet. If you go faster than a fired bullet, the bullet goes behind you. You pass it. You jump ahead of it. If we go slower than the bullet, the bullet will go by as we go nowhere. We are traveling as fast as the bullet, so we travel where ever the bullet goes.

The bullet it like that certain speed that controlls time, almost like that "certain speed" can "jump" into the dimension of time for a microsecond and come back. If we manage to go slower, we will go back in time. If we manage to go much faster, we can jump in time.

NOTE:

This is all just a *theory* that I saw a show on the Science channel one day when I was *really* sick.

Posted: **Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:11 am**

by **Z!re**

Nathan1993 wrote:lots of shit.

I'm just going to ignore that ignorant crap. And pretend you never said any of it nathan

Posted: **Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:27 pm**

by **RyanKelly**

Z!re wrote:Nathan1993 wrote:lots of shit.

I'm just going to ignore that ignorant crap. And pretend you never said any of it nathan

You're a little cranky before mid-day.