Philosoft

<strong>Sayeth SOMMS:

For example. Start with a single Plank-length particle. Since it 'fits' within the curvature of the wound up dimensions it can move and have momentum in these dimensions. That is relative to our tiny particle this higher dimension is in fact not wound up at all. Notice that this particle can also move in our 3 dimensions. So it has a another degree of freedom than a particle that can only fit in our 3 'loosely wound' dimensions has.</strong>

The curled-up dimensions of string theory aren't postulated to allow planck-length particles to disappear from 4D observation; their purpose is to allow more freedom for strings to vibrate.

<strong>Now consider a molecule made up of such a tiny particle. Since it instantiated by particles that fit into these higher dimensions...it also has degrees of freedom in these higher dimensions.</strong>

This is prima facie a fallacy of composition, but this also illustrates why the curled-up dimensions are not "movement" dimensions as we understand them. Strings can do things that more complex matter cannot.

<strong>It is especially incorrect to say that this object would not be perceivable or could not interact with lower dimensional constructs. However, it would be accurate to say that if this object did not intersect with the plane of the lower dimensional object then the lower dimensional object would never be aware of it.</strong>

Like I said, these curled-up dimensions are not "hiding places." Read up on Calabi-Yau shapes.

<strong>Unfortunately...I'm going to have to kung fu your ass with some math here Philosoft. I promise to be gentle.</strong>

Not so fast, sensei.

<strong>Here is an equation for a 2D plane in 3 space:
z = 1

Suppose we define an object in 3 space to be this plane. Relative to coordinates within this plane...is this object 'present' at the coordinates x=4 y=3? Yep.
How about x=2 y=123? Yep.
How about x=50321 y=2.3443? Yep.
How about any x and y? Yep.

For ANY x and y you chose (in the z=1 plane) this object exists. Relative to the 2 dimensional perspective within the plane this object is 'omnipresent'...everywhere at once.

This is an example of how a higher dimensional construct can seem 'omnipresent' to a lower dimensional construct.</strong>

Nice work. This is fine for extended 3D space, however, spatial dimensions 4-10 don't follow cartesian math. The sooner you drop the notion that something can move through these dimensions to the extent it is hidden from 3D observation, the easier this will be.

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Philosoft,
Not entirely true.

The only requirement (and definition) of a spatial dimension is that a particle can have momentum in it. If a particle fits inside a curled up dimension it can certainly have momentum in it. And in fact...relative to the particle...this dimension would not be curled up at all.

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

?

What do you mean by additional 'spatial dimensions...don't follow cartesian math'?

SOMMS

Philosoft

SOMMS,

I'm not going to claim I understand the underlying mathematics, but you can see <a href="http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Calabi-YauSpace.html" target="_blank">here</a> that Calabi-Yau spaces don't adhere to cartesian math, which presupposes dimensions that extend infinitely outward.

randomsyllable

I thought this was impossible as by "wrapping the plane, it would have a definable area, which plane do not have, being infintely large.

Likewise, by attributing a plane to be able to conform around a three dimensional object doesn't seem to be probable anyways as the point is that god would have to be of a higher dimension to exist alla round us and still maintain "dimensional cohesivness" (i made that up, but it sound cool)

If God was two dimensional (hypothetical based on your comparision), he couldn't interact with us because we occupy a dimension with characteristics that he wouldn't be able to interact with or percieve.


-random

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

I guess I need to clarify what I mean by a 2D object 'wrapped' around a 3D object: the easiest example is to think of a ball (a 3D object). The ball has a 2D surface that is 'wrapped' around it.

More specifically; think of the unit sphere...a ball with radius of one. Now imagine the 2D shell that exists inside the sphere at radius = .75. This is an entire 2D structure or 'plane' that is completely contained by a higher dimensional (3D) object (the unit sphere).

Relative to the something on the surface of the 2D shell the ball or unit sphere is 'omnipresent'. It simultaneously exists at all points on the 2D shell. Thus objects of higher dimensionality can exhibit aspects of 'omnipresence' relative to things of lower dimensionality.


I'm claiming God has greater dimensionality than our 3 (or 4 if you include time) dimensional plane of reference.

In the example, we would inhabit the 2D shell...God would be the 3D unit sphere or ball that encompasses it.

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

[ August 09, 2002: Message edited by: Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas ]</p>