What's beyond the Universe - Page 12

EvilEye · #**331** (**permalink**) 03-November-2007, 06:03 PM

That's only because we have a difficult time thinking (without math) outside of our 3 dimentional physicality. It would be like trying to explain a sphere to a circle. Circle says, "Well I'm perfectly round... how much more round can something get?" They try to explain that he is flat-round, and he just can't comprehend the statement. So the Sphere goes on it's merry way and Circle spends the rest of his life trying to understand the statement.

We don't live in a sphere of expanding "stuff" that had a beginning at some point in space and is getting bigger. The entire universe started as a small point... so that you & me and whatever is alllllll the way across the universe now... in ANY direction were all crammed into one place. AND WE STILL ARE... the place is just getting bigger and moving us apart from each other. Not into "where" It's still the same space... just bigger.

"Flat" universe doesn't mean like a record... it means flat in 3 dimentions. Like a cube grid, and as you move through the grid, it eventually folds back into itself.

So try to imagine a 4 dimentional sphere, and you get a better idea.

astromark · #**332** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilEye;

We don't live [I

in[/i] a sphere of expanding "stuff" that had a beginning at some point in space and is getting bigger. The entire universe started as a small point... so that you & me and whatever is alllllll the way across the universe now... in ANY direction were all crammed into one place. AND WE STILL ARE... the place is just getting bigger and moving us apart from each other. Not into "where" It's still the same space... just bigger.

"Yes we do. Hang on to somthing...have you not just said the same thing twice... What is that word 'don't' doing up there?
I am not a circle, I might be a square, only I feel I am that sphear...and I'm stuck in one. Its all we will ever know. Its called the universe. We know it began and we know it is expanding ever more. The words of Albert I., seem to say it best 'Finite but unbound'. If the popular opinion has moved on from this could somebody please tell me." Mark.

"Flat" universe doesn't mean like a record... it means flat in 3 dimensions. Like a cube grid, and as you move through the grid, it eventually folds back into itself.

"So try to imagine a 4 dimensional sphere, and you get a better idea."

OK have attempted to imagine this and am now seeking medical opinion. My sphere has but three dimensions. I now have a certificate that deems me sane. This discussion regarding a four dimensional sphere is erroneous and wrong. yep, both. Please try to explain again. Where is the other direction?

Neverfly · #**333** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astromark

OK have attempted to imagine this and am now seeking medical opinion. My sphere has but three dimensions. I now have a certificate that deems me sane. This discussion regarding a four dimensional sphere is erroneous and wrong. yep, both. Please try to explain again. Where is the other direction?

THis suggests that you are a circle

astromark · #**334** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 08:04 AM

No, no, no,

I have length, never enough...
I have depth, But often to shalow...
and width. Far to much of this... And It would seem that I am existing in this time frame right now.

So maybe I am not so spherical as rhomboid in shape.... Imagine a egg with short legs.

I have at present no understanding of this four dimensional space... You have not helped yet.

There is no problem with the shape of this Galaxy. Spiral structures I understand.
Groups of galaxies and clusters. super clusters and in general the shape of the whole universe I can imagine.
I do not have a understanding of a folding back on itself. String theories., or multi dimensional concepts. If you do? pass it on please.

Neverfly · #**335** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 08:49 AM

Like the tessaract?
Hypercube?

If a 2 dimensional man living in flatville were to see before him a series of six squares- arranged in a cross, he may be able to deduce that it can be somehow folded upwards into itself- to form a cube.

However, being 2-dimensional, he would not be able to picture this in his head nor imagine what a cube must look like.

A tessarct is a 3-dimensional representation of a hypercube- a 4-dimensional cube that is bigger on the inside- than on the outside. Us three dimensional beings cannot grasp the concept of how this tessarct can fold upon itself to form a hypercube, we can only guess that to a 4-dimensional being- it does.

I'm not saying that anyone elses post has merit or not, merely pointing out that as a 3-dimensional being, we are incapable of visualizing or understanding a hyper cube or how it's folded upon itself.
Even though a cube is quite easy to us.

Frog march · #**336** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 12:17 PM

I wonder what a book written in 4D would be like; the letters and words would all be three dimensional but would convey a different meaning when viewed from different angles.
Quite some book that would be.

~lightwaveryder~ · #**337** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frog march

I wonder what a book written in 4D would be like; the letters and words would all be three dimensional but would convey a different meaning when viewed from different angles.
Quite some book that would be.

there's some neat research on the ancient hebrew letters being a 3 dimensional map of a 4 dimensional object. The example i can think of shows that if you make the letter stand tall and place a candle behind it, the shadow that letter shape makes will intersect with the next letter in the sequence and the whole sequence of letters, arragned in a circle, their shadow is the object being referred to as the 4th dimensional creation of those letters. space beyond and within space, curved,like a mobius.

i can't locate any good 'here it is' images, but the basics can be gone over at meru foundation. (google for link)

~lwr~

EvilEye · #**338** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neverfly

Like the tessaract?
Hypercube?

If a 2 dimensional man living in flatville were to see before him a series of six squares- arranged in a cross, he may be able to deduce that it can be somehow folded upwards into itself- to form a cube.

However, being 2-dimensional, he would not be able to picture this in his head nor imagine what a cube must look like.

A tessarct is a 3-dimensional representation of a hypercube- a 4-dimensional cube that is bigger on the inside- than on the outside. Us three dimensional beings cannot grasp the concept of how this tessarct can fold upon itself to form a hypercube, we can only guess that to a 4-dimensional being- it does.

I'm not saying that anyone elses post has merit or not, merely pointing out that as a 3-dimensional being, we are incapable of visualizing or understanding a hyper cube or how it's folded upon itself.
Even though a cube is quite easy to us.

You nailed it.

And the problem is "inside" & "outside"

In the 4 dimentional universe, a sphere is not round like the earth with us on the surface. The surface itself is 3 dimentional with no outside or inside.

Regardless of your true direction of travel, (on cosmic scales) you will eventually return to your point of origin.

And in the flat (cube) universe, that folds upon itself.... it is even easier.

The same effect happens. But on local scales, as you move through the grid, you see every cube as perfect at 90^o ... but on large scales, the entire collection of small cubes wraps into itself.

One last try.

I can use a level to make a perfectly flat house.

I could even use a level that went all the way around the earth that would show it being flat, but we know it isn't.

Space is the same way. On small scales, everything locally is a straight line. On HUGE scales, they fail. You cannot have an outside or an INSIDE to the universe. It is all encompasing. How much of me was me when I was a baby and how much of me is me at 6 feet tall? All of me. ...regardless of my size.

astromark · #**339** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 05:40 PM

Having studied graphic desgne... all of these concepts of spacial dimensions I can see... It would appear that the only conclusion one can reach is that sanity is slipping away from some of you. Thank you.

Frog march · #**340** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astromark

Having studied graphic desgne... all of these concepts of spacial dimensions I can see... It would appear that the only conclusion one can reach is that sanity is slipping away from some of you. Thank you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Neverfly · #**341** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astromark

Having studied graphic desgne... all of these concepts of spacial dimensions I can see... It would appear that the only conclusion one can reach is that sanity is slipping away from some of you. Thank you.

Never assume that studies have provided you with an understanding of everything.

Noclevername · #**342** (**permalink**) 04-November-2007, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astromark

Having studied graphic desgne... all of these concepts of spacial dimensions I can see... It would appear that the only conclusion one can reach is that sanity is slipping away from some of you. Thank you.

Exactly. You are biased by your association with only two- and three-dimensional designs. Your mind has been trained into those narrow grooves of perception. Therefore you assume anyone who thinks outside your particular box has "sanity slippage". It points out how limited our perceptions are, because they come with both physical and mental blinders built right in.

EvilEye · #**343** (**permalink**) 05-November-2007, 01:23 AM

Found this... image

hypercube animation

shamushow · #**344** (**permalink**) 05-November-2007, 01:47 AM

HI, I think we can only be aware of what we are part of. we are a part of this universe.we are a product of it. so what ever is beyond this universe we can never be aware of

shamushow · #**345** (**permalink**) 05-November-2007, 01:49 AM

sorry am i off topic ,i thought i replied to whats beyond the universe

Ken G · #**346** (**permalink**) 05-November-2007, 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shamushow

HI, I think we can only be aware of what we are part of. we are a part of this universe.we are a product of it. so what ever is beyond this universe we can never be aware of

That seems perfectly on topic to me, you are just holding to a precise definition of the difference between what we can be aware of and what we can only wonder about. The problem with questions like the OP is it is never clear if the questioner is interested in what we can be aware of, or what we can just ponder about. One assumes on a science forum the former, yet in most cases it seems the latter is the real objective of the question, so little progress is ever made on threads like this one. I think that is more or less what you are saying-- welcome to the forum.

Dragon Star · #**347** (**permalink**) 05-November-2007, 02:47 AM

I think this thread has set some sort of unofficial record for necromancies.

EvilEye · #**348** (**permalink**) 05-November-2007, 02:53 AM

personally. I love podering the question.

I would love to experience a 4 dimentional cube/sphere.

shamushow · #**349** (**permalink**) 05-November-2007, 03:27 AM

I am saying if what is beyond or outside the universe is is not made of the same stuff as the universe, then we can not ever be aware of it. for we are only aware of our universe because of info being fed to us ,by that which we are part off, the real reality if there is one lies not here.