Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Hypertime: Seeing Around 'corners' Of Time

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics
Posted by Alan on December 6, 2001 08:20:01 UTC

Following my comments to Alex at the blackholes forum (post:"definitions can be wrong"):

Regarding "e = m c squared"; it appears that energy is hyper-mass; that is that mass is a lower-dimension view of energy. To put it another way: flat-land "energy" is cube-land "mass".

'c squared' in flatland would be 'c' in cube-land. ' Pi' is possibly the inter-dimensional transformation constant concealed within 'c', 'c squared', ' c cubed' , 'c to the 16th power' ,etc.

Regarding "futures repel"; and pasts attracting; I am not so sure that pasts attract. You can no more have two pasts than two futures. However, past attracts future. Also: pasts and futures in "flat-land" are at a different level to pasts and futures in "cube-land". You can have two pasts if one is a flatland past, and the other a cubeland past. Same with futures. In fact; the comparison between a "flatland past" and its synchronised "cube-land past" gives you a third "synchronization past". This attracts a similarly configured "synchronization future".

A phenomenon maybe involves a "three-way musical chairs" pattern-matching jump-scenario between levels of dimension; an interdimensional relativity.

So time has three dimensions; not surprising as "time" is in practice "reference space".

Seeing around 'corners' in time:

Consider: what does flat-land look like to a flat-lander? My sister's 11-yr-old son noted that a flat-land person on a sheet of paper would only see his neighbour as a line.

So I thought: but we live in cube-land; we should see objects also from a reduced perspective for the same reason; as flat objects. And we do; except that we recognise the meaning of certain lines coming together as 'perspective', so we can visualise a 3D cube.

Similarly, a flatlander notices that parts of his neighbour appear darker than others, giving him a visualisation of the flat-extent of his neighbour.

Further, we have stereo vision, we superpose two different flatish views of an object, and our brain re-constructs the true 3D experience of our 3D world. Similarly, a flatlander may superpose two angles of his neighbour. His superposition of two views; each having light/dark areas due to various distances of different parts of an object, allow the flat-lander to visualise the true flat-experience of his flat-world.

Now, suppose you were in 4D land. The equivalent of a flat-photo in 3D land; would now be a 3D object. Now, the view of the hyper-cube-lander of nearby hyper-objects would be reduced a dimension-level. This is just what happened with the cube-lander looking at cubes, and the flat-lander looking at squares. But the hyper-cube-lander would notice "perspective" that indicates the hyper-aspect of the merely cubic-images on his cubic-retina, so to speak. Further, if he had the hyper-equivalent of stereo vision; he would superpose two different hyper-angles on the nearby objects. Thus his brain would deliver him the true hypercube experience of his surroundings.

4D-vision would allow "seeing around corners" of the 4D objects thus fully appreciating them: just as we "see around corners" with our stereo vision of 3D land.

How would 3D-space look from a flat-land perspective? You would still re-construct the flat-land experience of the object via your flat-stereo vision. You would also experience a sense of continuous sequential or linear change in the flat-object as you scanned it; because it is really a cube-land object in flatland. Just as we experience a sense of continuous sequential or linear change when we scan a hypercube in our space. This sense of linear continuous change one might call "time", as that is how we experience time (for the moment).

But of course, the sense of linear change that a flatlander noticed when scanning a cube; is giving him a misleading view. If he had a higher level of vision, he could see all the cube, seeing around corners in flatland, seeing the localised past-future scan pattern of a particular object. He would be "seeing around corners of time" so far as his scan of the cube he encountered in flatland is concerned.

Note he would not see all the future in his world; only the local past-future represented by a scan of the cube. He would experience a higher-dimension of time, where various past-future objects (cubes) can be arranged in higher-time.

Our experience of time is similarly misleadingly linear and sequential; if we could have a higher level of vision; we would see objects in our world from a hyper-time perspective; we would see around corners of time for the particular objects. We would experience a higher level of time; where localised past-future hypercubes could be arranged in patterns of sequentially experienced hyper-time.

What pattern relationship is retained as you increase dimensions? When one knows what this is- maybe one can figure out higher dimensions.

Lineland: a line-lander sees a square as a line, with the other three sides collapsed thus: the two vertical sides are concertinered into each end of the line-view, and the top of the square is superposed along the middle of the line-view.

The linelander might think he just sees a 1-D object with 1-collapsed D; and call it 2-D; but actually it is able to be regarded as 1D plus three walls of 1D giving four exchange options (the line-walls of the square can take turns at occupying the base-line).

Flatland: a flat-lander sees a cube in flat-land as a square with the four vertical faces concertinered into the four lines of the base-square, and the top face of the square superposed on to the base square.

The flat-lander might think he sees a 2-D object with 1-collapsed D; and call it 3-D; but actually it is able to be regarded as 2D plus five walls of 2D giving six exchange options (the square-faces of the cube can take turns at occupying the base-face).

Cube-land: a cube-lander sees a hypercube in cube-land as a cube with six hyper-'vertical' cubic-faces concertinered into the four faces of the base-cube, and the hyper-top cube-face superposed with the base cube.

The cube-lander might think he sees a 3-D object with 1-collapsed D; and call it 4-D; but actually it is able to be regarded as 3-D plus seven 'walls' of 3D giving eight exchange options (the cube-faces of the hypercube can take turns at occupying the base-cube).

If the hypercube represents our view of a cube in time; we have arrive at ten thus: one 3D plus 7 walls (of 3D). We have eight exchange options (for Lorenz transformations). We have 3D plus 1 set of collapsed Ds giving a kind of 4D. "Meta-hyper Lorenz transformations" between two hypercubes meeting each other would give an apparant 11D. All this suggests that 10D and 11D string theory might be replaced by inter-dimensional meta-relativity; from which both theories might be derived. The patterns in M-theory and F-theory might also be obtained, given the notion of "seeing around corners in time" via hyper-time.


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins