The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: If the 4 dimensions of the Universe were removed, would a void remain?  (Read 1253 times)

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
If time was dependent to atoms/mass and not independent of mass in the universe, and we considered ourselves as 4 dimensions in space, if we could remove ourselves/mass from the Universe, are we left with a 5 th dimension of a single infinite void, making ourselves  the 4 dimensions that occupy a dimensionless 5th dimension of an infinite void?
« Last Edit: 18/11/2015 07:34:36 by chris »


 

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1825
  • Thanked: 12 times
    • View Profile
Thebox, when I started reading your post I thought: "Here comes another pink unicorn!".  However, I think I see what you are aiming at.  You might need to rework it though to get rid of things like dimensionless dimensions.

Think Platonia. :)
 
The following users thanked this post: Thebox

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Thebox, when I started reading your post I thought: "Here comes another pink unicorn!".  However, I think I see what you are aiming at.  You might need to rework it though to get rid of things like dimensionless dimensions.

Think Platonia. :)

I have it re-worded as this - Matter a single woven 4 dimensional manifold  in a fifth dimension of n-dimensional space(Platonia timeless)


« Last Edit: 15/11/2015 16:31:36 by Thebox »
 

Offline Dr. C. Michael Turner

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
I have a problem with the question and here is why.
    I believe that there are only three space dimensions and time is the overall measure of the process. In geometry, the x axis represents a coordinate point and therefore one dimension. The Y-axis represents a right angle coordinate point for a second dimension and the z-axis represents another right angle and therefore coordinate point, the third dimension. Now here is an absolute, there are no more ways to create another right angle coordinate point and therefore NO MORE DIMENSIONS. So in Mathmatics, there are only three dimensions, by defination.
     If the singularity contained mass, energy and space and all three were contained within it, then why do you think space is infinite and nothing? There are three types or matter, all finite. Relativity defines space and time as one thing, spacetime and mass warps it... I assume that nothing cannot be warped and since space is expanding and when you go to sleep tonight and wake up, it's tomorrow, not yesterday, time is a forward direction of space expansion since they are part of the same thing. So I suggest that as space increases, mass decreases but since the surface of mass is photons and since photons are also generated by stars/ the sun, that photons in mass decay into gravitational waves as photons from stars replace them creating a process of mass decay into space as the mass remains constant as it is in static equalibrium. This means that each galaxy or cluster creates its own spacetime and therefore a galaxy's speed relative to another galaxy's speed becomes additive. This one concept of mass creating spacetime by giving off identical lowest energy waves from all mass bodies creates time, space and the reaction of gravity and dark matter. Dark energy is F constant rate of force from constant decay and the galaxy losing overall mass with a constant force. It's called the NET WAVE THEORY BY THE WAY.
It explains that einsteins Marble and bowling ball should have been held above the trampoline and dropped and this shows that there is energy loss as all mass decays into space. So the answer to your question is that Nothing doesn't exist, only something exists and spacetime is not the fourth dimensions but a measure of a variable (relative) rate of mass decay into space itself. This is copyrighted 2004, all rights reserved.
 

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4120
  • Thanked: 245 times
    • View Profile
Quote from: Dr. C. Michael Turner
So in Mathematics, there are only three dimensions, by definition.
I beg to differ. Mathematics defines many objects, including:
- Quaternions, in 4 dimensions
- Octonions, in 8 dimensions
- And even higher dimensions can be defined using matrix operations, if you so desire.

I think the question here is one of Physics: How many dimensions does the real, physical universe have?
This may have a different answer than what a mathematician can dream up to solve some hypothetical problem.
 

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4120
  • Thanked: 245 times
    • View Profile
Quote from: Dr. C. Michael Turner
the surface of mass is photons
I would prefer to say that we see the surface of a mass by photons.
The surface is not made up of photons, as photons happily pass right through each other.
...And for really transparent materials, we actually don't see the surface of the mass, because the photons go right through.

Quote
and since photons are also generated by stars/ the sun, that photons in mass decay into gravitational waves as photons from stars replace them

This suggests that photons, which are vibrations of the electromagnetic field can transform into gravitational waves, which are vibrations of of the gravitational field.  I am sure scientists searching for gravitational waves would be delighted with a cheap and portable source of high-powered gravitational waves.

In sunlight, the photons striking an object at sea level carry around 750W/m2; photons bouncing off the object might carry perhaps 500W/m2 of energy. The remaining 250W/m2 goes into heating the object or the air near the object. The energy of the photons from the Sun is accounted for, with no reason to assume that it is all or partially transformed into gravitational waves.

Quote
creating a process of mass decay into space
It is true that the Sun loses mass as it fuses Hydrogen into Helium; this mass/energy is radiated away into space as photons and neutrinos.

However, this theory suggests that matter on Earth loses mass (decays) as it is struck by photons and radiates gravitational waves. There have been studies looking for decay of matter on Earth, and it hasn't been found, apart from the well-known radioactive elements.

Quote
therefore a galaxy's speed relative to another galaxy's speed becomes additive.
This is true for velocities which are small compared to the speed of light (eg < 1% of c).
However, galaxies with high redshift are travelling apart with a significant fraction of the speed of light, and galaxy velocities are no longer additive (according to Einstein). This would apply if we measured the velocities of two distant galaxies, one receding from Earth's North pole, and the other receding from the South pole at high redshift. But we can't visit one of them, and then look back to measure the velocity of the other one.

For which set of galaxies have you measured the velocities, and shown that the velocities are additive?
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
  • Thanked: 53 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Dr Turner you have a huge problem if you think that mass is evaporating. This would indicate a continuous decrease in the energy of gravitational fields. Over time galaxies would expand and eventually break apart since the overall escape velocity would also be decreasing. Over billions of years there would be significant dissipation.
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
  • Thanked: 53 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
I hope you are not trying to confuse yourself with this Dr Michael Turner.

http://cosmoquest.org/x/365daysofastronomy/2009/05/12/may-12th-dark-energy/
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length