"Dimension" has a very specific meaning in mathematics.

Perhaps one could say figuratively that 1 is multidimensional because there are multiple "types" of 1. But it would be a mistake to treat this as mathematically valid.

1 is one-dimensional because it is a single number.

(0, 1) is a two-dimensional representation of 1; as are (1, 0), (1/[tex]\sqrt{2}[/tex], 1/[tex]\sqrt{2}[/tex]), and any pair of numbers generated by (cos(θ), sin(θ)) for a given θ...

Two-dimensional representations of 1, can also come in the form of complex numbers (like 1 + 0i) or two dimensional matrices/vectors (like [0 1])...

Ok, so to get a value of one when related to anything there has to be two points, [0,1] , is that what you are saying?

or does there have to be 3 points to create one, where 1 point , z, can be an hidden i, meaning that paper looks flat but it is not.

Added - On what you have explained I drew you this

[attachment=21267]

Is this a representation of one?

And thinking about Jeff's matrices I drew this to represent one

[attachment=21269]

1=observer?

1 is one-dimensional because it is a single number.

That can't be a valid statement if statement, (to get a value of one when related to anything there has to be two points, [0,1]) is true.

Only i and 1 exist?

i=i only if one agrees with one

we have to see i to i on this

Before the big bang there was nothing, 0 can be n-dimensional i

after the big bang there was 1

1=n-dimensional i

Relativity = the agreement of i ?

1=σ

_{i}?

i=n if 1=1

added - If I was a moon being and born on the Moon, I would have to disagree on i when concerning mass and time.

so if I was a moon being and you an earthling , what are we agreeing that 1=1 on ?

added- If I had a slower rate of time, and I was measuring d/t, then I am measuring a different speed than you are.

added - because on the moon , my second i would be much shorter than your second, so I would not measure the speed of light in a vacuum to be the same speed.