Dimensions

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 24, 2012, 01:25:14 PM

The shadow analogy is apt in explaining how the 4th and 5th dimensions are still 3D objects but operating in 3D space in a manner which doesn't allow an observer to perceive the higher dimensional reality of the cosmos (given its a torus) because the stretching wavelengths exceed the cohesive threshold of sensory perception so outer space is stretched and the light travelling in those areas cannot resonate with the eye... so at any given time an individual can only perceive the local segment that they exist on a as a 3D gradient which is not warping - even though it is in the wider picture; they warp with it so they can see the local wavelengths as relatively normal.

What's the cohesive threshold of sensory perception?  And wouldn't a stretched wavelength due to the expansion of space be red-shift?

If you have space which expands -- as in its very fabric -- then light/energy and mass/matter of any given wavelength will be stretched beyond the interpretable frequencies of the eye. Hence why the naked eye can only receive light up to a certain point from outer space, past that the wavelengths become decoherant too small in energy and mass i.e. stars really far away cannot be received because they are smaller wavelengths than the eyes can interpret. That is to say they are folded along the non-Euclid curvature of dark energy which is expanding further away from all points faster than the light can travel to Earth.

Quote from: Lorddave on February 25, 2012, 09:30:44 PM

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 24, 2012, 01:25:14 PM

The shadow analogy is apt in explaining how the 4th and 5th dimensions are still 3D objects but operating in 3D space in a manner which doesn't allow an observer to perceive the higher dimensional reality of the cosmos (given its a torus) because the stretching wavelengths exceed the cohesive threshold of sensory perception so outer space is stretched and the light travelling in those areas cannot resonate with the eye... so at any given time an individual can only perceive the local segment that they exist on a as a 3D gradient which is not warping - even though it is in the wider picture; they warp with it so they can see the local wavelengths as relatively normal.

What's the cohesive threshold of sensory perception?  And wouldn't a stretched wavelength due to the expansion of space be red-shift?

If you have space which expands -- as in its very fabric -- then light/energy and mass/matter of any given wavelength will be stretched beyond the interpretable frequencies of the eye. Hence why the naked eye can only receive light up to a certain point from outer space, past that the wavelengths become decoherant too small in energy and mass i.e. stars really far away cannot be received because they are smaller wavelengths than the eyes can interpret. That is to say they are folded along the non-Euclid curvature of dark energy which is expanding further away from all points faster than the light can travel to Earth.

Err...
The fabric of space DOES expand.  We know that already.  In fact, we know that all of it is expanding.

When does mass have wavelength?  Are you referring to a photon?

What you're describing sounds an awfully lot like the Doppler effect.

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 25, 2012, 10:39:11 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on February 25, 2012, 09:30:44 PM

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 24, 2012, 01:25:14 PM

The shadow analogy is apt in explaining how the 4th and 5th dimensions are still 3D objects but operating in 3D space in a manner which doesn't allow an observer to perceive the higher dimensional reality of the cosmos (given its a torus)
because the stretching wavelengths exceed the cohesive threshold of sensory perception so outer space is stretched and the light travelling in those areas cannot resonate with the eye... so at any given time an individual can only perceive the local segment that they exist on a as a 3D gradient which is not warping - even though it is in the wider picture; they warp with it so they can see the local wavelengths as relatively normal.

What's the cohesive threshold of sensory perception?  And wouldn't a stretched wavelength due to the expansion of space be red-shift?

If you have space which expands -- as in its very fabric -- then light/energy and mass/matter of any given wavelength will be stretched beyond the interpretable frequencies of the eye. Hence why the naked eye can only receive light up to a certain point from outer space, past that the wavelengths become decoherant too small in energy and mass i.e. stars really far away cannot be received because they are smaller wavelengths than the eyes can interpret. That is to say they are folded along the non-Euclid curvature of dark energy which is expanding further away from all points faster than the light can travel to Earth.

Err...
The fabric of space DOES expand.  We know that already.  In fact, we know that all of it is expanding.

When does mass have wavelength?  Are you referring to a photon?

What you're describing sounds an awfully lot like the Doppler effect.

call it what you like.. people can get the jist of what's being implied. Mass would definitely have a wavelength or clusters of harmonic wavelengths since everything else does...even if its a wavelength of seeming "emptiness" which equates to density (dark energy or matter).. the wavelengths cant be measured and I've explained why in another post quite some time ago. Cant remember where exactly it was that I posted it and I've dug enough through my past posts on here today so I'll link to another forum where I know which one it is easily that is if you'd like me to.

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 25, 2012, 10:39:11 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on February 25, 2012, 09:30:44 PM

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 24, 2012, 01:25:14 PM

The shadow analogy is apt in explaining how the 4th and 5th dimensions are still 3D objects but operating in 3D space in a manner which doesn't allow an observer to perceive the higher dimensional reality of the cosmos (given its a torus) because the stretching wavelengths exceed the cohesive threshold of sensory perception so outer space is stretched and the light travelling in those areas cannot resonate with the eye... so at any given time an individual can only perceive the local segment that they exist on a as a 3D gradient which is not warping - even though it is in the wider picture; they warp with it so they can see the local wavelengths as relatively normal.

What's the cohesive threshold of sensory perception?  And wouldn't a stretched wavelength due to the expansion of space be red-shift?

If you have space which expands -- as in its very fabric -- then light/energy and mass/matter of any given wavelength will be stretched beyond the interpretable frequencies of the eye. Hence why the naked eye can only receive light up to a certain point from outer space, past that the wavelengths become decoherant too small in energy and mass i.e. stars really far away cannot be received because they are smaller wavelengths than the eyes can interpret. That is to say they are folded along the non-Euclid curvature of dark energy which is expanding further away from all points faster than the light can travel to Earth.

Err...
The fabric of space DOES expand.  We know that already.  In fact, we know that all of it is expanding.

Also: what is this ^^ all about... you sound as tho you think my post is intending to shed light on this for the first time in public domain.

Quote from: Lorddave on February 25, 2012, 11:22:11 PM

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 25, 2012, 10:39:11 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on February 25, 2012, 09:30:44 PM

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 24, 2012, 01:25:14 PM

The shadow analogy is apt in explaining how the 4th and 5th dimensions are still 3D objects but operating in 3D space in a manner which doesn't allow an observer to perceive the higher dimensional reality of the cosmos (given its a torus)
because the stretching wavelengths exceed the cohesive threshold of sensory perception so outer space is stretched and the light travelling in those areas cannot resonate with the eye... so at any given time an individual can only perceive the local segment that they exist on a as a 3D gradient which is not warping - even though it is in the wider picture; they warp with it so they can see the local wavelengths as relatively normal.

What's the cohesive threshold of sensory perception?  And wouldn't a stretched wavelength due to the expansion of space be red-shift?

If you have space which expands -- as in its very fabric -- then light/energy and mass/matter of any given wavelength will be stretched beyond the interpretable frequencies of the eye. Hence why the naked eye can only receive light up to a certain point from outer space, past that the wavelengths become decoherant too small in energy and mass i.e. stars really far away cannot be received because they are smaller wavelengths than the eyes can interpret. That is to say they are folded along the non-Euclid curvature of dark energy which is expanding further away from all points faster than the light can travel to Earth.

Err...
The fabric of space DOES expand.  We know that already.  In fact, we know that all of it is expanding.

When does mass have wavelength?  Are you referring to a photon?

What you're describing sounds an awfully lot like the Doppler effect.

call it what you like.. people can get the jist of what's being implied. Mass would definitely have a wavelength or clusters of harmonic wavelengths since everything else does...even if its a wavelength of seeming "emptiness" which equates to density (dark energy or matter).. the wavelengths cant be measured and I've explained why in another post quite some time ago. Cant remember where exactly it was that I posted it and I've dug enough through my past posts on here today so I'll link to another forum where I know which one it is easily that is if you'd like me to.

Call it what I like?!  That's what you do.  I call it by the academically sanctioned name.  I assume you at least know what the Doppler Effect is.

How does mass have a wavelength if a wavelength is pure energy that radiates at a frequency and matter isn't radiating itself.  It absorbs and radiates wavelengths of energy, but it isn't, in itself, a wavelength of energy.  To prove this, I will attempt to slide my hands through my keyboard....
....
...
Nope.  Didn't work.
Since all waves can pass through each other, and my hands can't pass through the keyboard, matter is not a wavelength. 

Quote from: Lorddave on February 25, 2012, 11:22:11 PM

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 25, 2012, 10:39:11 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on February 25, 2012, 09:30:44 PM

Quote from: Ryan Onessence on February 24, 2012, 01:25:14 PM

The shadow analogy is apt in explaining how the 4th and 5th dimensions are still 3D objects but operating in 3D space in a manner which doesn't allow an observer to perceive the higher dimensional reality of the cosmos (given its a torus) because the stretching wavelengths exceed the cohesive threshold of sensory perception so outer space is stretched and the light travelling in those areas cannot resonate with the eye... so at any given time an individual can only perceive the local segment that they exist on a as a 3D gradient which is not warping - even though it is in the wider picture; they warp with it so they can see the local wavelengths as relatively normal.

What's the cohesive threshold of sensory perception?  And wouldn't a stretched wavelength due to the expansion of space be red-shift?

If you have space which expands -- as in its very fabric -- then light/energy and mass/matter of any given wavelength will be stretched beyond the interpretable frequencies of the eye. Hence why the naked eye can only receive light up to a certain point from outer space, past that the wavelengths become decoherant too small in energy and mass i.e. stars really far away cannot be received because they are smaller wavelengths than the eyes can interpret. That is to say they are folded along the non-Euclid curvature of dark energy which is expanding further away from all points faster than the light can travel to Earth.

Err...
The fabric of space DOES expand.  We know that already.  In fact, we know that all of it is expanding.

Also: what is this ^^ all about... you sound as tho you think my post is intending to shed light on this for the first time in public domain.

It was the "if you have" part.  It's not "If you have" it's "Since every part of space expands uniformly"

The shadow analogy is apt in explaining how the 4th and 5th dimensions are still 3D objects but operating in 3D space in a manner which doesn't allow an observer to perceive the higher dimensional reality of the cosmos (given its a torus) because the stretching wavelengths exceed the cohesive threshold of sensory perception so outer space is stretched and the light travelling in those areas cannot resonate with the eye... so at any given time an individual can only perceive the local segment that they exist on a as a 3D gradient which is not warping - even though it is in the wider picture; they warp with it so they can see the local wavelengths as relatively normal.

Can you explain this a bit more? I'm not quite sure what it is you're trying to say.

Are you trying to say the reason why we can't see light in the outer universe is because the biological human eye can't perceive it?

How does mass have a wavelength if a wavelength is pure energy that radiates at a frequency and matter isn't radiating itself.  It absorbs and radiates wavelengths of energy, but it isn't, in itself, a wavelength of energy.  To prove this, I will attempt to slide my hands through my keyboard....
....
...
Nope.  Didn't work.
Since all waves can pass through each other, and my hands can't pass through the keyboard, matter is not a wavelength.

the wave particle duality holds true for "classical" particles with mass (eg electrons) as well. have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave

Quote from: Lorddave on February 26, 2012, 08:46:45 AM

How does mass have a wavelength if a wavelength is pure energy that radiates at a frequency and matter isn't radiating itself.  It absorbs and radiates wavelengths of energy, but it isn't, in itself, a wavelength of energy.  To prove this, I will attempt to slide my hands through my keyboard....
....
...
Nope.  Didn't work.
Since all waves can pass through each other, and my hands can't pass through the keyboard, matter is not a wavelength.

the wave particle duality holds true for "classical" particles with mass (eg electrons) as well. have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave

I stand corrected.

Alright, some brief notes on the construction of a rotating 4D object.

In 3D, vertices are represented by a 3 component coordinate set (x, y, and z).  A unit cube has 8 such vertices, and centered at the origin and aligned with the coordinate space the vertices would appear at all combinations of x = +/-0.5, y = +/-0.5, and z = +/-0.5.

In 4D, all vertices have 4 components (x, y, z, w).  For a unit cube in 4D, there would be 16 such vertices, with x = +/-0.5, y = +/-0.5, z = +/-0.5, and w = +/-0.5.  For other more complex shapes, a fair amount of geometry and trig might be required to figure out what the values of these coordinates are.

To map 3D images to a 2D plane, we project them:  objects with a larger distance from the viewer (greater value for the z component) are drawn smaller because they are farther away.  A very simple projection from 3D to 2D is to make the new 2D point equal to (x/z, y/z).  Granted, for this to work the object needs to be moved in front of the viewer first... using values of z <= zero would cause problems.

To map 4D images to a 3D space we do something similar... points farther away along the w axis are scaled down to appear smaller.  Like 3D to 2D, the most simple way to do this mapping is to choose a new 3D point based on (x/w, y/w, z/w), after the object has been translated far enough away from the camera that all values of w are positive.

Now all that is left is to rotate the object in 4D space over time.  A more interesting rotation is accomplished by making sure that the w component is one of those influenced by the rotation... otherwise it will just look like a static 3D object rotating in 3D space.  The rotation can be accomplished using some simple trigonometry:

current w = cos(angle) * original w + sin(angle) * original z
current z = cos(angle) * original z - sin(angle) * original w

This will result in a simple rotation through the x/y plane (a plane is an axis in 4D, because points that lie on it are not influenced by the rotation).

Now you have all the tools you need to make your own rotating 4D objects (except maybe access to Maya and an understanding of MEL scripting)

If you are interested in this kind of stuff (anyone else) take a class or two in Linear Algebra.