Are There More Than Three Dimensions?
For preview only. Get it at  #ad.

Are There More Than Three Dimensions?

2011, Science  -   133 Comments
Ratings: 7.80/10 from 127 users.

Are There More Than Three Dimensions? For most of our history, we've rested easy in the notion that there were three dimensions that have existed throughout time: length, width and height. Ah, the good old days. In the early 20th century, Hermann Minkowski and Albert Einstein connected our comfortable three dimensions with a fourth, time, defining special relativity using a space-time continuum.

This kind of worked, but still didn't explain a troublesome new theory of gravity called quantum mechanics that arose around the same time Minkowski and Einstein were working on their theories. Quantum mechanics had its own rules that contradicted the concepts behind the space-time continuum. Scientists treated this incompatibility like the weather for decades, discussing it but not really doing anything about it.

While higher theoretical dimensions began with Descartes in the 1600s, in the 1970s string theory expanded on this idea as physicists attempted to tie everything together in one elegant explanation of the universe. Variations of string theory require the existence of up to eleven dimensions and a slew of universes, with our universe forming a three-dimensional membrane floating around some higher-dimensional donut. According to this theory, each point in space has six higher dimensions wrapped up in super-tiny geometries called Calibi-Yau Manifolds.

One recent string theory suggests that the reason we only experience the three spatial dimensions is that all universes with higher dimensions got into some cosmic car accident and destroyed each other, leaving our measly three-dimensional brane untouched.

List of all episodes here: Through The Wormhole.

More great documentaries

133 Comments / User Reviews

  1. It's maybe like color. You can't explain a color to a person born blind.

  2. It's not opening...

  3. FYI All the through the wormhole docs are paywalled!

  4. Today 12-08-2015

    I happened upon the above text this evening - This gave real substance to me (my ego, I suppose) It has made me feel as though I was sucked up by the YouTube cesspool - In scanning the above comments I feel as though I have successfully completed rehab and now back to TDF where consciousness manifest concept in real time -

  5. if there is a dimension that has a sense of smell then there will be a dimension that has no sense of smell. Gravity could be another dimension. Envision a place where the laws of gravity do not apply. Artificial intelligence when it arrives could create another reality or dimension for mankind.

  6. Yes other dimensions exist,they are the ones we can't experience through our natural senses.

    1. Do you feel that we experience the next set of senses sensory states?

  7. I think we have too many dimensions to deal with already. lol

  8. If that woman had no depth perception until that day when she got into the car....why the hell was she getting into a car in the first place??

  9. As mankind grew the world became more than just 3 dimensions. when we started measuring time we added 1 more dimension never realizing we were already moving and not having a static position as we move we now have 5 dimensions. (length width height time motion) We can smell. Some creatures cannot so is that not another dimension? I say it is. Now we are up to five. We have knowledge of time as in the past. So we are moving through time also. So would we be able to consider that the past is another dimension. There is light could there be a dimension without light yes there could be but we have light. maybe we are up to six...ANY COMMENTS

    1. If we consider that we gave 3 dimensions (height, width, lenght) then motion still occurs in theese three dimensions. No new dimensions here (draw a line on a sheet of paper. Your line is within two dimensions and drawing it doesn't create a third(unless you draw with such force, that you rip the paper ;) ))
      Sense of smell is from receptors in our noses that pick up particles of matter (wich are bound in our 3 dimensions of space) then they send eletrochemical singals to our brains. Still no new dimensions...
      If we add time and move up to four dimensions then past is somewhere in space-time at this moment. It co-exists (this is just one hypothesis). Even if it doesn't some scientists believe it is in paralel universe (wich isn't equal to another dimension).
      Light moves in the same 4 dimensions as us. Energy condensed into slower vibration, nothing too fancy here and I think not a factor wich gives rise to a need of another dimension.

    2. Drawing a line creates a third dimension, the line whether it be ink or pencil is composed of particles, atoms, it does have a height etc: no matter how small, therefore more dimensions.

    3. just dont try and measure it :>

    4. your an *****. you cant base dimensional living on scientific evidence on drawing a pencil. just because you cant see something, in no way makes it so that it does not exist. how about what science refers to as the about of light we can see in simply a grain of salt on the spectrum of light scaled to the size of the empire state building. why cant we see it? because its within the next dimension, there is not just a 4th dimension there is also a 5th and 6th, to be as close minded as you, you will never transcend in this life into the next dimension, maybe in your next life is the time when you will truly awaken.

    5. Apparently to transcend(whatever that means) you need to tell others they will never transcend :S

    6. Smell Isn't another dimension. Smell is is a sense, you get the smell from particles of matter (length/width/height) they happen to go into your nose. The past is just part of the time dimension. Yes there could be another dimension that light is not in, but saying that doesn't really mean anything except restating that there could be more dimensions. There could also be dimensions where perhaps energy or matter doesn't exist.

    7. i agree people need to close there eyes picture nothing then add a line thats 1 dimension then make a square thats 2 nd dimensions make a cube thats 3rd then put it in space and time is 4th i believe each layer u add to the onion that defines it better like color texture vibration frequency enrgy and smell as well you have to add smell in a simulation to make it as real as this real world these are all 11 of the layers of dimensions

  10. Has anyone ever attempted at looking at a combination of the Single or One Dimension theory (As opposed to multi-dimensions) and the theory that time is a series of slices made up of "now" moments?

    1. The theory that time is a series of slices made up of now moments makes it a dimension.

      Do basic kinetic physics for world applications. Its alot easier if you make time a dimension though 4 dimensional vectors are pretty hard to get around so we just use 3 dimensions and differentiate.

  11. Taking time as the 4th dimension is a tool that allows us to describe MOTION in 3-Dimensions in a meaningful and useful way, i.e. Einstein’s General and Special Relativity.

    A different slant on the problem is to consider that there are more than 3 spatial dimensions; that the observable is a 3 dimensional manifestation of a higher dimensional spatial reality. A 3-D shadow projected from a higher spatial reality onto the observed 3 spatial dimensions. Just like your 3-D body gets projected onto the ground as a 2-D shadow, the hypothesis is that a 4-D object gets projected onto the observable 3-D world and in fact this idea can cascade down through any number of higher spatial dimensions.

    A stream of unexplainable and at present unobservable causes that affect our sensory reality and a beautiful hypothesis that merits further investigation and testing for validity.

    Scientific creativity and testability of ANY intuitive and seemingly plausible (and even the odd implausible) hypothesis are valid avenues of research even if there is an affirmation in the negative. We learn from our mistakes; cross erroneous ideas of the ‘list’ of possible truths and eventually construct a piece by piece jigsaw that describes the visible world to a high degree of accuracy. Agree or disagree, rightly or wrongly, that is the scientific approach and it is VERY effective.

  12. "A tensor is the ratio of the modulus of the quaternion stretched over the vector. Now, if we take the set of nonlinear, partial differential equations formulated by the prophesied Einstein, for his GR, finding solutions compatible with the Rest-State Value-Set Space, V, provided for above, and substitute, we arrive at the electro-magnetic-gravitic unification formulation."
    ~ Newly discovered text in the Dead Sea Scrolls


    1. The statement is a hoax for many reasons: Tensors, quaternions, vector and non-linear to name a few are modern words and are meaningless from an ancient point of view. It’s like the ancients talking about computers or candy floss! They just don’t have a word for it, the concepts do not exist at that time and require many preliminary ideas that had not been discovered.

      Not sure where you linked the statement from but I am pretty sure that it is a hoax or there has been some creative interpretation by the translator.

    2. I also thought if someone had written such text with such words in those years he would have ended up in some dungeon labelled a crazy man!
      I didn't dare say anything to Oz, one has to be careful when one is not ready or equipped to disagree with the wizard.
      I admit many of you guys speak a language i often don't understand even though it's english.
      My years studying in books are equal to that of an infant in some scientific your comment above (Taking time as the 4th dimension.....) sounds almost like chinese to me. lol

    3. Very simple, it is a hoax of grand design, by Oz himself from his own I must say, fertile mind.

  13. 777

    1. @ Liam O'Shea

      Now, what the hell is 'seven' 'seven' 'seven' supposed to mean?!


    2. Hey Oz, i don't think you want to spend that thumb-up on Liam. It has nothing to do with Boing 777 and what ever vacation you had in mind.

      here's what i got:
      As any reader of the Bible will tell you, the number seven is a number that is close to God's heart. It certainly is of massive importance in the BRJC. In the first chapter, we are introduced to seven churches. In Rev 1:20 we read of seven churches having seven stars (which are seven angels) and seven lampstands which symbolize those churches. In other words,

      7 Churches,
      7 Stars/Angels and,
      7 Lampstands,


  14. Do not watch this when you're high!

    1. @ Daniel Robinson
      "Do not watch this when you're high!"

      Oh, I don't know. It's kinda trippy!


    2. Watch this when you're high!

    3. Translation: Watch this. Especially when you're high.

    4. Do not watch this wearing a t-shirt saying "Do not watch this wearing a t-shirt saying: "Do not watch this wearing a t-shirt saying "Do not watch this wearing a t-shirt saying: "Do not watch this wearing Do not watch this wearing a t-shirt saying ..........

    5. = brainf--k

  15. The bible didn't mention anything about another dimension.. so it must not be true.

    1. Your bibles don't mention computers either, so whatever you wrote must not be true! Again, can't wait for your rapture. Argh!!

    2. Islam mentions of more than the ordinary dimensions with God occupying the most high dimension.

    3. @ Abdul Aleem Khusro
      "Islam mentions...more...dimensions with God occupying the most high dimension."

      Abdul, I know you're not joking!

      Apart from the Q'ran, what other kinds of books do you have in your house, and how many, if any?


    4. @ Robby Salisbury
      " didn't mention...another it must not be true."

      Robby, I am not absolutely sure you're not joking so, in my mind, at the moment, there's still hope for you. Tell me! Is my hope misplaced?


    5. There are a lot of things the bible did not mention, and possibly a lot was written that never made it pass the translation.

      You say "so it MUST not be true"...i read doubt or obligation.
      The bible tell me so...How are we ever gone get rid of that old book?

    6. by the way, Does the bible mention the bible?
      When it was written it was never meant to be as is....

    7. The bible didn't mention cars.... They exist...

    8. I've grown to hate the people who bash religion to feel better about themselves. You're a troll but even still...

  16. Anyone who has ever had a problem with ants inside their home knows just how maddening it can be. They're everywhere you look. That's all you see.

    Ants. Ants. Ants.

    Not one of those ants has ever seen you, and not one of us has ever seen...


  17. Well, I'm off to find out whatever I can, or can understand, about the fox, Dr. Laura Mersini-Houghton, and her work. And I'll love it, too, if one day her ideas turn out to take precedence. Especially in this field, with this problem, wouldn't it be satisfying if a woman succeeded where all the boys couldn't?

    1. what would be so satisfying about it?

    2. Not that there aren't many examples in science already, but in a field traditionally dominated by men even more than is usually the case in other professions, it would stand out as quite a significant one for girls talented in math and science as to what might be possible for them. As the father of a girl who has shown some aptitude in math and biology, I know I'd much rather her look up to a woman of this caliber, instead of all the GaGas, Lohans, Hiltons, and Spears you could stack all the way from here to the moon.

  18. I am back from StarbellyJam, The Coup and DJ Pam the Funkstress gets my 2 thumbs up for making every one Dance.
    Haven't watched a doc yet but have read quite a few posts. I see humour was in the air. A lot of good read.
    @Pysmythe...hadn't noticed you coming on this site very often yet. You read well, good thinking threads. @Waldo and made it interesting for me to be a student of life.
    Oz and Achems...hard to disagree with good sense

    1. Thanks, Az, and I'm glad you had a good time! I do try hard, probably too hard, to write so that it reads well. Unfortunately, style may sometimes be more important to me than content, and that may give off the wrong impression occasionally... But I generally refuse to dumb-it-down, even out of simple courtesy. The way I see it, there's far too much of that going on already out in the world.

    2. @ Azilda
      Haven't watched a doc yet..."

      Neither have I.
      I've been too busy commenting on it. (lol)


    3. @Azilda, wasn't that guy who said he liked my avatar just wonderful?!
      Can you imagine him riding you up against the wall without a word?

    4. I don't think it's my wall he wanted to climb.

    5. Couldn't make the starbelly jam, damn, had trouble with my 4 barrel carb.

    6. I saw a few guys who could have been you.
      You get an other chance at Shambhala Music Festival, this one is a bit crazy though with 10,000 plus people.

    7. This is going to make me sound like a party girl (i am a bit, basically i love to dance)...i just confirmed my working for the Shambhala Music festival (cook for the set-up crew). Anyone else going? It is the best large event party in the "world" according to Breakspoll Awards....right here in Salmo, Canada!
      See you there on the 4th!
      @Vlatko you missed Starbelly, this one is the one!
      See you there

    8. Just talked with my Mom and Dad, they went camping for a few days, last night there was music. She said they danced all 75 and 77
      That's where i get it from!

  19. Yes, duh... time is the fourth. But all of it is a failure of language to covet complex ideas and math isn't much better.

  20. Mankind does not live in 3 dimensions but rather 4 dimensions that we are aware of. The fourth dimension is time. Now knowing that "time" is our fourth dimension there is NO WAY that the particle collider in Europe is going to find other dimensions.

    Why? Because you cannot find other dimensions by smashing together sub atomic particles. It is never going to happen.

    Example? By smashing together sub atomic particles have the researchers discovered the fourth dimension of time? No they have not.

    Therefore you cannot discover other dimensions by smashing together sub atomic particles.

    Other dimensions are just just that other dimensions.

    Now the real question is "Other dimensions of what?"

    Our physical world consists of three physical dimensions. Up & Down, Left & Right, Forward and Backward. The fourth dimension is time. Yesterday - Today - Tomorrow.

    No matter what experiment you conduct in 3D space you cannot discover the dimension of "time". Time is a dimension that is experienced by life.

    Another dimension that we may be aware of is the "Spiritual Dimension". The "Spiritual Dimension" is the fifth dimension that governs our reality and existence.

    This dimension exists based on human experience and from the evidence time and distance (space) do not exist in the way we understand it in our 3D reality.

    To learn more about this "spiritual dimension" watch the documentary "Life After Life" at this site.

    We cannot see the spiritual intelligence in this dimension, but it exists none-the-less.

    What is even more interesting is that evidence is gradually being accumulated that ties our physical dimension with this spiritual dimension.
    Documentaries Life After Life & Previous Lives of Children.

    Life is only possible because of this "Spiritual Dimension" of which we are a part.

    Finding other dimensions is very difficult because they contain properties that are completely foreign to our senses. Even though they may exist we may be unable to sense them or we may be unable to believe what is possible.

    For instance the "Spiritual Dimension" is based on the reports brought back from people who have died and come back to life throughout time. There is an intelligence in the universe that exists in its own dimension. (See Life After Life)

    This "Spiritual Dimension" consists of pure love based on the reports. The universal intelligence in this dimension is able to send down spirits that somehow fuse with biological life to create conscience life. Human beings are one aspect of this type of biological-spiritual life that exists on the earth.

    Would scientists consider "Spiritual Dimension" as a dimension? No because they have never seen anything like it before. And that is the problem with searching for other dimensions. The dimension of "Time" is completely unlike the physical dimensions of "Up Down - Right Left - Forward Backward".

    The "Spiritual Dimension" is also unlike anything we know. Time and distance are fused into one. Reports are that a spirit can be in all places at once, aware but without form. Distance and time have no meaning in this dimension. Love and connectedness do have value in this dimension though.

    The "Spiritual Dimension" can best be described as the software dimension of the universe. Without it conscience life cannot exist. Human bodies are the biological hardware. The spiritual aspect is the software that makes consciousness possible.

    Don't laugh at this idea. More and more evidence is being gathered around the world that suggests that human memories can exist outside of the body in the "Spiritual Dimension". Goggle search "Previous lives of Children" to learn more.

    The universe is truly an interesting place to live.

    Another interesting aspect of our universe is that the general rule is for pure energy to become more and more complex over time. Both in the form of biological and non biological life. Although this has never been written down in the text books of science stop and think about it for a moment.

    All organic life as we know it has grown more complex over time. All inorganic life such as computers and software have also grown more complex over time. Therefore the general rule for our universe / dimension is that all pure energy becomes more and more complex until it becomes self aware and trys to understand itself.

    1. If you say so, by the way, don't leave your day job.

    2. I can't help thinking this is New-Age, metaphysical bullsh^t, Art, with one or two exceptions. You ought to know better than this! Are you pulling a prank here? Until such ideas CAN be repeated experimentally in some way, they are a matter of faith, not fact.

  21. @Pysmythe,@Achems_Razor,
    I find it fascinating that you guys are so very into universal 'holes'. (lol)

    I'm off to beddy-byes!


    1. Hey, if it's a hole, baby, I'm THERE! Just ask my wife! lol.


    3. The name of the woman youse guyses are searching for is...Dr. Laura Mersini-Houghton.

    4. I was just coming on to say that... Thanks, anyway, though!

      (aside- To my mind, an incredibly sexy looking woman, too. And that accent...)

    5. @ Pysmythe

      Now you tell me, after I did all that work going through my backup hard drives.


  22. i bet before we find out about some of the biggest fundamental questions of todays, we will probably already have learned from someone who spent millions of years finding out already

  23. Sometimes I get the impression that these poor, hard-working physicists may not have a real answer for gravity and its implications on the subatomic level until they have very strong A.I. to help them. So many of them have been chipping away at the problem for so long now, and there are so many different theories... I get reminded, too, of Feynman's statement that "Nobody really understands Quantum Mechanics." When I'm at my most cynical (and selfish) I get a little worried that these very high-quality minds are slaving away in pursuit of an equation that can never be found, for some reason, and wonder what the rest of us may be losing as a result. But I guess knowing a question couldn't be answered would be better than never having tried to answer it; it would be its own answer, however disappointing and costly, if it ever could come to such an extreme. But mostly I'm anxious that a working Standard Model fully incorporating gravity with the other three fundamental forces will be found in my lifetime; I have a feeling, borne out by the immense amount of work being put into it, that, if it happens, the implications are going to radically change more than just our views yet again. Since new technologies arise out of scientific theories, who knows what benefits might one day result from having such answers?

    1. @ Pysmythe

      You know, it's a real pity that 'TDF? SCIENCE? 244.What Happened Before the Big Bang?' has been blocked. I saw it a while back when
      it was still online. It is very good, but that alone is not why I would recommend it.

      Near the very end, a female physicist explains, not one, but THREE astronomical anomalies using one, and only one, 'flavor' of M-Theory. Further, had these anomalies not been known, her theory would have predicted all three. In fact, her theory demands they exist.

      In the past, M-Theory has been criticized(and rightfully so) due to lack of supporting evidence. Worse, still, the theory predicts phenomena peculiar to itself that it says would be so difficult to detect that even the LHC at CERN could not possibly hope to do so ? assuming, in the first instance, any of them exist.

      That is why Murray Gell-Mann(in another doc) said something like,
      Now folks, before we begin, you need to understand that there is
      physics, and then there is M-Theory. Ha. Ha.

      In seeking out confirming data, what no one, but no one, had thought to do was to look into the deepest reaches of space ? and I do mean DEEP. The theory allows for all three astronomical predictions, but no one knew enough to look for them. Everyone was so myopic. Everyone concentrated upon wringing the last from the quantum world.

      No one ? except for this one woman ? thought to look 'out'.

      Upon reflection, this fact is really quite odd because the whole point
      of M-Theory is to explain gravity at the quantum level in such a manner that there be a seamless continuum from the sub-sub-sub atomic to the macro-macro-macro scale.

      So why not look outwards and upwards for confirmation? There is no reason whatever to confine one's attention to the quantum level when M-Theory's whole goal is to make it possible to tease out predictions
      at ALL scales.

      The piece at the end of the doc(about this breakthrough) is mentioned almost in passing. Not more than a minute is devoted to it. When I heard and saw it, my jaw dropped because one of the anomalies was an anomaly which had been picked up by another woman, an astronomer, who noticed a pair of interacting galaxies were 'being' something impossible.

      Galaxy-A was saying, Hey, I'm here, right next door. While, Galaxy-B (which would have to also be 'next-door', as it is interacting) was saying, Hi, I'm Galaxy-B and I'm a billion light years farther away from Galaxy-A than I am supposed to be!

      Both can't be right.

      They offered to kick the astronomer upstairs, conferring upon her a Professorship Emeritus ? if, that is, she promised to shut up.

      She stood firm.

      So they took away from her all of her telescope time. Curiously, simultaneous to her losing her telescope time, out-of-the-blue she's offered a prestigious chair at MIT, which she refused.

      They did not know what to do with her. They could not fire her, because they had no grounds and, anyhow, that would only draw more attention. They may even have considered poisoning her (lol).

      Why did they want her out of the way? Simple.

      They wanted her out of the way because she saw something she was
      not supposed to see, namely, Galaxy-A and Galaxy-B interacting when
      all distance information said that they were not even close to each other, but separated by a billion light-years!

      This flies in the face of all the rules. The red shift, by which we measure everything, the expansion of the Universe and, in reverse, the Big Bang
      (and so on, and on, and on), would all have to go. Everything would fall apart, and I do mean everything. Either she went, or everything else went. The solution was obvious:

      She was for the chop!

      But now the other woman, the physicist, has resolved the 'Galaxy-A Galaxy-B interaction' paradox, by means of her M-Theory, and so everything has changed.

      The second anomaly is a hole at the center of the 'cosmic microwave background radiation' mapping ? a very small hole, yet unmistakable.
      No one knows what it is, nor why it is. It's 'microscopic'. so everyone
      just pretends it isn't there ? but it is. And her version of M-Theory explains it(and predicts it).

      The third anomaly, I forget. But all three are predicted, and explained.
      by, and only by, her version of M-Theory.

      All of this means that, for the first time ever, there might be, not only confirmation of M-Theory(threefold confirmation!), but, simultaneously,
      a narrowing of all possible 'flavors', down to just ONE.

      If all this pans out(it was discovered last year, 2010), the human race
      will have a quantum theory of gravity that is not fantasy and to which physicists can then turn their attention to work out its implications.
      In short:


      Only, the doc ain't there no more. I'd even buy it, if I knew how. Forget not, however, the doc is NOT about this. All this I got from past sources and from that one minute at the end(that they probably forgot to cut).

      You can drink methadone(243.'What Happened Before the Beginning?') instead of injection the real thing: 'TDF? SCIENCE? 244.What Happened Before the Big Bang?' But remember, the methadone don't have no extra bit at the end :-((


      Pysmythe, I liked your other avatar better.

    2. quantum theory is sort of like arm wrestling with yourself, you can concentrate on the left arm or the right arm, (pay no attention to the idiot behind the joy stick), It falls more or less under mental masterbation. quantum study brings me to a point very close to congnition but then i think well that's obvious and it defuses the concept.

    3. Thanks for posting this, I had never heard of it. Sounds amazing. Surely there is something online about it somewhere, maybe not the doc but some text on some site? I hope I can find it and research that. Of course I would also have to do a lot more research on m-theory to understand the full implications it sounds like. M-theory and string theory both have always been unbelievably confusing to me, the mathematics goes far beyond my ability, and it is almost impossible to gain any intuitive sense for it. Still its fun to try.

    4. @ wald0

      If you run across any info to fill some the gaping gaps, please do let me know, okay?


    5. @ wald0
      "M-theory and string theory..."

      M-Theory is just the generalization of so-called 'String Theory'. Though the term is still thrown about, nobody really talks about 'String Theory' any longer as it is subsumed by M-Theory: no more noodles ? now we're into soap bubbles, soap bubble like sheets stretched to fill the 2-D voids bounded by coat hangers. (lol)

      Ain't physics wonderful?!


      P.S.: If you want it full strength, look up Witten(in combo with M-Theory).

      Witten is probably the smartest man alive, right now. An architect of M-Theory, which he created in order to resolve contradictions among all of the String Theory Models. He succeeded, at the expense of adding even more dimensions, which is why we now have 10-Spatial + Time = 11-D. There are still groupings within M-Theory, but outright contradictions have vanished as a result of Witten's work.

      Witten is not famous for his modesty(and he talks funny ? high voice, and REAL fast). Gel-Mann was once asked, Why is it called M-Theory? Gel-Mann quipped, It's probably an upside-down W.
      Weinberg, not by Gell-Mann, made the 'upside-down-W' quip.

    6. True enough, string theory is a work in progress for the Brane, Cyclic, and landscape multiverses. But then we still have the Quilted and Inflationary multiverse and the other 5 different multiverses, that in the multiverses themselves propagate other universes, and so on to 10^500 different universes, or maybe to infinity?

    7. I was going to ask you if by some chance this lady had an association with Witten that you were aware of. Looking into him might be a way of finding her.

    8. @ Pysmythe

      ...this lady had an association with Witten..."


      Problem is, so has every other physicist in her field.


    9. MANY of whom were, or are, students of his... I went to his web-page once and saw quite a list of these, past and present. So I was thinking I might cull her name out of it, if you remembered him being mentioned in a direct connection like that, and I couldn't find her anywhere else...

    10. First of all, where in the hell were you at all night? Did you actually need to sleep that long, or were you just playing hard to get? lol.

      As for the doc, I saw that one, and vaguely remember that woman at the end. It's not surprising I didn't notice anything particularly extraordinary about what she said; things like that can usually be counted on to slip right by me, especially when they aren't given the emphasis they deserve, and even with a fairly longstanding interest in the subject. I'm just too unschooled for something like that to jump out at me. But from what you've said, I sure would like to know who she is now! You don't have a name? Is there any info you can give me to help track her down? What about the astronomer? Any names of their associates that you remember?

    11. Associates may be.

      Neil Turok...Burt Ovrut...and Justin Khoury. Are working on inflationary universe, M theory, branes colliding forming new universes.

    12. Thanks, Achem. Have YOU heard anything about this 'hole' in the background radiation, and what it might be or mean ?

    13. Yes, a hole a billion light years across.
      For info, google...

      "Astronomers find enormous hole in the universe"

    14. Okay.

    15. @ Pysmythe

      I had been up all night long.

      I do not know where you live, but where I live, I hit the sack at about 5 AM. So naturally, I slept all day. I got up at 6PM last evening, and now it's going to same, again.

      I'm on the 'night shift'.

      No, I do not know the physicist's name, but I sure as hell wish I did. If you can find an alternate way to access the doc, please let me know.



    16. (Actually, I liked it better, too. It shows up more, plus it's funnier, probably. So... what the hell? Happy now?!)

      I've got a couple of alternate sources for docs... One way or the other I'm gonna track her down some time today, and I'll let you know something. I'd really like to know what her explanation is for that void, and more specifically how it supports her theory, whatever that is. PLUS the galaxies anomaly... That is really weird.

      I live about 70 miles west of NYC... Lots of polka, lots of pretzels, a long, long way from the Southern beaches I grew up on. I miss those, too, believe me. The sound of the surf is the best damn sound there is.

    17. @ Pysmythe

      UrOldAvatar+Me= :-))

      I got lots of problems w/sleep.
      Also, I am failing miserably at 'getting a life' but that don't stop me from steadfastly trying to try to keep right on trying!

      Bottom line:
      I come and I go, fading in and out...
      If you don't see or hear me 'round, from time to time, that does not(necessarily) translate to me being dead. (lol)


      Me like u.

    18. @ Pysmythe
      "I'd really like to know what her explanation is for that void,..."

      The 'Gargantuan VOID in the Universe' and the hole in CMB
      are most probably related, but the focus of her theorems and calculations were confined, strictly, to explaining, directly,
      the hole in the CMB which, relative to the entirety of the CMB mapping, is dinky. For a long while, no one even knew it was there.


    19. Yeah, I was wondering how a hole a billion light-years across could be considered 'microscopic' in a universe 13 billion years old!

    20. Even bigger then the Eridanus hole in universe, another hole 3.5 billion light years across discovered.

      The consensus is that they are super-duper massive black holes swallowing an untold number of galaxies.

    21. Do you mean there are super-massive black holes somewhere within these voids? Or that the black holes themselves are billions of light-years across? That couldn't be right, could it? Where would they get the mass they needed to form?!

    22. Don't really know. Some say black holes themselves, some say not, the 3.5 billion LY one is apparently pulling thousands of galaxies towards it. Where would they get the mass? don't know, maybe dark matter itself.

  24. Space travel is, very likely, the only way all these questions and theories can be answered; there is not enough room spatially or mass and energy on this planet to create, focus and sustain the energies that we need to delve deeper into nature. Moreover, there is a need for vacuums so we can minimise contamination arising from foreign particles and light/noise pollution, with the increasing intricacy of our experiments. It's just a waste of time attempting it here because you can only get so far, it all lies with conquering space or at least partially. What we are seeing now, in the science world, is the decline of practical experimentation, science is slowly becoming guilty of what is criticised of religion. We seem to be getting scientists (Priests?) telling us about theories and concepts so out of reach and scope that they might as well be divine and supernatural - modern science is starting to feel like real cool stories with a real lack of evidence (Bible anyone?).

    Though, another way of experimentation is computers. However, these devices need to be fast enough to compute and visualise reality itself: all the particles, fields, forces, vibrations, dimensions, etc, which coalesce in a 1m x 1m x 1m cube of actual space-time. But then to achieve this you are going to need a machine as big as a galaxy! Try rendering an animation on today's computers ...

    I kind of get pissed off when companies like Apple spend all their time making gadgets which further intrench us, no offence, in our pointless niggles of life.

    We should ease off all the philosophical theories that are being bashed about by physicists and focus every gram of scientific thought in at least giving us a more practical application of space travel, colonisation and the production of anti-matter and nuclear fusion - that is the key to answering these deep questions. One step back into practical reality will take us two steps forward into the theoretical. I really believe in science but I am scared about where all the money and innovation is going.

    Where is the space race?

    1. "What we are seeing now, in the science world, is the decline of practical experimentation, science is slowly becoming guilty of what is criticised of religion"

      Please read my posts below about this, science is not to blame really. Science is a process not a bunch of scientists on cable t.v. or their philosophies and interpretations of the facts. Science is being misrepresented, one need look no further than plain average scientists to restore their faith in science. Even many of them that appear on these shows like through the worm hole practice sound solid science. But they didn't get invited to talk about that, they got invited to talk about scientific philosophy because cable t.v. is about ratings not science, and people don't want to hear E=MC2, they want to hear over simplified, some what misleading, generalizations so they can move onto the implications of what that might mean.

    2. waldo you are dead on in that first paragraph. Using the word theory and physics together just doesn't sit right with me. Sort of like scientific philosophy and that hole TV ratings bit. You have deciphered my anxiety about this hole thing. Waldo go back to ART your so close, In Art it's hand spirit coordination not hand eye. (spirit has nothing to do with religion). Visual Art is not a frivolous thing; The Artist is the Architect the Physicist is the Engineer.


      Thanks for taking time to consider what I wrote and comment on it. I am really happy majoring in physics, it keeps me in awe and not so dulled out and disgusted with all the things that I see wrong with politics, society, etc. It challenges me and makes me feel like I have accomplished something, which is always uplifting even if most people are to cool to admit it. But I haven't abandoned art, I still create and play music everyday just about. I have a little studio set up in my room that does surprisingly well for my purposes. I also play in a band and enjoy that very much as well, just bars and local clubs you know. Plus I go to school and am involved in a lot of political movements and efforts on a local, state,and federal level. I have also started into learning how to build cobb structures, which is exactly like sculpting a house from clay. Its amazing what you can do with this medium man, and when you are done you have a eco friendly, beautiful, and efficient structure to live in, or whatever you need it for. Anyway thanks for the vote of confidence and the conversation, but I think I will stay on this path for now.

    4. Hi Waldo, you know we take thing so literal on the internet and so much more is actually meant by the words then are posted, that can be good and bad. I am really interested in the cobb structures, i saw that somewhere recently probably on TDF no doubt. I live in a tree house up in the mountains, it's really put together well I would love to hear more about the cobb structures. All these people with these humungus dwellings, what greed i won't dwell on that subject, enough said. It's good that you are in the Art's it really doesn't have anything to do with making money. It's my opinion that we should all have an Artistic path along side what ever we do for a living. In hindsight the first article you posted in this recent run really has nothing to do with who wald0 is, it's just one small part, i have learned something from that and in the future i will try to take that into account when replying to comment! thank you and good luck to you friend.


  25. @ Shafiq Ahmed

    I know what you mean. However, even if we did solve the questions we have now doing so would only create that many more. Or at least I hope it would, it is the passion of discovery and exploration that I covet as much as the answers I suppose. I also think that because real science requires such brutal honesty, realism, discipline, and such a dogged pursuit of simplicity to be worth anything it brings out our best qualities. Not that all science is good science by a long shot, or that pettiness and ego do not rear there ugly heads as well, they do. But the scientific method uncorrupted by the business, bureaucracy, or ego that has grown up around it is beautiful.

    @ Vlatko or anyone that can help

    I am experiencing issues periodically when trying to respond to the top most post. About half the time it places my reply at the top as a new sub thread. My cursor also periodically disappears and the scroll function keeps going nuts all on it own no matter which post I am responding to. If any one knows what this is or how to stop it I would really appreciate the help.

    1. I'm sure this is a silly question, but did you run a full scan? Or maybe you should change your browser? I use Mozilla, and rarely have any problems with it. And reloading the page might help with more quickly putting your post in the right spot, if I understand you correctly.

    2. No it doesn't sound silly at all, do you mean a full virus scan? If so yes I have one scheduled to run every third day while I sleep. I also use Mozilla, and have updated shock wave, flash player, java script. I had a virus sometime ago and removed it, a Trojan, and every since my system restore will not work correctly. Plus every since I made the mistake of accepting a windows update that changed my IE to a 64 bit version I have had issues on different web sites even using Mozilla. I guess a reload is immanent, thanks for the suggestion though.

    3. Did you run the scan in safe mode? Because that disappearing cursor really does sound like a virus. Or have you defragged it lately, or ran chkdsk?

    4. @ waldo
      i agree it sounds like a virus. but if you go to the microsoft home page. search 32 bit versus 64 bit (within microsoft). the first result i got was frequently asked questions (choose that 1) and within it will show you how to check if 64 bit is compatible for your computer/operating system. if you are running 64 bit on a non compatible machine lots of strange things can happen

    5. sorry for the double post but i forgot a question. is your cursor disappearing when typing? if so that could be a setting to change that (xp but am sure vista/7 similar) click start -control panel-mouse-pointer options there should be a check box for "hide pointer while typing" uncheck that then "apply"

    6. I am running a 64 bit version of windows seven. No, its not my setting in control panel cause it only does it here on this site, word and all is fine. It is a virus I am almost sure of it. That's what happens when my dad finds out he can find and download pictures of Brittney Spears online for free, dirty old man. Considering all the other software problems I have right now I am just going to reload. I Maybe down for awhile but it shouldn't take long and will be worth it to get rid of all this junk and these errors and stuff. The last time I reloaded was shortly after windows seven came out, so its been a while. Thanks for the advise though.

    7. I would do a defragg on your hdd at least 25x overwrite, because that trojan you had could have easily hidden itself in windows when you tried to remove it. other than that, try checking out google chrome as a browser, since mozilla had their last update, i find their browsers to be sub-par compared to chrome lately, plus chrom has some interesting anti-virus/spyware apps you can run in it, but im not to sure how much you can trust them since they are open source. avg all the way for me.

  26. One dimension or nine? We are just at the starting line of a marathon of modern physics/science. If our own created rigorously building destruction to the earth allows us to even complete quarter of this marathon, we would certainly be able to answer many fundamental questions currently unanswerable. I presume, some of the questions would not take more than twenty or thirty years but at the same time I have a great great fear that our own created mess will win the race and the marathon will be finished for us, i.e: destruction of the earth by us before the science explores the fundamental questions about the universe and our selves.

  27. Ice and steam are made up of the same molecular structure yet have very different forms as is energy and mass

    1. @as_above:

      Have no idea what you are talking about.

    2. just speculating that mass and energy are the same thing just at different vibratory frequency all atomic structures are made up of charged particles ie energy.

    3. Energy doesn't have a molecular structure, it is not made of molecules. Matter and energy are interchangeable, meaning they can be converted into one another as per Einsteins equation E=MC2. So, I can agree it is correct to say that they are different forms of the same thing, just not that they have the same molecular structure like water and steam. The efficient conversion of water into steam can be achieved on a kitchen stove, the efficient conversion of matter into energy is called nuclear fusion and is a completely different means of arriving at a completely different end. Turning water into steam is a physical change, converting mass to energy requires a chemical change (fire) or changes at the molecular level (breaking covalent bonds creates heat) or atomic levels (splitting atoms creates a nuclear reaction). You are basically converting the bonds between the atoms of a compound or the particles of an atom into energy and reducing the matter to its constituent parts.

      P.S. Whether or not a particle carries a charge has nothing to do with it being a different form of energy, neutrons are a different form of energy and they carry no charge at all. Whether a particle is charged positive or neutral, has to do with what types of quarks it consists of, up, down, strange, charmed, beauty, truth- (some call beauty and truth top and bottom) not the fact that it is a different form of energy. Why electrons are negative we don't know yet, we have yet to split it and see what it is made of. Some think it is elementary and will not break down any further.

    4. You are and academianamazoid, book learned, not bad though you have done your home work well. I am afraid , hence, you have the right answers to the wrong concept. No argument here just an observation. Like i tell my grandson, "A sharp or quick mind doesn't mean the right thoughts are in there".

    5. i did not say energy has a molecular structure i was trying to say molecular structure is a form of or state of energy containing charged particles


      I can be philosophical with the best of them, I even write music, play guitar, and draw- and I am fairly good at all three- if you excuse me tooting my own horn for a moment. I love art, philosophy, abstract thought in general. I've had poetry published, in amateur magazines mind you nothing serious, and written many short stories. I have nothing against these things and feel they are at least as important if not more important in many ways than science. A life that consists of nothing but facts and utilitarian pursuits can sustain itself well, but why would it want to?

      That said, these things have no place in practical useful science. If they did science and religion would be on equal footing. Playing what if is not science, it is not what it means to be open minded or to think out of the box in the context of science. Science doesn't waste time questioning fundamental truths when we have no evidence or observation to suggest we were wrong. The reason they are considered fundamental truths is because they have withstood countless attempts to prove them wrong, because they are used everyday in technology and operate just as we predicted they would, and because we have no reason to question them presently other than to play what if.

      Does that mean we should never play what if? No, not at all. Its fun and inspiring and sometimes leads to new concepts to be explored. But we should keep it separate and not present it as science, we should present it as what it is- playing what if. In fact you don't have to define it as anything, just don't define it as science. Otherwise all trust in science is misplaced and science is no longer the useful tool it was. Most of all if we are going to preach the importance and superiority of science over religion as a tool for discovering truth, which myself and countless others do constantly on this site, many even to the point of cursing others out and calling them names, belittling them for their belief in a deity and his omnipotence- then how dare we turn around and indulge in the same behavior and call it science. I get tired of religees telling me how science is just like religion, it isn't supposed to be, its being perverted into something like religion.

      That said , I will leave you guys alone. I didn't mean you could not indulge in whatever you like, its not for me to say. You can even call it science, nothing I can really do about it. I have said my piece, that's all I am entitled to. Thanks for your response and time, you have some interesting philosophical questions- thanks for not calling them science as well.

      P.S. You would also have to read the thread under the last through the worm hole to really understand why I responded to as_above like I did. Just looking at this makes me look really over zealous.

    7. concept, as a noun, is absent of energy/matter. your dealing with infrastructure, like most of these so called theoretical physicist, they need "substance", something they can touch or feel, or if you will, labels, hence the "string", how ignorant!! Perhaps our best path to meander through towards the uncovering or discovering the answers to the SECRET is Visual Art or Metaphysics and for those of you who need a security blanket here, Math. You see Labels and Strings come after the fact. Also, Energy, Matter and Form are words and not things but descriptions of, concept, (for lack of a better word), and subject to connotation.

      I must relay a story here to give credence to ambiguity. (I am a Visual Artist and have been most of my life. My study is in, i guess one might say, communication. My work for the most part is about something not of something).

      While living at Atlantic Beach North Carolina in 1987, a drawing appeared of a, lets say a Native Americans head and the composite or composition within the head was comprised of the king of Egypt, Emperor of China, dark angels with black wings and so on. On the outside of this head was a tail that floated outwards and at the end of this tail was the beginning of, i guess time, any way as i followed it back toward the base of the head where all these little pictures of the different periods of time that the earth went through, the ice age, the dinosaur period, two religious people and then came a computer followed by black space then a jet plane then another black space then finally the Sphinx in Egypt. The title came immediately, "Tribunal Of The Homo Sapiens", I destroyed the piece trying to control it with my ego i guess. I thought, no one will ever get to see this. A year later i was living in Port Costa California and was in my studio working on a piece and about a week or two into the piece i noticed two religious people and thought, i know those people and stepped back and looked at the work in process and it was the same drawing line for line dot for dot as the one i did on Atlantic Beach! I was speechless for almost a week.

      Mind you i am not a clairvoyant, this is a learned process through understanding and much study over a life time, a process we all manifest. Like the lost city of Atlantis, in essence, a link we have collectively left behind, way before script. Just yesterday while sitting outside the coffee shop with other Artist friends and relaying other story's like this my friend said, Where does this come from and i said, i don't know maybe the collective mind or another dimension or frequency? Now i can't sit down and tell someone give me some money and I'll take you down the rabbit hole, No! I receive transmissions in essence, sometimes colors go off in my head or i just start painting and they come out. Now that being said I also paint flowers and just designs but nothing i process through Visual Art is thought out it just appears!

      Now that's how i know about parallel universes not from some F@#king String!


    8. Waldo were on the same page, i feel this. I have much respect for science and you. I am not an Organized religious person. Deity is my choice of words also. I like to open things up Waldo. I love education and the people that make it a passion. As far as Philosophy goes, if we can't apply it to the "real world" the every day hump and bump, to me it's BS!, there are some WONDERFUL things emerging for us all at this frequency. We may have to take one big butt wippen in the interim but i leave you with this, If Your Hearts In The Right Place Everything Will Fall Into Place.

    9. That's cool Sonny, we just don't think exactly alike that's all. I am capable of artistic expression and, at one time, it was my main concern. But something happened over the years, my creativity started to express itself differently. The scientific method can be seen as another medium like clay or canvas, you have to follow the restrictions of the medium you work with but that doesn't mean you are not creative. You see labels as limiting, I say only when they are applied to living creatures. Other wise they are useful tools when considering complicated systems. The trick is to not let them limit you, use them for what they are for. When it comes time to postulate a hypothesis and try to figure out what experiments could help prove or disprove it you have to see through the labels. If a logical train of thought progresses out side of the box that's great, we just don't jump out of the box for no reason. We need both science and art, logical and abstract thinking.

      You seem almost angry with science, cursing string theory like it had done you personal harm, insinuating theoretical physicists are so slow as to require tangible objects and labels to be able to understand things. I mean I appreciate your respect and of course return it, but you do realize I am a physics major and will probably go into theoretical physics one day, at least I hope to. At my age who knows, I mean I am not old or anything or sick I am just thinking bills to pay and responsibilities to meet, life tends to drag you were it wants you sometimes. Philosophy is useful but at some point we have to make a decision if we hope to create technologies and answer questions, extend human life, try and understand just how badly we have screwed the earth up and turn things around. That's what science is for, to make reliable predictions. Now I don't know about you but when I am on a plane thirty thousand feet off the ground I am very appreciative of the no nonsense reliability of the scientific method.

    10. is thought-concept, pure energy without form, is concept absent of matter? Is concept non molecular? Is concept the only reality or is concept the primary reality and matter the secondary reality or does matter exist at all; just a figment of our imagination-concept, hence, is life itself non molecular? (Is the atom non molecular, ha ha).

  28. Good basic stuff, If you want to go more in depth, check out Brian Greene's books, "the elegant universe"..."the fabric of the cosmos"...and his latest book, "the hidden reality"

    1. Love Greene's books, wasn't aware he had a new one though...thanks I'll pick it up!

  29. I'm going to love this video, and not understand a thing about it.

    1. I am with you on this, I find it fascinating. Well to a point and that point is when I stop understanding what they are talking about which usually occurs during the opening credits

    2. Lol. For me, I could say it comes down to those metaphors they have to use a lot in describing these things to us laymen. And that only gets you so far, if you don't have the math that backs them up. It's like music! Everyone can enjoy it, but to best discuss and understand it requires a LOT of technical training. So I just sit back and let the concepts wash over me as much as I can, without making the mistake of thinking I know how the internal connections work, or even what they really are.