The Danger Fred Could Pose to Bob, and Bob to Emily

[Geosphere]

Jay meant a disc, I think.

OK, even weirder.

What if its a torus?


ooooooooohhhhhh.

[alkaline]

OK. If it were an infinite plane passing through your desk - would you know it? Is it perceived here at all? Being of no thickness, it exhibits no mass. Light and gravity affect it quite differently than we are used to. How do you know we haven't encountered it? Maybe were not looking for the right thing.

It is possible for this to be true. However, it isn't as interesting to study as a universe where we actually can perceive a planespace, so that's what we concentrate on.

It is also possible it is a single infinite plane that simply hasn't been found yet.

There are many possible reasons we havent seen such a thing, including, of course, the thought that it does not exist.

yep, that is true.

[alkaline]

Jay meant a disc, I think.

OK, even weirder.

What if its a torus?

ooooooooohhhhhh.

Or any other topologically finite shape - like a figure-eight donut type shape :-)

[Geosphere]

If planespace exists as a single square millimeter somewhere deep in the heart of a star in some yet undiscovered galaxy, that would be a real gyp.

[Jay]

I think they both work, it's just the inhabitants are at different places inthe two hypothetical universes. In your spherical one, they move about on the planar surface of the sphere, thinking there universe is 2d when it's actually 3d.

In my circular universe, the inhabitants move about within the circle. You know, just like we move around the inside of our spherical one. Although maybe we are wandering around the realmic surface of a glomular universe.

[alkaline]

our universe can't be spherical - a sphere is topologically 2d, but our universe fills up 3d space. It would have to be a 3d surface, and it would fill up four dimensions.

[Jay]

The universe only needs a 3d surface if it's really shaped like glome, and everything we see exists on its surface. But it's possible that we aren't on the 3d surface of a glome. We can be INSIDE a hollow sphere. Like flies flying about within a jar. Everything they know is 3d, and they are within the jar, even though it has a 2d surface. We could all just be within a sphere, so the fact that it has a 2d surface won't affect us since we don't interact with that part.

[alkaline]

That wouldn't be a spherical universe, it would be a flat 3d universe with a spherical boundary. Generally when you refer to the shape of the universe, you refer to its shape in higher dimensional space.

Maybe the boundary of our 3d universe is planespace, and there is nothing on the other side.

[Geosphere]

Or Neverland is on the other side.

[whiteonriceboy]

all this 'hand-shaking' brings us back to an elemental question, "does Fred have any mass at all? maybe that's why we can walk through theoretical 2D planes, which should be everywhere, without being trapped. maybe they don't affect us because either they have no mass, or their supposed mass has no effect on us. if this is true, then there can be no interaction between dimensions, and it also proves that God is in no dimension, because he can interact with our mass, e.g. the parting of the Red Sea.

[4dlayman]

Maybe Fred doesn't and can't exist !! If he does exist then he would be unknowable and cannot interact with us.
I don't think god has anything to do with the dimensions....not sure if he even exists....need a lot more proof than the bible which was written by non-impartial humans long ago. (not trying to say anything good or bad about god & religion; just that no one has been able to prove the existence of god to my satisfaction).

[RQ]

Well according to Descartes, if you want a 100% chance of not having to be doomed for eternity you should believe, but it is a choice after all.
For anything else a reasonable proof is the fact of nonspatial images, or imagination for one.

[whiteonriceboy]

i'd love to talk about God, but this is a tetraspace forum, not about religion.
would most of you agree that less-than-3-dimensional beings are nonexistent? with no senses we know of, and probably no substance, how could they?

[RQ]

How do you know that they don't have senses. No substance with respect to 3D. Surely 2D isn't 3D, but they could exist. Whether we can observe them or not, does not mean that they don't exist.

[RQ]

The mere fact that we are a 3D universe proves that if nothing else there are our 2D incorporations because otherwise we'd have to be 1D which would be nothing according to your analogy/theory.

[PWrong]

Maybe 2D incorporations don't exist in our universe, or maybe we can't detect them, but we could theoretically create something 2D, or find a way to see into a separate 2D universe.

If that doesn't work, we could always resort to computer simulations. A program is just a one-dimensional string of digits, but it can simulate any number of dimensions.

With a powerful computer, maybe a quantum computer, we could simulate a 2D universe in which Fred can exist. Then we could interact with him in any way we want.

[RQ]

I suppose, that cyberspace can be a form of 2D, but all it is is electrons giving you an image which you might perceive that way. Just like saying imagination/thought experiments can make you interact with the 2nd dimension, it is not really physical, but more mental. Im still thinking though whether the 3D could appear all of a sudden in 2D in its 2D incoporation. Perhaps since the 2D itself could not affect 3D, then the 3D would not be able to affect it(its not very often we see ourselves bouncing back from a 2D object). And since the 2D wont affect the 3D, the 3D would not affect the 2D(since it would all have to be in 2D and since the 2D object doesn't affect us or our infinite 2D incorporations, then vice versa.
It was funny, though, when Aale mentioned in one of the earliest topics, "for all I know, gravity might be a tetronian pulling down on my leg."

[Apeironian]

What do we call a nilonian and a mononian?
?, ?, Fred, Bob, Emily...

[papernuke]

this is hecka old.. you could have just mad e a new thread..

You could use any name. Because Alkaline didnt mention the 0th and 1st dimensions with people. You could use like.. Joe or something.
Use your imagination

[zero]

would most of you agree that less-than-3-dimensional beings are nonexistent?

Well, I would agree that I cannot think of any way for us (as 3-dimensional beings) to detect them even if they did exist.