Tetraspace Beings

[Kahlar]

I don't think that there are tetraspace beings out there in the 4d. Because since they have a whole other dimension, they should be able to advance in science way faster and just be a completely stronger race than we could even imagine. They would be so far in science that they would have to know that life exists in the 3rd dimension and they would probably be able to find out a way to come visit us stuck in the 3rd dimension. Since there have been no reports of 4d creatures coming to our world or any types of signs, then there are no such things as tetraspace beings.

[wendy]

Likewise, there are no Americans, becanuse none have come to buzz me.

There are things out there in mathematics that one can still study by largely avoiding mathematics. I found something like half a dozen products. They always been there, but no one bothered to look.

Oh well. I suppose, that if you imagine yourself the centre of the universe, there really is nothing out there unless it's buzzing your pants off.

W

[thigle]

its a misunderstanding to think that we live in 3d and that 4d is somewhere else, or other.

"dimension" is pretty misunderstood semantically. even Poincare didn't make it much clearer with his cutting trick.

dimension in older books/languague was often written as "degree of freedom".

so there is no such thing as 4th dimension without other 3 together with it, otherwise it would be the 1st one then. 4th dimension is an additional degree-of-freedom attribute added to space possesing 3 dims already.

so now kahlar who wrote

I don't think that there are tetraspace beings out there in the 4d.

can see why "out there in 4d" is not the case, and right here in this space, with additional dimension apprehended for additional refinement of freedoms is a way to go.

[jinydu]

In mathematics, there is a precise definition of dimension: The dimension of a vector space (a collection of vectors) is the number of linearly independent vectors in a set (called a basis) such that any vector in the vector space can be written as a linear combination of the vectors in the basis. For example,
{(1, 0, 0), (0, 1, 0), (0, 0, 1)}, which has three linearly independent vectors, forms a basis for R^3; therefore, R^3 has dimension 3.

If you believe that the universe actually has four spatial dimensions, then (as thigle pointed out) it is not correct to use phrases such as "out there in 4D" because the 3D world we can observe would be a subset of the four dimensional universe, just as the xy plane is a subset of R^3.

[thigle]

hey jin, this is at least 5th time you give definition of dimension on these forums, and this time, i don't object, its well phrased and usable. :wink:

but that applies only to "external" view on dimension. topologically, from inside, this is hard for me to apply. for ex., what dimension is hyperkleinbottle ? or just a mobius strip. can these be considered as vector spaces ? what about their non-orientability ?

i've read a good definition, a topological one, from Poincare, in "Science, Paradox, and the Mobius Principle (the evoloution of transcultural approach to wholeness) by Steve Rosen, but right now a friend of mine has it borrowed from me, so i cannot check it and my memory fails.
it was something about how many cuts one needs to bring the object of inquiry into like zero state where no more cuts can be made somehow. :? i'll give it in a week or so when he gives the book back, you gonna like it.

[Nick]

Because since they have a whole other dimension, they should be able to advance in science way faster and just be a completely stronger race than we could even imagine.

So? Why does that make them impossible?

They would be so far in science that they would have to know that life exists in the 3rd dimension and they would probably be able to find out a way to come visit us stuck in the 3rd dimension.

Umm... we know that there can be a second dimensional world, but it's not like I go there every Sunday and scare a couple of second-dimensional beings.

Since there have been no reports of 4d creatures coming to our world or any types of signs, then there are no such things as tetraspace beings.

This one is inherently stupid because even if a four-dimensional being tried to go into the three-dimensional world, we would only see it as a three dimensional slice of him. Imagine if you stuck your finger in a two-dimensional plane. The two-dimensional beings wouldn't see all of you, they would only see a 2d slice of you.

Duh.

[Kahlar]

This one is inherently stupid because even if a four-dimensional being tried to go into the three-dimensional world, we would only see it as a three dimensional slice of him. Imagine if you stuck your finger in a two-dimensional plane. The two-dimensional beings wouldn't see all of you, they would only see a 2d slice of you.

Duh.

Yes but we could obviously tell that they were 4d because they could have a whole other axis to move on. Maybe they could fly or walk through walls. Something that obviously no human being or any other creature that we know of could do. Therefore we would assume that they are 4d.

I dont really get what you guys mean by it not being 'out there'. So is it around us and we can't see it?

edit by Irockyou: Fixed the quote.

[mjjirachi]

Likewise, there are no Americans, becanuse none have come to buzz me.

If u havnt seen any americans, but americans exist, then how do you know that tetraspace beings dont exist?

[Batman3]

I think the technical term for hypersomatic beings in the multi-dimensional spaces is either, "angel" or "daemon", depending on their citizenship. If we are going to deal with such creatures, an appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world is best. The existence of angels(or daemons) implies the existence of some sort of Most-High-God who knows all their secrets, created all and loves His enemies enough to not destroy us. A God who loves His human children and who loves His enemies enough to die for them is the God of Christianity, whatever one may think of Biblical or Church Authority. This is serious stuff. I suggest we pray or if we can't do that talk to Christians or research God on the internet. I wouldn't trust just any 'god'. Not all are good or honest.

[PWrong]

I think the technical term for hypersomatic beings in the multi-dimensional spaces is either, "angel" or "daemon", depending on their citizenship.

Is that so?

The existence of angels(or daemons) implies the existence of some sort of Most-High-God who knows all their secrets, created all and loves His enemies enough to not destroy us.

So, string theory implies there are extra dimensions the size of the planck length. Therefore there must be tiny planck-sized angels and daemons living in them. Therefore there must be some tiny planck-sized God who just happens to be the God of some arbitrary religion you already follow. Is this what you're saying?

I wouldn't trust just any 'god'.

Neither would I.

Now, onto Bannin's question. The extra dimensions of string theory are curled up, so you can't see them. Have a look at your carpet. From far away, it looks like a 2D surface, right? But close up, you can see little threads in them going up into the 3rd dimension. Our universe is like that. 3D at large scales, 11D at small scales. At every point, there is a tiny 6D shape (called a Calabi-Yau space).

So: all things in 4d space would be "touching" or interacting with different parts of different 3d spaces, creating the strings.

I don't see what you mean. If a string was created every time a 4D object touched a 3D realm, there would be infinitely many strings. But there's only one string for each particle (including gravitons).

EDIT: Just remembered that there are infinitely many (virtual) particles, according to Dirac's interpretation or something. I don't know the details of that though. Damn, physics is complicated .