"Not-Physical" Fourth Dimension

[gutto786]

Hey guys
This is my first post in this forum. I believe that I have thought about another fourth dimension. I would explain my idea below.
The words I used "not-physical" is the beauty and the concept of my idea. The idea I have is:
"We are all human beings. We have experienced three dimensions (or maybe more, as many people say) but these all dimensions are physical. They are related to our physical being. I have thought of a dimension which is more of a not-physical. Basic idea: When you sleep you actually slip from the three (common) physical dimensions to the fourth not-physical dimension. Normally people think that whatever happens in the dreams is not real and is mind games. I say whatever happens in the dreams is 100% real but as it is not related to the physical medium so you cannot experience the feelings when you wake up.

Main points:
1) This 4th dimension is not a physical dimension
2) There are two mediums in our life: physical medium, which holds the three normal dimensions; not-physical medium, which holds the fourth dimension.
3) Everything which happens in the fourth dimension is 100% real but as it is not related to the physical medium. We cannot experience the same feelings when we slip back to physical medium.
4) Both mediums are going parallel.
5) The physical medium ends at some time, as it is related to the concept of time.
6) The not-physical medium never ends as there is no concept of time related to that.
7) When you are asleep/unconscious/dead you slip from the physical medium to the not-physical medium.
8) The journey from the physical medium to not-physical medium or vice-versa is not instantaneous (it can never happen within seconds, because there is no time concept related to the not-physical medium)
9) Everything in the not-physical medium is 100% real. For example, if you slip from physical medium to the not-physical medium (common case is when you sleep) everything which happens in the not-physical medium is as real and as true as is in physical medium. When you come back to physical medium you can relate everything happened in the not-physical medium to everything in the physical medium but the feelings are different in both the mediums.
10) There is no concept of time related to the not-physical medium, so, you can cover infinite distance in that medium and you can pass an infinite length life in that medium.

Extra point
11) That medium was created by the almighty to make a medium for the impossible things (infinite length things) to happen

Examples
1) A lady had a brain tumour and she was carried to the hospital and the doctors made her unconscious. So her contact with the physical medium was lost and her contact with the not-physical medium started. Then after the operation the lady related that she felt that the doctors were working on her legs part and she was amazed that the operation was for her brain tumour. The doctors told her that it is 100% true as they were gettin skin out of her legs to put that on her forehead.

Explanation
The lady moved from the physical to not-physical medium but as I said there is a relation between the physical and the not-physical world (that's why I said its the fourth dimension). The lady in her not-physical medium realized everything which was happening in her physical medium and that everything was real. So she traveled from the physical medium (three dimesions) to her not-physical medium (fourth dimesion).
2) In this physical medium it is impossible to reach far away, for example, we cannot travel to Pluto in this physical medium. But the not-physical medium is independent of time and distance concepts. So we can travel where ever we want and everything we do in that not-physical medium is totally real but it holds for that not-physical dimesion.
Thats why every prophet met GOD or got revelations from GOD in their dreams. Because it is impossible to travel to GOD in the physical medium but it is easier (for a pious person in case of meeting GOD ) to travel to GOD in the not-physical medium and everything which happens in their not-physical medium is real (as they come back out of there dreams and tell the people true and real things)

For now this is all I have to say, think about it guys.

Edit by iNVERTED: Fixed spelling and grammar.

[Nick]

EDIT: sorry I'm a jerk in this post, I just broke up with my gf.

I have to say, that is pretty far out there. And by that, I mean it's strange. And by that, I mean it's (one of) the stupidest things I ever heard.

There are two ways to explain this not-physical bull you are spouting out of your mouth.

1) Everyone shares this not-physical world.
2) Everyone has a seperate not-physical world.

If everyone shared one, then we would all dream the same dream, and we know that's not true because my dreams usually involve other people, but that same night those other people have different dreams.

If everyone has a different not-physical world, then we must consider your dimension as a possibility, but consider this: science has found that when you are asleep, your brain starts working in regenerating yourself. There is no way scientifically to prove your not-physical fourth dimension.

The only solid argument you could have would involve religion, which science is currently not able to prove, and therefore is not good enough for me.

But thanks for trying, and welcome to the forum.

btw, are you religious?

[gutto786]

First of all, I joined this forum after observing the respect for the views people have here. I suppose you really are a jerk. Anyways... lets see what we have in my first post, so that in future you read the stuff more carefully before you argue against the material.

See following points:
2) There are two mediums in our life: physical medium, which holds the three normal dimensions; not-physical medium, which holds the fourth dimension.
3) Everything which happens in the fourth dimension is 100% real but as it is not related to the physical medium, we cannot experience the same feelings when we slip back to physical medium.
4) Both mediums are going parallel.

Now, everybody is born separate but in this physical world we are sharing the same 3 physical dimensions. It does not mean that you share the same feelings and emotions that somebody else do.
So if everybody shares the same 4th not-physical medium it doesn't mean that everybody should dream the same dream (this was the stupidest argument which anybody can give against my theory).

Also, I don't know how you related the brain regeneration thing with the point I made. The things are clear because in this physical medium most of the time you do what you intended to do and it's the same in the not-physical world: you feel what you intended to feel most of the time... besides those nightmares that we have.

So think about it like that, it's not something supernatural, I am saying. It's just that the dreams are actually based on our intentions and they are not just mind games but a 4th dimension where things are real but things are of that dimensions... like you visited Mars in your dream then you actually did visit Mars but in the 4th not-physical dimension... You cannot come the next day and tell you friends of this physical dimension that you visited Mars... they are going to laugh at you... but still you actually did visit Mars (for real) in the 4th dimension.

So you will have to think before you argue about this thoery becuase it is kind of complex... plus you can never relate this physical medium concepts with that not-physical medium.

And what's with being religious, I never mentioned any religious or spiritual stuff in my theory.

Stilll if you dont understand what my point is, then think about it again and again... intellectuals think before they speak.

Edit by iNVERTED: Fixed spelling and grammar.

[bo198214]

@gutto786

Its not clear to me why you call it *4th dimension*.
It suggests that it is in some kind similiar to the previous 3 dimensions. And I can not see any similarity in your description.
Already the naming "4th dimension" implies that it is one-dimensional, where we live not in the 3th dimension but in 3 dimensions.

So why dont you name it "not-physical realm" and discuss it at an other forum?

[gutto786]

Alright I am outta here... but the last thing I want to make clear: maybe you will get my point.

Today in this world people like you and me and all of us around are looking for other dimensions that are not within the 3 dimensions that we know.
My point is that 4th dimension is in front of us everyday and we cannot realize that. When you dream when you are unconscious, you actually move from these three dimensions (world) to the 4th dimension (not-physical). That fourth dimension is cool because it allows us to do things which cannot be done in 3 dimensions.
The simple conclusion from what I wrote was... maybe dreams are not dreams or brain regeneration or mind games... maybe it's real and it's the 4th dimension where we go everyday and where we will be, most probably, after death too.

Edit by iNVERTED: Fixed spelling and grammar.

[Nick]

EDIT: I take back my apology. I meant everything I said in that post.

And what's with being religious, I never mentioned any religious or spiritual stuff in my theory.

I mentioned that because I saw a similar theory on a different, Christian forum, and I thought maybe you were taking it from there.

I don't completely understand your not-physical dimension (yes, I have tried to for the past several minutes). I'm confused... if everyone goes into this dimension, and has different feelings and emotions about it, wouldn't people still have the same dream, or would their memories also change?

[gutto786]

Sorry I didn't explain the question you asked, I am doing it right now.
Actually let's take an example.

Suppose you and your friend are sharing the same book for a school course. Now you are going to read the same book as your friend. But when the final marks will come there are 99.9% chances that both of you will get different marks.

It all depends on the way of thinking a person has. Sharing the same medium applies the same conditions to everybody but the reaction of an individual is according to his conditions. But still, the central constraints are the same, I mean if the final exam is of 50 then it would be of 50 for all students, but different people will get different marks out of it.

So although we share the same not-physical dimension, our response to that dimension is different. Like some people see violent dreams others see cool stuff in their dreams. So sharing the same dimension means: The basic constraints and rules are same for everybody but the reaction of each individual is different.

No matter how an individual reacts to that 4th Dimension, the reaction is not a mind game or fake, but it's true and real but holds only for that 4th dimension... I think I am boring you so I am outta here... but one last thing: in this physical world you share the same dimensions but your memories and actions are different from that of your friends. It's the same over there too.

Edit by iNVERTED: Fixed spelling and grammar.

[moonlord]

I've seen several flaws in your theory:

1. The rules in the dreams are not the same for all who dream; stronger, the rules in the dreams are not the same for all the sessions when a entity (aka, human being) dreams. Example: I sometimes dream things which lay in worlds with same rules as ours, sometimes dream things which don't obey the rules. I just dreamt this night that I was in nothingness (that is, dark and no way to move) but still had the notion of time. Most of the dreams are restricted because people generally lack imagination. Try to sleep while under the effect of halucinagens. When you wake up, you remain shocked at what you could dream.

2. If you travel along a fourth dimension, then (at least in the periods of time when you're not in our realm) you are conscious of it's existence. How many people have dreamt tesseracts? I struggle for some time, with no result.

3. The journey between our realm and your extra dimension cannot take place through nothing, therefore either there is a fifth dimension, either the fourth is not parallel to the previous three, so they intersect.

4. For a line to be considered to be aligned on a fourth dimension, it must be perpendicular to the other three. Your fourth dimension is not actually a dimension -- you said it's parallel to our realm.

5. A dimension is a mathematical concept. Four identical dimensions have the same properties. Even if they are not identical (aka, they differ in shape), the same rules apply.

6. Considering what I think you meant: Our realm is at W=0. The dream realm is at W!=0. Then, there are two three-dimensional worlds, parallel to each other and connected via the fourth. In this case, the journey takes time, contradicting other of your statements.

As bo198214 said, your realm is not a fourth dimension. It is a interesting theory, but it doesn't belong here.

[jinydu]

gutto786, it seems that you understand neither the definition of "dimension" nor the word "theory" as used in real science.

As you will see if you read the FAQ thread in the questions and answers section, the dimension of a vector space is defined as the number of linearly independent vectors you need to span a vector space. It is not defined as a fun and magical place where anything can happen.

Furthermore, your idea is not a theory in the scientific sense because:

1) It is subjective and invokes non-physical things.

2) It is not testable. There are no experiments that could test the validity of your idea nor is there any experiment that could disprove it.

3) It violates the Occam's Razor: Theories should rely on the least number of assumptions. You claim that dreams are caused by travel into some mystical nonphysical place. A much simpler explanation is that dreams are caused by electrical and chemical signals flowing through the brain that follow certain patterns. The second explanation is to be preferred because it does not assume the existence of things whose existence is unverifiable.

[bo198214]

Though it might be unbeleavable to you Jinydu, but neither everything said has to be in scientific sense nor would it be useful in every case.

[gutto786]

Hey jinydu! Believe me man you've got a solid point.

Listen man... what do you think is the master peice of work done by any man in this world? I am gonna tell you right now. Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Einstein formulates an equation E = mc². Now we consider that equation true as a special theory is based on that too. But we cannot have any practical implementation or proof of that. Scientists proved special theory of relativity as true for any kind of observer now. So it doesn't mean that if a theory is out of scope of any physical medium or it cannot be proven by any scientific proof, then it is wrong. The Word "Theory" was and is used for random (brainstormed) ideas which people come up with. If there is a proof to a specific theory then it becomes a law. So before becoming a law any idea is called a theory whether it is right or wrong.

I think you get my point. If you cannot grasp anything with your mind and knowledge it doesn't mean that it is wrong.

Edit by iNVERTED: Fixed spelling and grammar.

[jinydu]

Actually, in science, an idea that has not yet been verified experimentally many times is usually referred to as a hypothesis, not a theory. These days, the words "Law" is not used to refer to new theories very often anymore; you'll notice that most statements that are referred to as "laws" were discovered well over a hundred years ago. But the distinction between "theory" and "law" is besides the point.

It seems that you don't really understand understand Einstein's Theory of Relativity (I'll admit that I don't understand it fully either, but I at least know quite a bit more than can be found in popular science writing). Have you read the FAQ thread in the Questions and Answers section?

The Theory of Relativity is not fundamentally based on E = mc². In fact, E = mc² is not even correct in general; the correct formula is E² = (mc²)² + (pc)². Instead, Special Relativity is based on the fundamental postulate:

The laws of physics (in particular, Maxwell's equations) are valid in all inertial frames of reference.

General Relativity adds an additional postulate:

Gravitational fields are locally indistinguishable from acceleration.

And there are indeed practical uses for the Theory of Relativity. Just to name a few: Lasers, nuclear fission, GPS, etc.

Furthermore, unlike with your idea, there are ways to test relativity experimentally. For example, have you heard of the Michelson-Morley experiment? Or how about Eddington's solar eclipse experiment? Or for an experiment that is going on right now: NASA's GPB experiment.

[gutto786]

I never said that Einstein based the Special Theory of Relativity on E=mc². Look at the words carefully! Don't hurry to answer. Anyways, I think I said that during his work (creating the special theory of relativity), he came up with an equation which is E=mc². Plus, I never said the General Theory of Relativity (because we don't give credit for the general theory of relativity to Einstein, it was Lorentz's work). For any inertial frame of reference the equation E=mc² holds perfectly. You are right in terms of relativistic and moving frame of references that the equation cannot hold true. The equation is not wrong but conditions apply. Anyhow, I don't want to argue. If you don't like my idea or you think are smart enough to say it is bull, keep saying that, it doesn't matter to me. Also I never talked about the General theory of relativity.

Edit by iNVERTED: Fixed spelling and grammar.

[DenijsD]

Quite some people seem to think that this subject doesn't belong in this forum as it does not comply to the definition of dimension. And it seems to be true that it doesn't. However, it hasn't been proved false. I haven't seen any mathematical theory that proves that the theory is false.
Of cause it's difficult to think of a vector that goes into the unconscious human mind, and I am quite sure that it will be pretty easy to proof such a thing. But I think that thinking like this does help us to find the 4th dimension.
A (serious) brainstorm session will give us many, many thoughts on this subject and by proving all these thought false we will probably learn a lot about what is plausible and what is not.

[Nick]

Uhh... DennijsD, maybe you should scroll up and read Jinydu and Moonlord's answers. And besides, just because something can't be proved false doesn't make it a reality, or makes it worth thinking about. Many people misunderstand the way science works.

Girl: Dad, do fairies exist?
Dad: No honey, they do not.
Girl: How do you know?
Dad: I have never seen one.
Girl: Doesn't that mean they DO exist.
Dad: Honey, if no human ever in existence has seen a single fairy in the 5 thousand years that humans have been on earth, then the probablility of them existing is beyond the point of imposibility.
Girl: But they could still exist! Why don't people spend money to go out and look for them?
...
This thread is a lot like the above conversation, and that scares me .

[gutto786]

Many people just think that everything in this world goes according to the science and scientific proofs only. It doesn't make any difference to the society if millions of people disagree with something. But it does make a huge difference if even one person thinks out of the borders. Science is a tool developed by human beings and now its web has conjusted our lives in a such a way that we are unable to think beyond it.

Anyway, I am saying again and again that it's not something supernatural being suggested. Try to read the thing carefully, there are no faeries and no magic in it, it's simply an idea that the hidden fourth dimension may be the one which we experience everyday.

Bring me one scientific proof that the dreams are because of mental regeneration or some other chemical and physical reactions going on and then I will quit this discussion.

By the way, if the girl's dad hasn't seen the fairies, it doesn't mean the girl should be forced to believe that there are none. Dad may be wrong, think about it.

Edit by iNVERTED: Fixed spelling and grammar.

[Nick]

Bring me one scientific proof that the dreams are because of mental regeneration or some other chemical and physical reactions going on and then I will quit this discussion.

Maybe your the one that should be thinking about what we say. Nobody on this forum has ever said that mental regeneration is a perfect theory, all we said was that it makes more sense then what you're saying, and requires less assumptions (Occam's Razor).

Many people just think that everything in this world goes according to the science and scientific proofs only. It doesn't make any difference to the society if millions of people disagree with something. But it does make a huge difference if even one person thinks out of the borders. Science is a tool developed by human beings and now its web has conjusted our lives in a such a way that we are unable to think beyond it.

Dude, you are wrong on so many levels. First of all, everything in this world does go by scientific proofs (well, there are some things that we don't understand yet), because that is the purpose of scientific proofs: laws that are always followed by nature, despite the condition.

Second, you say that it makes a big difference if someone thinks "outside the box" so to speak. Yes, it does, but only if that makes sense, or if someone has a reason to believe that way. If it doesn't, then you should try to find some proof, instead of saying, "Well, how would YOU know?".

Then, you have the nerve to say that science has conjusted our lives to the point that we cannot think beyond it. (I edited this sentence out because.. well you don't want to know). Science is changing EVERY DAY because people who make sense are thinking outside the box and seperating the incorrect theories from the correct ones, and eventually proving/disproving many of them. This process takes years but eventually we learn something new about our universe. Because of this there are no loopholes or contradictions in science. People have made theories as far out as yours, and some have been proven true. But until you can show me proof then I am less than convinced.

P.S. You ask us for proof, yet you don't show us any. Maybe instead of telling us to "think about it" at the end of your posts, you should think about what we're saying before you start a post.

[jinydu]

Of cause it's difficult to think of a vector that goes into the unconscious human mind, and I am quite sure that it will be pretty easy to proof such a thing. But I think that thinking like this does help us to find the 4th dimension.

Sorry, but the word "vector" has a precise definition that excludes that idea. Simply put, a vector is defined as an element of a vector space. What is a vector space?

A vector space (call it V) is a set defined over a field (call it F) with two operations: addition and scalar multiplication, that satisfy 8 properties:

1) For all x, y in V, x + y = y + x

2) For all x, y, z in V, (x + y) + z = x + (y + z)

3) There exists an element in V denoted by 0 such that x + 0 = x for each x in V.

4) For each element x in V there exists an element y in V such that x + y = 0.

5) For each element x in V, 1x = x

6) For each pair of elements a, b in F and each element x in V, (ab)x = a(bx)

7) For each element a in F and each pair of elements x and y in V, a(x + y) = ax + ay

8) For each pair of elements a and b in F and each element x in V, (a + b)x = ax + bx

As you can see, this definition leaves no room for each wooly concepts as "a vector pointing into the unconscious mind". I am quite sure that you do not even have a definition for addition and scalar multiplication in that "case", let alone a proof that the 8 properties above are satisfied.

Of course, if you really want to understand this definition, you also have to know what the definition of a field is. Simply put, a field is a different kind of set; if anyone is interested, I can post the definition of a field too.

[DenijsD]

that scares me

I wasn't trying to scare you :-)
And as I said, it would be quite easy to proof that a vector is a mathematical thing. Of cause we are talking about two completely different things here.
It seems that people have quite a lot of comments on Gutto's thoughts, and I too think that it isn't very likely. That's all fine, but please put some thought in your answer.

just because something can't be proved false doesn't make it a reality

Who said that and your thesis is incorrect. Just because something can't be proved false doesn't mean it's true. So that's why you should try harder to proof what's true!! And just because something doesn't seem logical doesn't mean it isn't

All I try to say (and I have tried before, but no one ever understands!!)
You can't proof or unproof the existence of the 4th dimension with mathematics as we know it. It simply doesn't allow us to. It doesn't fit in our rules. And when nobody changes the rules, we'll never find the answer.

Edit by jinydu: Fixed your misquote. irockyou said "that scares me", not jinydu.

[jinydu]

You can't proof or unproof the existence of the 4th dimension with mathematics as we know it. It simply doesn't allow us to. It doesn't fit in our rules. And when nobody changes the rules, we'll never find the answer.

You're right; of course mathematics can't prove or disprove that a 4th (presumably you mean spatial) dimension actually exists. That's not what mathematics is designed to do. What mathematics can do is tell you the properties of a hypothetical 4D world, provided that you supply it with a suitable collection of axioms from which to construct proofs.

[DenijsD]

I see what you mean.
I do think that it's easier for me (and many of us) to think of something common (or something weird like vectors in dreams ) to come to a possible true definition of the 4th dimension. (or anything else, but that isn't discussed here).
That's probably because I can't be bothered putting my mind around x,y,z's^1,2,3. I just seems boring, but that's doesn't mean it is boring.

I wonder what the great scientists would have done though, try to explain their thought or try to think about their explanations first.

[jinydu]

As far as I know, scientists who develop successful theories are familiar with both previous theories, and the observations and experiments that the previous theories are unable to explain. They attempt to find a simple principle that explains both the phenomena already described by previous theories, and the newer phenomena that the previous theories are unable to explain. Then, they attempt to condense this principle into a few simple equations, then use the equations to known experimental results, and predict the results of experiments that have not yet been conducted. The process is often plauged by false starts; for every successful theory, there are many unsuccessful (and hence forgotten) theories, and key principles are often far clearer in hindsight. But there is no doubt that in quantitative sciences, mathematics is crucial to the entire process.

The classic example is the development of Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Einstein's vague ideas about what it would be like to travel at the speed of light, together with his knowledge of Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism, eventually led to the ideas that the speed of light is the same in all inertial frames of reference, and that all inertial frames of reference are equally valid. This, in turn, was recast into the more mathematically usable notion of "invariance under Lorentz transformations".

In the end, if you really want to understand what a dimension is, you have to look at the mathematics.

[gutto786]

I strongly do not believe in begging mathematics or any other sceince to give me and other people proof of what I said.

Secondly, when the world doesn't know that Earth revovles around the Sun rather than the Sun revolving around the Earth, the Greek philosopher was made to die for his idea, which was later proved right. I do not have any strong scientific proof for my theory right now. But the concept is clear and it is not a "magical or supernatural" thing. Try to understand what I said.

If you move an infinite distance with a uniform speed in space up to an infinitely far away point, your vector analysis could not be applied effectively any further to the body at that point in the space, giving us a hint that the dimensions do not even exist on some infinite distance in space too (remember, space is considered as a physical thing).

If Newton had never thought of why the apple fell on his head then there would be no such theories for us to use as a tool right now.

And there are thousand of examples, where people always thought out of the "given box" and they gave something useful and new to the world. Remember that if what I am saying is right then you will never find that fourth dimension while using most of the currently available scientific tools and reasoning.

Edit by iNVERTED: Fixed spelling and grammar.

[DenijsD]

Don't get carried away Gutto.
First of all; I do agree that you can only get to new ideas by thinking 'Out of the Box'
Second; jinydu explains that thinking like that is how many theories come to life (Or end up in the round and gray archive :-)) but that then those theories will (have to) be scientifically proven.
It seems that this forum is the perfect place to combine these thoughts and scientific knowledge. rather than waiting for one brilliant mind who can do both. (1+1=3)

Why don't you try to find some structure in your idea. May be that can help us find a formula that proves (or disproves) your theory.

[Nick]

I strongly do not believe in begging mathematics or any other sceince to give me and other people proof of what I said.

How else are you going to "prove" what you say?

Also (iNVERTED edited this out), you said something about not bringing you medical research papers as proof. Well, what kind of research do you want then? Calculus research papers? The only branch of science that deals with that stuff is Medicine.

Let me explain to you why I feel that this "mental regeneration" thing is so right. You see, Medicine found a way to discover what parts of the brain that are working when you do an activity. The subject ingests slightly radioactive fluid (not enough to harm the subject), then the subject performs an activity. When the person gets a cat scan (or whatever), the parts of the brain that are working start glowing. They did this to a sleeping person and found that parts of the brain are being used that aren't used during the day.

I'm not saying its flawless, but what I'm saying is that it makes more sense than what your saying. If you don't go to sleep, your mind gets messed up. It makes more sense to say that if you don't regenerate your mind it gets messed up than it is to say if you don't go to dreamspace (mind it I call it this? It fits nicely with my new planespace upgrade..) your mind gets messed up.

Talking in caps doesn't make you heard, nor does it make you seem smarter; it actually does the opposite.

[houserichichi]

I strongly do not believe in begging mathematics or any other sceince to give me and other people proof of what I said.

Asking mathematics to prove anything physical is futile. Math is a tool that describes things just like words describe things. What dictates how math works is the logic underneath. If the logic is sound then the idea makes sense...so don't ask for math to prove your arguments, ask for logic to do it. The logic you require is based on definitions. Your first post did not detail any definitions whatsoever but, instead, gave arguments. Arguments without definitions or logical connections come off as crackpot-ish, hence some of the arguments against. Say WHY you think the fourth dimension is not physical and back it up with an argument. Say WHY there are two mediums and back it up with argument. Making claims and then giving a single example as proof isn't science and ultimately fails based on bad form alone. Know what I mean?

I do not have any strong scientific proof for my theory right now. But the concept is clear and it is not a "magical or supernatural" thing. Try to understand what I said.

Your arguments are, in fact, quite supernatural. Things that don't fit the accepted model of how nature works (think relativity and quantum mechanics, for one) are "beyond" nature, hence "super"natural. Once you've the arguments to back up your claims it becomes "natural" and the only thing you'll have to worry about is experimental evidence for or against.

If you move an infinite distance with a uniform speed in space up to an infinitely far away point, your vector analysis could not be applied effectively any further to the body at that point in the space, giving us a hint that the dimensions do not even exist on some infinite distance in space too (remember, space is considered as a physical thing).

Are you suggesting that if you were to move to an infinitely far away point space would collapse at that distance? Consider basic special relativity...it may appear that way to you but in my frame of reference (I'm the moving one) things would seem all fine and dandy, dimensions and all. Who's in the proper frame? Relativity dictates that I am so my arguments are the "right" ones, hence the dimensions are the same and vector analysis still works.

If Newton had never thought of why the apple fell on his head then there would be no such theories for us to use as a tool right now.

Makes you wonder how primitive we'd be right now were he not to get the ball rolling for the rest of us!

And there are thousand of examples, where people always thought out of the "given box" and they gave something useful and new to the world. Remember that if what I am saying is right then you will never find that fourth dimension while using most of the currently available scientific tools and reasoning.

Why wouldn't science be able to argue for or against you?

[Nick]

Secondly, when the world doesn't know that Earth revovles around the Sun rather than the Sun revolving around the Earth, the Greek philosopher was made to die for his idea, which was later proved right. I do not have any strong scientific proof for my theory right now. But the concept is clear and it is not a "magical or supernatural" thing. Try to understand what I said.

Wow.

You really don't get it, do you? I was at first thinking that this was some kind of joke, but I guess not. I guess you honestly believe what you're saying.

Galileo didn't just pull the idea that the Earth revolved around the sun out of his ass, you know. He studied the way the planets moved with his telescope, wrote down his observations and created a conclusion using the analysis. He had the technology to do it, and he had pretty strong proof, along with an experiment that anyone can emulate.

What you think is that anyone can come up with an explanation for anything, out of random. You're acting as if everything you are saying is not only probably true, but IS true, and could easily be proved if you had the technology.

The purpose of this forum is to say things that you think may be true, based on logical thought and reason, and wait to see if others think it may be true or may not be true. Instead, what you are doing is throwing something out there, and when someone challenges you, you repeat what you said over and over again. People like you disgust me. I feel dirty posting on this, and I feel like throwing up whenever you post. This is my last post on my thread... good riddance.

p.s., thank you for editing his posts inverted, they were giving me a headache.

[Keiji]

I have to sympathize a little with gutto here. He's saying that his ideas are a possible (albeit supernatural) explanation for dreams.

I have a supernatural theory of my own, the "camera" theory as I call it: do I believe in it? Yes. Do I consider it proven? No. Did I get flamed about it when I posted it (on another forum)? No.

Therefore the only reason I can think for gutto having being flamed here is that he didn't present his theory well. Seeing someone be flamed for their beliefs is just sad, whatever the reason.

[jinydu]

Secondly, when the world doesn't know that Earth revovles around the Sun rather than the Sun revolving around the Earth, the Greek philosopher was made to die for his idea, which was later proved right. I do not have any strong scientific proof for my theory right now. But the concept is clear and it is not a "magical or supernatural" thing. Try to understand what I said.

The problem with that argument, as irockyou implied, is that it radically undetermines the criteria for what it takes for an idea to be accepted scientifically. Surely, you don't really mean to say that any idea that is clear and unconventional should be taken seriously, right? I could claim that cars are able to move because there are invisible fairies pushing them, and the fact that they run only when the engine is on is just a coincidence. The idea is clear and definitely unconventional; surely you don't think that it should be taken seriously, do you?

If you move an infinite distance with a uniform speed in space up to an infinitely far away point, your vector analysis could not be applied effectively any further to the body at that point in the space, giving us a hint that the dimensions do not even exist on some infinite distance in space too (remember, space is considered as a physical thing).

In linear algebra, a vector space is not actually considered as a physical thing. As you would know if you read my earlier post, a vector space is a set whose elements satisfy certain properties. Furthermore, what do you mean by "infinite distance"? In mathematics, there is a precise definition of a quantity called length. For the vector space R^n, the length of a vector with coordinates (x_1, x_2, ... x_n) is defined as:

Length = sqrt((x_1)^2 + (x_2)^2 + ... + (x_n)^2)

Care to define "infinite distance" with as much precision as the above formula?

If Newton had never thought of why the apple fell on his head then there would be no such theories for us to use as a tool right now.

Not true; the conditions of the time were ripe for scientific progress. If he hadn't come up with his ideas, someone else would have, eventually. However, it would delay scientific progress. Remember that scientific laws exist independently of the human minds that discover them.

[DenijsD]

@Gutto.

I'd pull back if I were you and work on some proof for your theory.
The people here don't seem to want to accept your idea, and as long as it is just an idea, i must admit that it is difficult to back you up on it.

As I said, why don't you try and work out a set of rules that apply to your 'dreamspace'. That will make it easier for people to respond in a civilised way. Cause even though you are not taken seriously right now (as was Galileo back when?), I am sure you will be when to take a more scientific effort to explain your theory, as now religion (hunger for power, we have Bush for that now!) is not playing the part that it was back then.