Paradox

[moonlord]

I've just realised that a discussion on a metaphysical fourth dimension (aka non-mathematical) can not live long because a four dimensional space is, by definition, mathematical... Or am I wrong?

[Nick]

I completely agree. This forum isn't going to work out too well...

[Keiji]

Then what do you suppose we call it?

[Nick]

I propose we get rid of it, and move these threads to theories.

[Keiji]

We can't do that, because the Theories forum is purely for theories about the SPATIAL fourth dimension.

[houserichichi]

I support this part of the forum, though I'm not a very active player. This is the place where people get to talk about consciousness and various other philosophical/psychological/whateveralogical terms and relate them to the fourth dimension. Math and science have no place in the metaphysics and I'll be the first to admit that I never remember WHERE I'm posting when I come into these sections of the board.

This is the realm of new age and VRIs and all those nonscientific (but totally acceptable) ideas to crop up and be discussed. I'll make more of an effort to leave my scientific prejudices out of here unless asked specifically to bring them in and I hope the rest of the science dweebs (of which I have my membership badge sewn directly onto my jacket shoulder) would be willing to do the same.

I say keep this part of the forum. Look at the definition on the main page:

Metaphysical Fourth Dimension
Topics related to a fourth dimension that isn't spatial or time-based belong here.

I'm sure we'll have essences of space or time being thrown around but the purely scientific and/or mathematical definitions should not be presupposed. Really, keep it around because, at the very least, lots of interesting conversations and debates could crop up. It never hurts to have some of those, now does it?

[Nick]

nonscientific (but totally acceptable)

If something is nonscientific, then I refuse to accept it.

Then here's another idea: change the name. Fourth dimensions implies vector space, so... call it "consciousness discussion" or something of that nature, not dimension.

[moonlord]

Hmmm. That's an interesting opinion... hourichichi is somewhat right afterall...

EDIT: irockyou posted while I was writing this.

[houserichichi]

If something is nonscientific, then I refuse to accept it.

As a supposed scientist you're not allowed to outright refuse to accept something. Your train of thought must necessarily be (by definition of scientist as one who follows the "rules" of science) to refute the argument before it can be supposed "wrong" or "incomplete". Now since topics in this section of the forum should, and I stress that word, be formed via logic and assumption alone (not unlike much of the great works of science of the past) it would be the job of the scientist or logician to prove them wrong through their own tools. Since this section of the forum is devoted to non-science then we, as the scientists, cannot bring our tools in to play (assuming their arguments have no "real" science in them).

Fourth dimensions implies vector space

It most certainly does not.

[Nick]

You misunderstood me. I said that if something is nonscientific, then I refuse to accept it. In other words, if something is supernatural, then I refuse to accept it. Science only deals with what is natural.

What you describe is the way science works when it encounters a theory or problem that isn't supernatural.

[pat]

Meta-note... why is this thread sticky?

[bo198214]

Though often its also not safe to go with science.
I recall for example the hypothesis (which were accepted for years in the scientific community) that neurons of the brain do not build any more in adults (but only die). It was a kind of dogma.

And now it turns out, that it was complete nonsense. There is heavy experimental evidence that new neurons can grow in adults (first verified in rats of course).

So in most cases you have to judge for your own, the feeling of being in a agreeing community might be quite comforting, but tells nothing about truth.

[Keiji]

Then here's another idea: change the name. Fourth dimensions implies vector space, so... call it "consciousness discussion" or something of that nature, not dimension.

I'm prepared to rename it to simply "Metaphysical Dimensions", if that would be any better. But the subject matter is definately metaphysical and can be treated as a dimension.

[Nick]

I disagree, but I'm obviously outnumbered, so do whatever you want.

[Hugh]

This is the realm of new age and VRIs and all those nonscientific (but totally acceptable) ideas to crop up and be discussed.

Hey, VRIs are in the Theories section House, and may involve a spatial 4th dimension.

I say keep this part of the forum. Look at the definition on the main page.

I agree with House, there are lots of people who come to the forum to discuss metaphysical fourth dimension possibilities. We have a thread on the forum for jokes, and yet we would disallow them the freedom to post about the possibility of there being higher metaphysical dimensions? I say let it be discussed. Let's open our minds to new possibilities.

[GARD1]

ThanX.

[moonlord]

why is this thread sticky?

This thread is sticky, because it regards the forum more than something about it. Take it as a... administrative discussion.

We have a thread on the forum for jokes, and yet we would disallow them the freedom to post about the possibility of there being higher metaphysical dimensions?

How about moving all the thread to Unrelated topics, then?

[Hugh]

How about moving all the thread to Unrelated topics, then?

Here are the definitions of "dimension" :
1. A measure of spatial extent, especially width, height, or length.
2. Extent or magnitude; scope. Often used in the plural: a problem of alarming dimensions.
3. Aspect; element: “He's a good newsman, and he has that extra dimension” (William S. Paley).
Mathematics.
4. The least number of independent coordinates required to specify uniquely the points in a space.
The range of such a coordinate.
5. Physics. A physical property, such as mass, length, time, or a combination thereof, regarded as a fundamental measure or as one of a set of fundamental measures of a physical quantity: Velocity has the dimensions of length divided by time.

"Dimension" pertaining to this section might fit within the realms of definitions 2 or 3, and possibly 5, so let's leave it here.

[moonlord]

In fact, it can only fall under definition 3. The second is only used as a superlative, and the fifth is very well defined (the definition is defined, take care ) to be related to measuring and what kinds of units you can use. So other than the third, no definition allows metaphysical.

I haven't understood the third, although it seems related to the character (parameters) of something. But I'll leave the thread here, if so you (plural) wish.

[ By the way, I finally cleared the naming in my mind. Forum -> subforum(s) ... -> thread/topic -> post. So the thread is the whole "Metaphysical..." set of topics. Good. ]

Edit by moonlord: deleted off-topic posts. Yeah, I've got it with the names

[GARD1]

In fact, it can only fall under definition 3. The second is only used as a superlative, and the fifth is very well defined (the definition is defined, take care ) to be related to measuring and what kinds of units you can use. So other than the third, no definition allows metaphysical.

I haven't understood the third, although it seems related to the character (parameters) of something. But I'll leave the thread here, if so you (plural) wish.

[ By the way, I finally cleared the naming in my mind. Forum -> subforum(s) ... -> thread/topic -> post. So the thread is the whole "Metaphysical..." set of topics. Good. ]

Edit by moonlord: deleted off-topic posts. Yeah, I've got it with the names

Moonlord, Your signature is an open invitation to the metaphysical for discussion in this thread.

"God does not play dice." -- Albert Einstein, early 1900's.
"Not only does God play dice, but... he sometimes throws them where we cannot see them." -- Stephen Hawking, late 1900's.

[moonlord]

In the context Einstein said that, he was refering to the disintegration of a nucleus, that he believed to be determined by something and not random. Hawking said that when talking about Einstein, mentioning that the development of physics have shown that "not only does God play dice", but, according to Heisenberg's Uncertainity Principle, we can not always see the result, because we'd interact with the dice and change it's state.

There is nothing metaphysical here.

[GARD1]

You are correct moonlord.

I read one word wrong in the Hawking quote, "we" was read as "he".

[thigle]

if God is not metaphysics, then what is ?

this forum is completely adequate, as it allows to discuss 4th dimension outside of the reductionist scientific worldview.
by that worldview i mean the Western Indo-European WorldView that is the 'norm' of judgement today on the majority of the Earth, and that has taken it to the edge of self-destruction.
this worldView - the self-proclaimed exclusive truth-holder, takes its own projection of a specific kind(s) of Being over the Existence as something objective, 'out-there', divisible from subjects that project it over themselves and their environments, thus it misunderstands the ontological status of its own thinking, its own discourse. it fairly well succeeds at misunderstanding itself too.

i fully support this metaphysical forum. it allows (or should) discussion of 4th dimensions ouside of rigid frames of reductionists who are able to claim anything from falsity to nonexistence of others' conceptions of dimensionality that don't fit the(ir) consensus - which is always nothing other than temporally freezed opinion that yields results through application in the specific reality-at-hand.

btw, there would be no science without metaphysics, the very start of the era that we call Metaphysical is the start of science as we conceive of it in Western Indo-European worldView, there was not even the distinction of physus/logos present before the eras turning. the scientific leans against the metaPhysical. they are siamese twins.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
too little people have tried smoking marihuana in socially positive mindset and setting. if you have, try providing the same comfort to others, through tolerance and promotion of cognitive AND somatic liberty of individuals, and copy and paste this onto your sig.

[PWrong]

I think this forum is a good idea. We're always going to get posts about the "metaphysical" 4th dimension, we can't do anything about that, short of banning anyone who mentions it. This forum just hides them somewhere so we can ignore them.

[GARD1]

Whithouth the creation of the universe there would be nothing.

Thigle! ThanX for your input.

I believe "dimension" is interpreted different between religion and mathematic.

Both sides is worthwhile getting to know more about.

Nature is chaotic, the number 5 is the most common. Odd numbers is the most gentle to our perception of sight.

Got to go.

Cy

[Keiji]

if God is not metaphysics, then what is ?

God is religion.

Metaphysics is extra so-called dimensions that are not physical. I suppose you could have a metaphysical god, but god is usually treated in a different way to metaphysics.

[thigle]

actually we have to be precise as for where that distinction- the concept of physus comes from.

this can be traced back (as far as i know) to the end of so called 'mythopoietic Era' and start of so-called 'metaphysical Era'. this time of turning of Eras is roughly somewhere at the end of Greek debates over the transcendental principle. after many proposals for candidates for this principle (that was bound to start of symbolic function in languague) like number, Idea, water, fire, etc.,...

...Anaximander - who btw made one of the first maps of the world, summed up all that haggle over transcendence in a way that said something like: "...that which gives order to all things - that which transcends all things that are bounded(peiron), cannot be bounded if its transcendental, nothing specific or concrete, not a thing of the world.. thus the transcendental principle is apeiron - the unbounded, or infinite."

later the peiron or lets call it simply the finite became the focus of our rationality-crafting civilisation and apeiron - the infinite, was left over to religion, metaphysics, mystics. by being focused on, it came to further differentiation into physus/logos duality, that was a distinction of 2 unfoldings - one of the thought/sound and one of the living body(of Nature).

these are the fundaments of the western science. all the -logies and physics and all the disciplinary differentiation into domains of knowledge is just further and further splits from this duality. hardScience from physus, softScience from logos.

well and metaPhysics ment all beyond physus. god(s) included.

aperion//peiron(physus/logos)

metaphysical thinking is ontology and epistemology plus some other philosophical disciplines, traditionally. end of metaphysics was often (wrongly) identified as from when Nietzsche wrote his famous "God is dead".

so metaphysical (n-th) dimension is anything that conceptually transcends the concept/distinction of physus-like dimensionality. this can be any conception of dimensionality that is unbound from taking empirical experience as ultimately and exclusively real, anything that is not bound by empiric assumptions.

like for exemple imaginary dimensionality, logical dimensionality, existential dimensionality, perceptual dimensionality, etc.

math is metaphysics par excellence

moonlord: Removed posts on the angle systems.

[Keiji]

I have renamed the forum to simply "Metaphysics", as you can see. I've also changed the description for obvious reasons.