|
 |
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:16:05 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> Am 25.07.2013 19:24, schrieb Nekar Xenos:
>> Now for the part that I don't understand at all:
>>
>> I have heard it mentioned in scientific news that scientists have found
>> the fourth dimension and measured it.
>> How can you measure a dimension? I don't understand that. If the 4th
>> dimension has a "thickness", what then is the thickness of the 3rd
>> dimension. It makes absolutely no sense to me at all.
>
> Those news actually make no sense for yet another reason: Scientists
> around the world should know better than to call a newly discovered
> dimension the "4th dimension", as the term is already firmly associated
> with time.
>
> But yes, there is some sense to measuring a dimension: Imagine the
> universe was made up of only one spacetime dimension, and one additional
> dimension curled up in a small loop; the universe would then have the
> shape of a cylinder surface stretching into infinity(*) along the
> spacetime dimension. But the other dimension would be finite, and could
> probably be measured.
>
> (*Alternatively, spacetime might also be finite, but on a much larger
> scale, in which case we'd get a torus surface.)
>
> String theory postulates that there are indeed - AFAIR - about half a
> dozen extra dimensions, and it is suggested that they may indeed all be
> curled up in this manner, with sizes roughly on the scale of sub-atomic
> particles.
>
It still doesn't make sense to me ...
--
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
