Here’s something to mull over: If time is the fourth dimension, can it be said that “psychics” can see all four dimensions? If 4-D perception was possible, how do you think the fourth dimension would be perceived by our central nervous system?
Maybe I’m missing something, but I think I perceive time. For example, it is NOW later than it was when I started typing this. NOW it is even later.
However, if the question is, do psychics “perceive” time differently than the rest of us, it might be a question. However, most researchers don’t think so. And James Randi has a standing offer of (some big sum of money) for anyone who can prove psychic ability.
Well, I’ll take a whack at it, though I’m sure a real master on the subject will have much more to say. Perhaps this might even become a mass debate. eh? eh? oh forget it…
Dimensions aren’t naturally occuring laws of reality inherent in the universe. They are concepts developed by man to define a particular point, or set of points in space. Time is not necessarily the 4th dimension. It is a possible dimension which one would use to define an event that takes place at a particular time. Thus, if I wanted to watch today’s reruns (2) of the Simpson’s on Fox, to represent it graphically, I would define a point of origin (let’s say my eyes which will be resting comfortably in my head, which will be resting comfortably on my pillow), then define the x, y, and z, axes (sp?), and using those axes I would be able to describe in units where the TV screen is in relation to my eyes, and finally I would describe the time in terms of our system of time (5:30 - 6:30 PM).
BTW, IANAM, and am bracing myself for the possibility that I will look silly once people who actually know what they are talking about arrive.
I have news for you: normal humans can percieve in 4 dimensions. Example:
- Read this sentence.
- Wait 5 seconds.
- Did you notice that some time elapsed since you read the sentence?
You have just percieved the 4th dimension, time.
The time thing confuses me somewhat. I keep hearing that time is the fourth dimension, but in the Cosmos series, Carl Sagan said that while fourth dimension can be understood academically by us, we can’t perceive it at all. His version was of the first dimension being a line, the second a plane (second line at right angles to the first), the third providing depth (third line at right angles to the other two), and the fourth dimension being at right angles to the first three! He did say that whilst we can’t see a four dimensional object, we can see its three dimensional shadow.
[sub]Anyway, as usual, Cosmos was brilliant, but it does make my brain smart somewhat. I think I’ll go and have another three dimensional beer.[/sub]
Sagan was talking of a fourth spacial dimension; look up tesseracts. (Yes, tesseracts do exist.) It is not equivalent to time being the fourth way to measure something’s position in space-time.
Also bear in mind that while we can mathematically understand a fourth (or 5th or 27th) spatial dimension, that’s not to suggest that a fourth spatial dimension actually exists. If we were suddenly tossed into an alternate universe with a fourth spatial dimension, I doubt we’d actually perceive it; we’d see three dimensional projections. If the universe had four extended spatial dimensions from the beginning, we probably would have evolved to see… four spatial dimensions, and I have no idea what that would be like.
Actually, while it’s not the question you asked, I’m a little surprised no one has mentioned Edwin Abbot’s book Flatland.
Would music be considered a 4D object? not that it is 4 dimensions, but it has a real value on the temporal dimesion that we call time. It is an infinite series of snapshots within a given range of time.
What about the trails you get from looking at a light bulb while turning your head really fast?
Oooohh, I just noticed mention of Flatland. Awesome book!!
Here is a mind-bending Java animation of a hypercube, aka tesseract, which is a cube in four spatial dimensions.
To (attempt to) visualize a hypercube: First, imagine a point. Just a dot. This is zero-dimensional space (a Euclidian point, as opposed to various non-Euclidian points). Make a second dot, then connect the two dots with a line. This is one-dimensional space (a line). Make two lines, then connect them to form a plane. This is two-dimensional space (a plane). Make two planes, then connect them to form a cube. This is three-dimensional space (at last something we can actually call a space). Okay, enough with the basics. Now, make a second cube, displaced in four-dimensional space from the first. Connect the verticies of the two cubes, and you have a tesseract, or a hypercube. That is four-dimensional space. You can do this an arbitrary amount of times to create figures in an aribtrary amount of dimensions. None of these dimensions is ‘time’, just numerous spatial dimensions.
As for psychics, I think it’s all bunk and will until someone shows otherwise with a repeatable, scrutinizable experiment.
Time is another dimension. There is not a great deal of double about that. The one thing that must be considured is that the numbers are arbitrary. It could be the second, first, or one thousandth. There are an infinite number of possible dimensions, though not all may exist. Assuming that psychics can see the future (which I highly doubt), the chance of them seeing time as another dimension (like space) is not likely. It might replace one of the others in their mind, but probably not exist in addition to the other three. This is because the human mind cannot picture four dimensions. If you then argue that they may be different, the question must be asked why don’t they act extremely differently in our world as all of their spacial orientation would be completely different.
Correction: The human mind has difficulty picturing four (or more) dimensions, but it’s not impossible. If we grant, for the sake of argument, that psychics exist and have the ability to perceive the future, then we might as well also assume that they have a greater than normal proficiency at visualizing four or more dimensions. This is strictly hypothetical, though, considering that there’s no evidence that psychics exist.
This is more like what i was trying to get at in my original post. Let me rephrase my question:
How would human beings be able to transcend our everyday three spatial dimension and incorporate time into what we perceive as “vision?”
This question was inspired by a passage from Kurt Vonnegut’s brilliant classic “Slaughter-House Five.” In it, Billy Pilgrim describes his alien captives as being able to “see” in four dimensions: "The creatures can see where each star has been and where it is going, so that the heavens are filled with rarefied, luminous spaghetti. And Trafalmadorians don’t see human beings as two-legged creatures, either. They see them as great millepedes- “with babies’ legs at one end and old people’s legs at the other.”
Just thought I’d share this interesting idea with the Teeming Millions. What do you think?
One thing to remember when trying to understand things Carl Sagan said… is that he smoked a fuckload of weed… Maybe we could all learn from his example?
Using Derleth’s example (which is exactly how I visualize a 4th dimensional object), time can indeed be the fourth dimension.
First, if the fourth dimension is indeed time, then we are all creatures of (at least) four dimensions. Unless you assume that at every infinite point in time, the universe erases itself and then makes a near duplicate of itself at the next point. Now THAT would be difficult to imagine. I’d wonder why my computer didn’t crash more often.
OK, now, take a line on a particular plane. This line stretches across the plane’s x-axis. Now, we push the line up along its y-axis. We, as 3rd (or 4th, or whatever) dimensional creatures can easily see this line moving. We know because we can see the entire plane and we can see how it moves and in what direction it moves. The only thing the line sees is its own little world of that one line, no matter where along the plane it’s moving.
Now, imagine that time is a dimension and every millionth of a billionth of a google plex of a second is a part of that dimension. We are constantly moving along in 4 dimensional space but we cannot see anything but the present. Those in 4th (or larger) dimensions would see our progress easily.
I’m not sure if I’m following Derleth’s example. A line is a continuous set of point, a plane (or a 2d object anyway) is a continuous set of line, and a solid is a continuous set of planes… so then how does 4d object consist of only 2 3d objects? Wouldn’t it have to be a continues set of solids? (no i cant’ visualize this…which is where i run into trouble)
perhaps my definition of these things is malformed, it just seemed that’s how you explained them
I actually did read that book. You can find it online if you don’t want to buy it:
http://www.vuiksvertier.nl/wetenschap/flatland-by-abbot.htm
I find it interesting how a 3 dimensional being is able to see all of Flatland (which is 2d). Because of this, a resident of Flatland views a 3d being almost as a god. If there was such thing as a 5d being, such a creature would be able to percieve things 4 diminsionally. In other words, they would be able to see the future (or at least a portion of it).
I also just finished reading Michael Crightons ‘Timeline’. In the book (which is about time travel), time is not some location you can travel too. Instead, they go with the infinite number of parallel univereses theory. ie, there is a universe where you brushed your teeth this morning. A universe where you didn’t. Another universe where you went to the mall instead, and so on and so on. Since the universes also don’t exist simultaneously, you can travel to a parallel universe which is 600 years behind ours. Since it is a diferent universe, you dont have to worry about time paradoxes like killing your grandfather. You will still exist, you just would never be born in that particular universe.
I had a discussion about the concepts from Timeline with my physics professor last year… He did find the quantum computing part interesting as that’s one his areas of research, but the quantum foam stuff he just didn’t buy. What followed was way over my head so whatever, was still a cool book (though dull ending).
However, since you mentioned the book, it also says that one cannot “travel through time” because time is not a continuous flow or something like that, and that time is just a way we label past events.
And this whole thread brings to mind a line in that movie “Oh God!” when somebody asks George Burns (playing God) what’s in the future and he goes “I dunno, it hasn’t happened yet”
“That’s the problem Marty, you’re not thinking in four dimensions.”
“Yeah…I have a problem with that.”
Kaje, don’t be surprised that you can’t “visualize” four dimensions. Technically, no one can. We can only imagine what it’s like to visualize it.
Let me give a few examples.
You draw two squares a very short distance away from each other on a piece of paper and connect them at their corners. What is that figure? Many people would call it a cube, but it’s not. A cube is a 3 dimensional object and you can’t ever draw a three dimensional object. You can only represent it and, because we understand the concept of three dimensions, we instantly convert it into its 3D equivilant. We can also represent a 4D object through a 2D medium. The problem is that you truly can’t visualize it because you have no experience seeing in four dimensions.
“Wouldn’t it have to be a continuous set of solids?” you ask. Yes, it would (at least part of the time (I’ll explain in a bit)).
Imagine you lived in 2D. There is no up or down. Someone tries to explain to you about 3D. “I don’t understand,” you say, “how can there be a continuous set of planes?” And now you, as a creature of 3D would laugh. “Pretty damn easily,” you’d respond.
But someone in 2D couldn’t see up and down even if they knew it existed.
Now, let me confuse you even more. If we imagine 4D to include time, there’s no reason why 3D necessarily needs to be length, width, and heighth. Think about a bunch of lines. One line is right along an X axis, another is right along a Y axis and another right along the Z axis. All three of them are 1D objects in that they only have length. But…each object travels through time and that gives them one more dimension. It’s not a dimension we can chart, but if they didn’t travel through time, they would only be visible at one point in time and then disappear. Also, with respect to each other, they’re multi dimensional objects for they can only hope to meet each other at one specific point unless any one line can transcend the dimension they’re in.
The more I type, the more I think of. It’s all very confusing if you can’t grasp the concept that you’ll never truly understand it and go on from there.
Moe says
That has a lot more to do with the operation of the rods and cones in the eye, as well as the optic nerve and the nanoseconds it takes for optical information to strike said rods and cones, and be processed as individual bits ( sic ) of information by the brain.
Your eyes sees the light. As you turn your head, you may THINK you are not looking AT the light bulb any longer, but instead are gazing with rapture upon the lithe and supple figure seated on the divan NEXT to the bare light bulb.
Your eyes dont’ discriminate the way your brain does, as you turn your head, the bright image of the bulb continues to burn into the rods and cones, and so leaves artifact as your turn. Depending on the brightness of the burn, and the time since you saw it, it may very well leave an afterimage lasting a few seconds or more- witness most strobe flashes used in photography.
My .02 cents.
Cartooniverse
If psychic ability exists, how come we never see headlines reading “Psychic wins millions in lottery”?
I believe that is a George Carlin bit, so I won’t take credit, but it certainly makes sense.