If a fourth spatial dimension exists

Post Reply New Topic

Ya, the internal/external size discrepancy was what I was mostly referring to.

My wife and I watched this video: [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoVb6-s-wEA[/youtube]
And I asked her why, after the one-minute mark, the guy starts listing visually-obvious size discrepancies about his balls.
At one point, he compares them to the size of the moon, so I asked my wife why the lyrics were so inaccurately chosen.
She replied that his pants might be like the TARDIS.

How about the space-time continuum? and well, one variable is dependent on the other.

I don't know how it works but I presume they are trying to demonstrate that the Doctor goes into the tardis and steps into a new spatial dimension.

I've seen it played with before, it seems like a cute and edgy concept but what I don't understand is how such an object (4th dimensional) would interact with its surroundings or that the extra fourth dimension would be in a spatial sense. When I see it attempted it seems like an attempt to imply a partially inside-out factor of some type or saying that an object has some visual trickery to it - which when looked at that way would make you wonder whether its truly 4 dimensional or whether the particular visual vantage point is deceptive. The gif on the front page of the seeming cube but not a cube is a good example - where the lines line up to look like a cube but when it rotates you see that its not really a cube in there but rather just something that looks like that from a given vantage point (much like Julian Beever's sidewalk art looks 3D from the proper angle).

Only on a world-line. Not throughout the entire space. The equation for a circle makes the x co-ordinate dependent on the y or the other way around.

ruveyn

Like Predator?

That would be cool!