Is there any actual proof of the existence of Dimensions beyond what we can experience or is the existence of these dimensions only postulated in theory or in support of theory.

Aham, have you not seen my avatar then

(January 1, 2013 at 7:28 pm)Mark 13:13 Wrote: Is there any actual proof of the existence of Dimensions beyond what we can experience or is the existence of these dimensions only postulated in theory or in support of theory.

It depends on which kind of dimensions you are talking about, and whether you are talking about mathematical proof or empirical proof.

In mathematics, calculations are done with many many dimensions and some parts of math rely on them to exist. In physics, it is generally accepted that there are 3 spacial dimensions and one of time, but others may exist (though there is no evidence that they exist). Some theories propose many other spacial dimensions.

In the case of spacial dimensions, proof of extra dimensions would not necessarily require us to experience them for ourselves. For example, a 2 dimensional being would be able to see a 3 dimensional object, but only as its 2 dimensional representation in the 2 dimensional universe.

If a sphere was placed in the 2 dimensional universe, any 2 dimensional beings would see it as a zero-dimensional point. If the sphere then moved through the 2 dimensional universe (i.e. down in the 3rd dimension, and not forward/back/left/right 2 dimensionally), then the 2 dimensional being would see the same point become a circle that got bigger and bigger, before getting smaller and smaller again, becoming a point and then finally disappearing.

Edited to add: Darwinian's avatar is the 2D representation of a 3D rotation of a 4D hypercube.

If I could add on to Tiberius' analogy:

Imagine bacteria on a piece of paper. They are so small that they would think the universe is 2D, but then they would see anomalies like imperfections in the paper (e.g. small bumps) because it's not perfectly flat. This would suggest to them that there's another dimension.

I believe that we are the same. We can't comprehend the "next" dimension (if there's one) because we are limited somehow in the same way the bacteria are. As for anomalies in this universe... well I don't think there's evidence of that sort so far.

(January 1, 2013 at 8:23 pm)Darwinian Wrote: Aham, have you not seen my avatar then

I see a two dimensional object; if i had 3D tv ; I would see 3 D. What you show is a representation of an interpretation of a possible 4th dimensional obect based on extrapolating on 3 pieces of data, that being the three dimensions we can observe

1,2,4 what is the next number.

also just because it could exist isn't a proof it does.
1,2,4 whats the next number i,m thinking off. Was i thinking of another number?

---

(January 1, 2013 at 9:07 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: If I could add on to Tiberius' analogy:

Imagine bacteria on a piece of paper. They are so small that they would think the universe is 2D, but then they would see anomalies like imperfections in the paper (e.g. small bumps) because it's not perfectly flat. This would suggest to them that there's another dimension.

I believe that we are the same. We can't comprehend the "next" dimension (if there's one) because we are limited somehow in the same way the bacteria are. As for anomalies in this universe... well I don't think there's evidence of that sort so far.

I agree with what your saying but we assume the would see abnormailty , but for discussion sake does this mean that when we see an abnormality and cant explain it yet with current scientific thinking within the context of our 3D universe ( 4 if you call time a dimension ) we would be correct to assume its caused by another dimension.

(January 1, 2013 at 9:17 pm)Mark 13:13 Wrote: also just because it could exist isn't a proof it does.

What?!
Dinosaurs could exist... do they?
The same goes for unicorns and almost anything else you can come up with, but doesn't exist (as far as we know).

(January 1, 2013 at 9:17 pm)Mark 13:13 Wrote: I agree with what your saying but we assume the would see abnormailty , but for discussion sake does this mean that when we see an abnormality and cant explain it yet with current scientific thinking within the context of our 3D universe ( 4 if you call time a dimension ) we would be correct to assume its caused by another dimension.

What?!?!?
You wouldn't be correct in that assumption.
First use all the tools at your disposal which use the standard dimensionality... When all these fail, try to use a higher dimensional solution which, when approximated to the standard one will yield the abnormality.... that's what the guys are trying to do with string theory..... but it's so complex they can't do these approximations very well.

I'm waiting for the bit where he says god is hiding in the other dimensions.

Or something similar.

(January 2, 2013 at 6:26 am)Zen Badger Wrote: I'm waiting for the bit where he says god is hiding in the other dimensions.

Or something similar.

Or that other dimensions can't be proved to exist, so all of science is a lie created by the devil to pull us away from the one true Cod.
I wonder how he is going to pay his hand exciting isn't it, and it's in 3D?

(January 2, 2013 at 7:49 am)jonb Wrote:

(January 2, 2013 at 6:26 am)Zen Badger Wrote: I'm waiting for the bit where he says god is hiding in the other dimensions.

Or something similar.

Or that other dimensions can't be proved to exist, so all of science is a lie created by the devil to pull us away from the one true Cod.
I wonder how he is going to pay his hand exciting isn't it, and it's in 3D?

Well, if you hold with string theory it'll be 11D.

Imagine the glasses you'd have to wear for that experience.

@Mark 13:13:

No spatial dimensions have been proven to exist beyond the 3 we can experience. There are many theories that hypothesise that more spatial dimensions exist, most famously string theory. Mathematically, any number of dimensions is fine.