tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post7603136509034561641..comments2024-01-25T13:46:11.967-06:00Comments on The Bronze Blog: Doggerel #137: "Dimension"Ryan Michaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14750814560493466382noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-91321991756549975242008-02-27T08:10:00.000-06:002008-02-27T08:10:00.000-06:00I had a thermo professor who insisted that time wa...I had a thermo professor who insisted that time was a pseudo-dimension, since time is one-way (as far as we know). <BR/><BR/>Sure we can plot a time versus distance graph and 'go backwards' by retreating down the graph, but that is more an artifact of the math rather than a physical property of time.Wikinitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16662942824534085891noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-15429215682809430462008-02-24T21:37:00.000-06:002008-02-24T21:37:00.000-06:00Oh, no question, I agree with your inclusion of "d...Oh, no question, I agree with your inclusion of "dimension" in the Doggerel series. You're right that almost any time a nonscientist uses the word "dimension," they use it to mean "alternate universes, elseworlds, different planes of existence, etcetera." My favorite example is the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles' <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension_X_%28TMNT%29" REL="nofollow">Dimension X</A><A HREF="" REL="nofollow"></A>.<BR/><BR/>I was trying to make the ancillary and superfluous point that string theory is hokum.Flavinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15080348139889212664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-33030328723134449802008-02-24T16:04:00.000-06:002008-02-24T16:04:00.000-06:00I was largely referring to a lot of woos out there...I was largely referring to a lot of woos out there who try to refer to concepts like dimension without using any math with it to form an explanatory model for existing evidence.Bronze Doghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10938257296504189967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-1112996160742849362008-02-24T15:41:00.000-06:002008-02-24T15:41:00.000-06:00That's a good point Flavin. Adding an extra dimen...That's a good point Flavin. Adding an extra dimension is actually pretty easy math. Want one? Bam. Y axis. 2? There ya go, X. 2 more? How about Z and W for your trouble?<BR/><BR/>12? Sure thing. Let's define A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, M, N.<BR/><BR/>The math is easy enough to do, add a new axis. There just needs to be justification for needing those extra dimensions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-84126822942058914822008-02-24T14:40:00.000-06:002008-02-24T14:40:00.000-06:00I heard we're up to ten or so. If you want to add ...<I>I heard we're up to ten or so. If you want to add some more, show us the math.</I><BR/><BR/>I'd rather be shown the evidence. How about we subtract a few dimensions until we can't subtract any more—I'd put odds on getting back down to four pretty quickly—then we can talk about why some scientists think we need more and how we can test for them. <BR/><BR/>Though I guess it's not you I need to convince, BD, it's the Discovery Channel.Flavinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15080348139889212664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-20427438528298699032008-02-23T07:38:00.000-06:002008-02-23T07:38:00.000-06:00I've got to the point where I'm almost inured to t...I've got to the point where I'm almost inured to the pop-cultural inundation of the incorrect definition. It's just annoying one of those damn sci-fi things contributing in some small fashion to scientific illiteracy, like visible laser beams or FTL travel.<BR/><BR/>Though, unlike FTL travel, it isn't a storytelling necessity. If they'd just start saying "planes" or "alternate realities," maybe the confusion would go away after a while.Donhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06661441668625677468noreply@blogger.com