OTHER DIMENSIONS

by **Feather** on Sun 16 Oct 2011, 12:56 pm

Do you accept/believe that other dimensions exist in reality? confused

by **KitKat** on Sun 16 Oct 2011, 2:52 pm

Feather wrote:Do you accept/believe that other dimensions exist in reality?

Hi Feather,
It is generally accepted that we (humans) exist in a three-dimensional reality. Brian Cox suggests a fourth if you include 'time'. Yes, I can accept the notion that there are other (interactive) dimensions in "our reality" not readily comprehensible and which we as a human race may not be fully aware of.

by **Feather** on Sun 16 Oct 2011, 3:14 pm

I take the same view as you, Kitkat. The idea of other dimensions, which are far from understood by science, excites me. I hope The Spirit World turns out to be one of them---or more. Other universes has the same effect on me though that's even more difficult to understand. I think it's the discovery of quantum particles/waves that has led some scientists to speculate on these possibilities. I don't suppose JJ would agree all the same.

by **Stardust** on Mon 17 Oct 2011, 12:42 pm

I'm with you two. We'll meet again, don't know where or when, in another dimension. Who knows, but it's a lovely thought.

by **Umberto Cocopop** on Tue 18 Oct 2011, 10:32 am

Other dimensions can be modelled mathematically but there's no evidence that they exist. String theory requires 11 dimensions (IIRC) in order to work (as a model) but they are a theoretical construct and there's no evidence for them and currently no way of testing the theory (therefore pseudoscience?

)

However, I don't think that physics has quite finished yet with understanding the nature of reality!

As for new discoveries...

I think they'll lead to new knowledge and technologies but they won't make true things that we know are already false.

by **Feather** on Tue 18 Oct 2011, 12:42 pm

Hey, me auld mucker, good to see you back. It's the use of the word,"know", there that I question. Haven't things been "known" in the past only to be "un-known" later? What are your thoughts on the results of the Collider experiments?

by **KitKat** on Tue 18 Oct 2011, 1:36 pm

LOL! Hi Umbo ... Fancy seeing you here Surprised

Love the avatar.

I've never understood what IIRC stands for, and just cannot make anything fit there. study

What does it mean?

by **Umberto Cocopop** on Tue 18 Oct 2011, 1:57 pm

Well we know that homeopathy doesn't work, for example, but the proponents of it still make appeals to quantum physics or things yet to be discovered as providing (one day) the explanation that will vindicate their belief.

It makes as much sense as claiming that the discovery of a new subatomic particle will explain how pigs can fly.

Everything that exists in nature already exists, so any properties of things as yet undiscovered are already present. Discovering something we weren't aware of will increase our understanding of reality but it won't change reality (because it's already real).

As for things like new discoveries from the LHC, well if neutrinos can travel faster than light and we can learn how to exploit this then it could open up the possibility of intergalactic communication (currently it's impractical due to the limitation of the speed of light - and lack of known alien life!) and so could lead to new technologies that could revolutionize our existence. But it won't ever provide a validation for claims like homeopathy.

Likewise, if an afterlife exists in another dimension and a new discovery allows us to make contact then that would be great - but it won't validate the false claims of current day mediums and such like.

So, this 'appeal to the unknown' can only be postulated as an argument when applied to things that are demonstrably true (we know they're real) but have no current explanation. Otherwise, it's a fallacious* argument.

* Yes, he's back!!!

by **Umberto Cocopop** on Tue 18 Oct 2011, 1:58 pm

KitKat wrote:LOL! Hi Umbo ... Fancy seeing you here

Love the avatar.

Just reminding people!

KitKat wrote:I've never understood what IIRC stands for, and just cannot make anything fit there. What does it mean?

IIRC = If I Remember Correctly (Internet shorthand)

by **Feather** on Tue 18 Oct 2011, 2:33 pm

Yes I understand what you are saying and agree with it. Science is the only credible way forward in all things. cheers

by **Pixie** on Wed 19 Oct 2011, 7:47 am

Umberto Cocopop wrote:
KitKat wrote:LOL! Hi Umbo ... Fancy seeing you here

Love the avatar.

Just reminding people!

KitKat wrote:I've never understood what IIRC stands for, and just cannot make anything fit there. What does it mean?

IIRC = If I Remember Correctly (Internet shorthand)

Umbo, if you can waffle on about subatomic particles, string theories and all the rest of it, I'm sure that one can take the time to type the words. (laughing out loud)

Are you here in a 'lets kick some woo ass' or are you over all that now?

Nice to see you up and about again Bongo

by **Umberto Cocopop** on Wed 19 Oct 2011, 12:25 pm

Pixie wrote:Are you here in a 'lets kick some woo ass' or are you over all that now?

No, I'm not interested in going over the same old arguments about paranormal stuff endlessly and pointlessly.

I'm more interested in how we think about things and how we use arguments to justify our conclusions. Having said that, paranormal type thinking is a very rich source of how thinking goes wrong!

I'm also interested in why we think the way we do. What motivates us to conclude the things we do on issues.

But the old, "mediumship is real", "no it's not", "I got a message that no one could possibly have known", "that was cold reading", "no it wasn't, "yes it was and you're a fool to think otherwise", "ah, but some of us have open minds you know", type of endless nonsense is not for me.

No way Hose!

I'll be just as happy to discuss Strictly Come Dancing.

(Especially Holly Valance!

)

by **Pixie** on Wed 19 Oct 2011, 12:52 pm

Umberto Cocopop wrote:
Pixie wrote:Are you here in a 'lets kick some woo ass' or are you over all that now?

No, I'm not interested in going over the same old arguments about paranormal stuff endlessly and pointlessly.

I'm more interested in how we think about things and how we use arguments to justify our conclusions. Having said that, paranormal type thinking is a very rich source of how thinking goes wrong!

I'm also interested in why we think the way we do. What motivates us to conclude the things we do on issues.

But the old, "mediumship is real", "no it's not", "I got a message that no one could possibly have known", "that was cold reading", "no it wasn't, "yes it was and you're a fool to think otherwise", "ah, but some of us have open minds you know", type of endless nonsense is not for me.

No way Hose!

Fair nuff!

I'll be just as happy to discuss Strictly Come Dancing. (Especially Holly Valance! )

Don't actually watch it Umbo. I Googled it though and thought Dan Lobb was worthy of a closer look (swit swoo

and all that) Did you know he used to be a professional tennis player?

Dan Lobb...tennis player!!

Never heard of him.

I actually enjoy watching a bit o ballroom dancin. I always enjoy watching the oldies fox trotting around Blackpool Tower Ballroom, it passes the time while I eat me pie

by **Umberto Cocopop** on Wed 19 Oct 2011, 1:06 pm

Pixie wrote:Dan Lobb...tennis player!!

Names that go with jobs are called aptronyms and there are some great ones.

A policeman called Constable Lawless

An American football player called Chuck Long

And a guy who advocated the use of semen as an invisible ink called Mansfield Smith-Cumming

You couldn't make it up!

As for Strictly...

It's the sort of thing I would never normally watch but I got into it at the end of last year's series and got hooked. I'm not too sure whether it's the drama, tension, voting or the fit bods that's got me hooked mind you.

by **KitKat** on Wed 19 Oct 2011, 9:01 pm

On BBC2 now ... 9 to 10

Faster Than the Speed of Light?

Was Einstein wrong? One of the few things the lay person understands,
or thinks they do, about relativity is that things can’t go faster than
light. Because if they do they travel backwards in time. So when
scientists at Cern, Europe’s top physics laboratory, recently claimed
that particles they fired had broken the ultimate speed limit, their
peers were sceptical. (BBC4’s Jim Al-Khalili wagered, “If the Cern
experiment proves to be correct and neutrinos have broken the speed of
light, I will eat my boxer shorts on live TV.”)

Professor Marcus du Sautoy spells out the physics involved and wonders whether orthodoxy is about be turned on its head.

About this programme

Marcus du Sautoy explores the recent discovery of particles that
appear to travel faster than the speed of light, and how the claims
could challenge Einstein's theory of relativity. The finding has sparked
a flurry of bizarre concepts, from time travel to parallel universes.
Using simple language, Marcus explains what was known, what has changed,
and why it matters.

by **Pixie** on Wed 19 Oct 2011, 9:04 pm

Someone is watching the football so I will have to pass...

As it is, I've missed Kirsty Allsop's Home Made Do Dah

by **Umberto Cocopop** on Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:34 am

Damn, I missed it.

I'll watch it on iPlayer

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b016bys2/Faster_Than_the_Speed_of_Light/

by **Pixie** on Thu 20 Oct 2011, 1:03 pm

Thanks for the link Bongo

Forgot about the iPlayer....

Very disappointed with Kirstie Allsop. She entered an 'afternoon tea cake' competition (last minute) and came second with one set of cakes and first with her fruitcake! (rigggggggged) Some of the other cakes on display were bloody gorgeous. You could see the hate on the faces of the other competitors as Kirst gave her tearful thank you speech:lol!:

Anno, I am being a cynical cow.

Will watch FTTSOL tomorrow night

by **Umberto Cocopop** on Thu 20 Oct 2011, 2:34 pm

Well, I watched it. Quite interesting but inconclusive.

There seems to be a couple of possibilities:

A systematic error that's causing all of the measurements to be skewed; and
It's evidence for some other description of the universe (such as string theory) that doesn't necessarily invalidate Einstein's theory.

I hope it's not a systematic error as this finding would then open up all sorts of new possibilities for research. It could be the biggest discovery in physics for around a century.

by **Umberto Cocopop** on Thu 20 Oct 2011, 2:35 pm

Pixie wrote:Anno, I am being a cynical cow.

As it ever was.....

by **Feather** on Fri 21 Oct 2011, 11:21 am

I watched it too, from your link. For once I didn't have to strain to hear what was being said. That was a pleasure in itself. I can't get my head round the idea that cause and effect would cease to operate if this experiment is found to have no flaws. We live in a time zone so that idea is inconceivable to us. It's beyond me to imagine a scenario where you could go back and kill your grandad so that you could not have been born. What's that all about?

by **Pixie** on Sat 22 Oct 2011, 8:07 am

Feather wrote:I watched it too, from your link. For once I didn't have to strain to hear what was being said. That was a pleasure in itself. I can't get my head round the idea that cause and effect would cease to operate if this experiment is found to have no flaws. We live in a time zone so that idea is inconceivable to us. It's beyond me to imagine a scenario where you could go back and kill your grandad so that you could not have been born. What's that all about?

It's like Back To The Future where his own mother falls in love with him.

I really should stop reading this topic until I have watched it. Didn't watch it last night because I was hoping Derren Brown was going to be assinated, as it was it was someone else (won't say in case people are playing catch up tv) Then that fit Brian Cox was on QI. He's good looking, clever, funny AND he was in a pop band, even if it was D-Ream.

Can things get any better for Brian?

by **KitKat** on Sat 22 Oct 2011, 10:22 am

Pixie wrote:Didn't watch it last night because I was hoping Derren Brown was going to be assinated, as it was it was someone else (won't say in case people are playing catch up tv) Then that fit Brian Cox was on QI.

I missed them both, at least ... started to watch the Derren Brown programme but boredom set in right from the beginning ... same old, same old ...

Brian Cox geek

... now that's a different story ... I'd never get bored watching or listening to him.

by **Pixie** on Sun 23 Oct 2011, 9:54 am

KitKat wrote:
Pixie wrote:Didn't watch it last night because I was hoping Derren Brown was going to be assinated, as it was it was someone else (won't say in case people are playing catch up tv) Then that fit Brian Cox was on QI.

I missed them both, at least ... started to watch the Derren Brown programme but boredom set in right from the beginning ... same old, same old ...

Yep.

It cracks me up how Derren has hitched a ride on the Sally bandwaggon. Hasn't he already been exposed as using actors when he clearly states that he doesn't? Yet his fans defend him in the same way that Sally's die-hard fans defend her. Double standards?

As regards The Assassin, maybe I can be hypnotized to forget that I ever saw it. lol!

OTHER DIMENSIONS

OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS

Re: OTHER DIMENSIONS