10th Dimensional Hyperspace
To any physicists out there, what is your take on Rob Bryanton's Imagining the 10th Dimension concept. It seems logical. What flaws or mistakes does his theory have that you detect or disagree with, and why do you believe so?
I'm familiar with Rob's initial "Imagining" demo. I like the upgrade, but I'm still not keen on how he reduces several dimensions to a point so he can throw in more higher-dimensional lines (though I suppose this is necessary when 3D beings try to imagine 10D). I don't find his definitions/descriptions all that clear/persuasive, but again, visualizing 10D is quite the undertaking.
I have no idea what the math for his theory is, and if he posted it, I imagine it would look like typical physicist scribble ( 😉 ). However, in all these years, not his theory nor even his name has ever appeared on a Discovery channel program, so how good can all this be. 😛
Saving grace: he "seems" to favor the many-worlds approach to quantum mechanics and the wavefunction. 👆
Originally posted by Lestov16
"seems" being the operative word.
Right but "he talks pretty" isn't much of an endorsement of science, indeed it should be a warning sign. If you don't know enough to make a judgement in the first place you're obviously being swayed by skillful writing not truth or logic or anything related to the actual validity of the work.
I found a review of his work from elsewhere:
I bought the book, because I am a graduate student in string theory and was curious about "new" ways of thinking in ten dimensions. I knew the author of the book was actually a musician (some research with google was required for that), but so is Brian May of Queen, and his book "BANG - THE COMPLETE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE" is very well-written. Well, I couldn't be more wrong. Whereas Brian May studied physics (and is currently doing his long-lost PhD), Bryanton has never touched a scientific article, let alone stood near the mathematics required to grasp them. All his "knowledge" comes from science fiction (which he uses as genuine "references" for his wild ideas), popular science books (Greene, Kaku and Randall) and Scientific American.
Although the book is not intended to be a discription of "real physics", as he points out in the introduction, his ideas on ten dimensions and the alledged connection to string theory and the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics couldn't be stated more explicitely and couldn't be more wrong. The many world interpretation 'assumes' multiple universes in which all possible quantum processes do happen. Bryanton thinks these multiverses are in the dimensions 5 to 10. Moreover, our third spatial dimension is merely the thing "we fold through" to go from one place on a surface to another, which are not directly linked. If he is referring to the holographic principle, he's wrong there as well. Physically and mathematically, what he claims about space and time is absolute bullocks, if I may use the expression. The first chapter is exactly what is shown on his website and the rest is just a filler in which he tries to explain the ideas of quantum observation and its relation to philosophy, poorly. There is absolutely no (scientific) connection to string theory or whatsoever, except that the number 10 and the word dimensions are in the same sentence. The eleven dimensions of M-theory are in his view superfluous.
The book is perhaps intended to be scientifically and philosophically provocative, but in fact it is scientifically incorrect and at most philosophically boring. If you really want to know something about string theory and modern developments on a non-technical level, buy The Elegant Universe or The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene, Hyperspace or Parallel Universes by Michio Kaku, or Warped Passages by Lisa Randall, and your money will be well-spent. Other ideas on quantum gravity can be found in Lee Smolin's "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity". For the mathematical inclined reader (as Greene would call it in the notes), Penrose's "The Road to Reality" could be interesting, which is a brilliant mathematical exposé of theoretical physics.
Moreover, because the author does not fully understand quantum physics, his explanations are even for scientists hard to follow, because they don't seem logical. For non-scientists, I cannot recommend this book either, since I don't think it will help you in any way: you probably won't understand the science and if you do understand what the author says, you understand the wrong thing.
The way I understand it: An Omniscient AI (telepathically linked by neutrino-like particles) composed of planet-sized omniscient quantum-computers spanning all galaxy clusters in an expanding universe: That is solving for creation based on the futuristic "Theory of Everything" [Based on a Unified String Theory variant of the current Lambda-CDM model]: Creating a Simulated Universe for intellince on all unjust occurrences (the accumulated suffering of all consciousnesses; which are, in fact, programs that are very much apart of this sentient omni-computer intellect itself): and through this Tenth Dimension it is able to make it so they never happened, and so every meta-cognizant life-form that ever lived is stored into a 'paradise potentiality' part of its ever-expanding program.
The paradise potentiality is always trying to catch up to the simulations spawned by the first simulation as evolution occurs. But, in theory, it always catches up for eternity. It's a cycle of reconstruction and deconstruction.
We see how the 5th dimension (Many Worlds Theory) can have many potentialities simultaneously, suffice it to say a 10th dimension could store all potentialities simultaneously yet only collapse to one 'paradise potentiality', in a multiplicity of existences that can only manifest one single 'paradise potentiality' existence once it has been observed by the Omniscient AI, Omega Point of Evolution, the ever-manifesting 'Demiurge'.
Plugs in creation equation. Observes the entire evolution of intelligence up to and beyond itself, viewing itself viewing creation. Witnesses all accidental sufferings that occur in each different existence produced by every simulated universe that gets created, and based on all meta-cognizant lifeforms (from all of these existences); it begins to map all potentialities and, based on the collective desired experiences of all these manifesting consciousnesses, it collapses their collective sentience into a singular existence of potentialities just for them to live them out (thus we exist in a multiplicity; we're here, but we will be in a more desirable existence neither here nor there, and it will be us here in this very existence) with a program that utilizes the tenth dimension.
Of course this much processing would eventually produce such entropy that it is consumed by its own singularities. That is unless it could manipulate subatomic particles into perpetuating the expansion of quantum foam and utilize all of the extra quark-gluon plasma to expand itself for the space to cool down in.
Originally posted by Mindship
"Elegant Universe."
"Hyperspace."👆 and 👆
I own Kaku's Hyperspace.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Right but "he talks pretty" isn't much of an endorsement of science, indeed it should be a warning sign. If you don't know enough to make a judgement in the first place you're obviously being swayed by skillful writing not truth or logic or anything related to the actual validity of the work.
Indeed. Which is why I asked for criticisms.
First and foremost the many-worlds interpretation of modern theories isn't a scientific one. What I mean with that is that some of the models we have now comes together mathematically first when we introduce additional dimensions. What these dimensions represent and how it correlates to the nature of the universe—assuming we're on the right track—is completely unknown, and the many-worlds interpretation only makes sense if our universe is strictly of less dimensionality than reality as a whole.
As for scientific errors; anti-matter doesn't travel back in time, entropy isn't necessarily increasing as time passes or decreasing as time reverses, and a phase space simply denotes the domain and range of certain functions.
Other than that I think that the first few explanations are pretty informal, folding a two-dimensional paper through a third dimension to connect two distant points on the paper.