Main      Site Guide    
Message Forum
Re: Universal ramblings... Huh?
Posted By: gabby, on host 198.242.248.12
Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2000, at 14:07:23
In Reply To: Re: Universal ramblings... Huh? posted by Wolfspirit on Saturday, July 15, 2000, at 22:41:50:

> > Somewhat recently there was an article in the newspaper about a set of experiments that had been conducted which strongly suggested a three-dimensionally flat universe. It made sense at the time, but I've forgotten how they did it--timing radiation bursts from (or at?) different places. Of course, one could always argue that if the hypersphere were big enough, it'd be too hard to detect the time differences.
>
> (-: A new article, really? I always prefer experimental evidence over theory in testing the viability of a multi-dimensional universe. If memory serves me correctly, last time you (gabby) and Balanthalus discussed cosmology, it was over the existence of an 11-dimensional universe. Bal also said that current theory asserts the universe is *curved* with no boundaries, just as a circle has no endpoints.
>
> So we seem to to progressing in a retrograde fashion... Basically, some physicists want to collapse the concept of 11 space-time dimensions (including 3 quantum-microtemporals) back down to the traditional understanding of 3 ordinary spatial dimensions in a *flat* universe?

I guess I didn't say that very well. What the data suggested was that our favorite three dimensions are likely flat in comparison to others. An easy analogy is of a two-dimensional paper. It can be fresh and lie flat in three dimensions or be crumpled up and be ... not flat. To the two-dimensional paper people within it, though, there would be no big differences. The idea of the experiments was to carefully time radiation bursts from various locations. If the three normal dimensions were curved appreciably, there should be a time delay where the radiation had to travel farther. The scientists didn't detect any such delay, so postulated that the universe may be three-dimensionally flat. I don't think they were concerned with the nature or number of other dimensions.

On a side note, the article was very curiously written. One reading it gets the definite impression that more is actually being hidden than revealed. It made me wonder whether the evidence was as conclusive as the journalists wanted it to seem.

gab"Or maybe I'm just paranoid"by