Yeah I didn’t wanted to be destroyed again.
I was anxious that this monke with a computer is again trying to mess up my ideas and inject some anxiety to my environment.
Again, all you have to do is add a new direction orthogonal to all the others; give it a new letter/label; problem solved! Want more? Just keep adding them: x1, x2, x3, x4, x5, …, x∞
2 Likes
Howdy, Atkin. Been following the recent discussion between you and Cog. Hope you don’t mind if I interject here a little bit. The subject is interesting to me. During the years before my retirement, I often had the pleasure of being given the opportunity to teach/instruct various groups/individuals in a wide range of subjects. Always enjoyed teaching, especially if it was a subject in which I was proficient. For the topics where I may have been a little less confident, I tried to look at it as a chance for me to learn more about it. Did not bother me at all if those being taught/instructed may have known things about the topic I did not know. Hell, I would sometimes even take advantage of their knowledge to let them pass it along to the class.
Anyway, point being, Cog may certainly come off as a belligerent ass at times (primarily because he IS a belligerent ass). Nevertheless, in the realm of teaching and psychology, he has displayed many times over the years he expertise in those fields. I have found in most cases, though, that those who reject his advice/explanations are most often focused too much on his tone and language rather than the actual information in his message. Just saying…
(Edit to add: In other words, if you allow Cog to get under your skin, then you have totally missed the point he was trying to make. OR, perhaps his getting under your skin is EXACTLY the point he was making. Mind games are fun. Cheap entertainment for us. 
)
3 Likes
@Cognostic, I think this applies to parenting as well.
4 Likes
No,it doesn’t solve the problem.
You can have a vector space assume it contains vector in n dimensions.
So can you precieve an n dimension on paper.
You may solve problems in n variable but how you imagine it,you can’t think about it’s structure mentally.
It’s not possible for a human being to perceive more than 3 dimensions.
We even can’t perceive 2D(assuming a 2D universe) exist.
We are trapped in 3D and maths help us to relate some concept about lines and draw graphs but the creatures living in real 2D or 4D will be more cooler than drawing dimensions on paper
Using the vector space to solve problems IS thinking about it’s structure mentally. It might not be the most obvious method, but I don’t think that matters.
1 Like
What I am saying is that we can’t perceive more than 3D.
I think he is using perception in a very literal sense. He is not accounting for imagination or the visualization process. In fact mathematicians have perceived higher dimensions. They have written about them and explained them. The fact that you do not perceive them is just a limitation of your imagination. I am unable to comprehend Brane and string theory. I just don’t get it. I have watched videos and listened to the explanations, but I am not grasping the concept. The string has never been explained in such a way that it makes any sense to me. That’s just me and my brain so I don’t see it. It is a limitation of my imagination. So far. You don’t see dimensions for the very same reason you do see ghosts. You have not trained your mind.
I am in agreement.
I know it can be explained mathematically and my mind can’t percieve them.
I don’t think he was getting my point at all.
All he was doing was to draw more dimensions orthogonally which was absolute opposite of what I was saying.
He thinks he can sense 4D with his orthogonal projections.
They are useful indeed in science and that is not my point.
You have missed my point entirely.,
2 Likes
I didn’t say that, you are the author of that statement, not me.
And for what it is worth, the methods I described are exactly how people do it in 2d, 3d, and higher. IMO: moving from 1d to 2d is significantly more difficult than going form 3d to 4d, or 90d for that matter.
Hope you guys don’t mind if I cut in for a second. Been following this discussion because I find the whole multiple dimension stuff fascinating. Granted, there are many things about it I admit I do not fully understand, but it’s still something I enjoy learning about.
Anyway, in regards to Atkin saying we cannot visualize dimensions beyond 3d… I think I understand what he is saying. Yes, there are mathematical methods of helping scientists “construct” higher dimensions. But can they actually draw or project a picture/image of a dimension beyond 3d that allows us to actually SEE that dimension? And I think that is what Atkin is trying to say. (@Atkinbean Please correct me if I’m wrong.) But like Cog said, just because some (most) people don’t have the mental ability to visualize those higher dimensions in their mind (I know I can’t.), it doesn’t mean there are not those out there who can. Personally, I think it would be pretty cool to have that ability. As it is, I’m pleased with myself to be able to simply draw a 3d box and then flip its perspective back and forth in my mind. 
Of course, I could be completely wrong about all of this. If so, please feel free to ignore my ramblings. Carry on…
1 Like
Yeah it explains my idea well.
Actually animators help us give some idea how it maybe but it is only perceivable via mathematics and not Intuition.
Yes.
I think we as Newtonian creatures are bound to Newtonian mechanics that is the reason we can’t perceive higher dimensions.
It’s same like we can’t comprehend quantum realm only make a quantum computer out of it.
Rather than actually knowing how do things really behave at sub atomic realm.
Yeah anybody with intuition more than Newtonian brain is called a God and I don’t think humans can ever do that.
Even a mushroom trip can make it appear as ceiling and floor are merged or you in 4D but a real 4D creature would be unimaginable ,unthinkable.
First
Then
Then
Then
Then
Really?
I thought you like drawing multiple dimensions on paper and problem was solved.
How am I the author.
If you are willing to learn, I’m willing to teach. It seems you want to argue instead so I’ll leave you too it.
1 Like
Teach me what you want.
You don’t know me I don’t know you.
I tell you things.
You tell me things.
I am saying only one thing from start even now.
You can’t perceive higher dimensions with your mind.
I know you are dishonest as fuck:
That is lie sir. Retract that lie in your next post or I will block you. I don’t need to waste time on a liar.
1 Like
I am confused what I lied explain.
Did I changed my stand and said yes I can perceive highest dimensions with mind.
?
No I didn’t.
How am I dishonest.
Mostly you just ignore facts that are clearly stated and repeat the same bullshit opinion over and over as if it means anything, You can not see beyond your own assumptions.
2 Likes
Ok but I was answering his questions and I am reading others , wasn’t I saying just a same concept again and again.
And it was being misinterpreted for no reason.