12-15-09, Jennifer wrote: A few months back, a rather intense conversation waged among some of the staff about the "truths" of the Mardi Gras 3000 universe. The MG3K mythology took some things as fact that, in truth, have been dis-proven by science beyond a doubt.
In the end, it was decided that (much like many of the complex universes found in best-selling fiction today) the MG3K universe was an alternate history. This means that there may be subtle differences, factual differences, in our actual universe and that of MG3K. What these differences are, is decided on a case-by-case basis between the writers and Cris (as the Senior Editor), though I hope, some day, that a comprehensive list of differences might be posted here.
I'm actually not sure what got me going on that train of thought (LOL!) but here's the true reason for my post:
In the December 2009 issue of
National Geographic there was a featured article about the continued search for and study of Earth-like planets, there was an incredible, huge pull-out map of a segment of our galaxy (does anyone need an explanation of the differences between solar system, galaxy, and universe? Just let me know, okay?) with a gorgeous and very concise layering graphic to show the multi-dimensional depth of our universe.
In other worlds, it was a perfect example of how our universe is not an expanse on a single layer like a plate but rather a full, three dimensional map. Looking at this graphic it was also so very easy to comprehend a fourth dimension.
Now, I remember that we all decided that Hom is not in another dimension, per say, but rather simply a planet in our own. But how interesting is the idea that Hom might actually be the fourth dimension of a three dimensional planet in our universe?
Since we have decided that the MG3K universe is an alternate history... perhaps the scientists in the MG3K universe have mapped their universe beyond three dimensions?
(Look at that. I came full circle!)
Jennifer continued: I will post a picture of the basic graphic (it isn't available online, only in the print issue) that shows the simplest explanation of the three-dimensional nature of our universe. I'll also include a more complex image. Stars and planets do not just exist on our plane of space but rather wrap below, above and all around us. We tend to think of space as a plane (meaning, a flat surface, not a jet) because we imagine those models of the solar system we made in school
In case anyone is wary about a conversation where I seem to imply that four dimensions is scientific fact, please review Young's Experiment where the duality of light and its interaction with the universe (what we can see and what we cannot see) is beautifully illustrated. I'm sure that Terrapyres consider 99% of quantum mechanics to be scripture
12-16-09 Summer responded: Layman's term is the "double-slit" experiment (which most of us probably are, though Jennifer, you are not) and here's a link to the innocents out there lurking:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experimentThe incredible possibilities of this phenomenon is that it speaks both to the existence of additional dimensions and to probability waves within Chaos Theory.
Just when we think we know something or someone, the higher the chances are that something utterly unexpected will occur.
Summer
12-16-09, Jennifer respondedDec 16, 2009, 7:40am, Sunshine wrote:
Just when we think we know something or someone, the higher the chances are that something utterly unexpected will occur.
Every important truth in all the world, proven in mathematics
Thank you for the compliment, Summer, and for posting the link. I pulled out a book that has a great layman's description of what Young's Experiment proves and doesn't prove and I'll add that this week for viewing pleasure. I remember being blown away when I first really "got it."
Hm. The mysteries of the universe... not so mysterious. "The simplest proof is most often the correct one."
I found the wonderful description (my first exposure to the experiment) of Young's Experiment late last night and looked around for a way to link everyone to images of the book's pages as there are some great charts but this doesn't seem to exist on the web (other images and examples, yes, but not the ones in the original book). So here goes a simple explanation. I think this will be helpful for all since, in the words of Niels Bohr, "Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory, does not understand it." Here's in favor of everyone being shocked
You have a piece of cardboard. You cut a coin-slot type slit in the cardboard. You shine a light from one side through the slot. The light shines through the slot onto a nearby wall and makes a single line, relatively slot-shaped. Yay.
You cut a second slot. You shine your light. Two slot-shaped images appear on the wall, right? Nope. You'll see a series of light and dark bars. Hey, but that makes sense, right? Because light is a wave. And waves expand. Waves crash over each other and disrupt each other.
Um... nope again. Light as a wave (like a sound wave) is a 19th century belief. Einstein showed that light was made not of waves, per say, but of cascades of photons. So overlapping, disrupting waves no longer explains the two slots producing a series of light and dark bars.
What does explain this series is the duality of quantum physics. Let's continue:
Now cut two more slots in the cardboard. You have four slots now. More lines of light and dark appear? Go ahead and guess my answer. If you guess, "Nope" then you're right If you add four slots, the number of bars of light and dark actually *decreases.* And this decrease continues the more slots you add. The photons of light actually begin to cancel each other out.
Consider that. Light canceling out light.
Let's continue:
Since there are billions upon billions of photons in a beam of light, it makes perfect sense that these photons would interfere with each other sometimes. But what if we shone a light that was only one single itty bitty photon? The faintest of faint lights that could only be detected by ultra-sensitive computer sensors. We should be able to shine the light on the cardboard with the slots and the light cast on the wall would be just one bar of light for every slot -- because there's no canceling interference from other photons. Right? Following?
Yet, this experiment has been done. And guess what? The wall showed bars of light just like a billion photon cascade. In other words: The photons themselves are *not* what's causing the interference. And yet... *only* photons can cause this specific type of interference. So what has science illustrated with this experiment?
That photons cross between visual dimensions and interact with other photons invisible to our 2D-conceiving eyes (remember, our eyes only see in 2D -- it's only our brain that translates the 2D images into 3D to match the reality of our world as we know it) that exist on higher dimensions. Really exist. Solid and true existence. Real photons from a higher dimension, really interacting with our real world.
How does all of this relate to MG3K? The very nature of Celestials and what they can and can't do is governed by quantum mechanics. The idea that we, as 3D creatures, can draw a circle in the dirt and then place a stone inside the circle or lift a stone out of the circle without disrupting the circle in any way, is the same exponentially as what a Celestial can do.
As a 4D creature, a Celestial (even on Earth, can reach inside a 3D dimensional creature or object, and lift something in or out of that 3D entity without harming the 3D surface or structure -- without even touching it at all really.
Yes, I know we've created Celestials as beings with a fourth dimension that manifests as emotion. In part, yes. But a four dimensional creature is also just that. Four dimensional. They have an extra *physical* measurement. Height, depth, width... and ?? We have come to call this extra dimension resonance. And that certainly works as long as we remember that in order to stay factual to the truths of mathematics, the resonance of Celestials must be a truly *physical* measurement. It adds mass and has substance. In short (to be blunt):
If I am a Celestial, and I reach out and touch my lover's face, all four of my dimensions shift to reach him, and the touch of my hand on his cheek has width, depth, height, and resonance, all of which are experienced physically.
As our universe (meaning our cosmos) has proven to support multiple dimensions, so must our Celestials follow the general rules of scientific proof. Example:
A Terrapyre throws a carrot at a Celestial. The carrot misses but it passes very close to the Celestial and seems to blink out of existence for a moment before reappearing just past the Celestial traveling on a different trajectory.
Props (and an animated gif of a star) to the forum member who can tell me why this would be
12-17-09 Summer responded:A Terrapyre throws a carrot at a Celestial. The carrot misses but it passes very close to the Celestial and seems to blink out of existence for a moment before reappearing just past the Celestial traveling on a different trajectory.
Props (and an animated gif of a star) to the forum member who can tell me why this would be
As the carrot passes close to the Celestial (or even appears [to a 2D eye in a 3D Terrapyre] to pass through) the carrot might move through the fourth dimensional aspect of the Celestial and so, since the Terrapyre eye cannot perceive the fourth dimension, the carrot, surrounded by fourth dimensional photons would appear to disappear for a fraction of time. During this moment, the carrot could be effected by the fourth dimensional aspect and so its trajectory might be changed completely.
Where's my star, Professor?
;-}
Summer
Summer continued: Our universe shown above as a cube (three dimensions). Taken out to a logical conclusion:
12-17-09, Cris wrote: In layman's terms, the carrot pings off some random Celestial hair extension, appears to disappear behind said hair extension and then reappears moving in a different direction due to the aforementioned collision.
Where's
my star professor?
12-17-09 Jennifer wrote: You're both correct
Here's your fabulous reward
12-18-09 Launa wrote, Okay... and the layman tentatively places a toe in the water to ask a few questions (Don't worry, she isn't afraid of being schooled):
How big would this field around the Celestial be, then, and is it large enough that a Celestial might (mentally perhaps? Or if the object flies close enough to a hand?) manipulate the object? I realize that the object is reacting to 4D material that a human or Terrapyre can not physically see, but the Celestial is kind of contained on Earth, yes? Since they are physically manifesting in a 3D environment? So how far does their influence on our dimension radiate?
In example, a knife is thrown. It disappears. But then seems to be flying right back at the Terrapyre. Is this possible?
In this same vein, could a Celestial use this science to steal something or hide something?
Also... If we're talking about Hom as the fourth dimension of a planet already in our universe that is not Earth... could the Celestials shift back and forth into the fourth dimension of the planet that is Earth? For protection, perhaps? Or maybe that is where the Outposts truly exist? If so, what is this planet like?
12-18-09 Cris wroteHow big would this field around the Celestial be, then, and is it large enough that a Celestial might (mentally perhaps? Or if the object flies close enough to a hand?) manipulate the object? I realize that the object is reacting to 4D material that a human or Terrapyre can not physically see, but the Celestial is kind of contained on Earth, yes? Since they are physically manifesting in a 3D environment? So how far does their influence on our dimension radiate?
In example, a knife is thrown. It disappears. But then seems to be flying right back at the Terrapyre. Is this possible?
In this same vein, could a Celestial use this science to steal something or hide something?
Also... If we're talking about Hom as the fourth dimension of a planet already in our universe that is not Earth... could the Celestials shift back and forth into the fourth dimension of the planet that is Earth? For protection, perhaps? Or maybe that is where the Outposts truly exist? If so, what is this planet like?
Let me answer which parts of this I can:
First, the fourth dimension exists everywhere in the universe at the same time. The fourth dimension on Earth is the same as the fourth dimension on
Hom. There is not a separate fourth dimension where Hom appears. There are, most likely, billions of worlds in other dimensions. Humans, in our present evolution, cannot see or interact with them.
We are not able to interpret the fourth dimension with our 3D eyes.
Our brains can conceptualize the fourth dimension, but we can't "see" it.
The way we've been talking about
Hom is inaccurate and Jennifer's discussion is the way that we're going to clarify how we think about the Celestials and
Hom and how we talk about them.
Second, yes, a knife could seem to disappear and then reappear coming back at a Terrapyre. Yes, the fourth dimension could be used to hide or steal. It is my understanding that this is how
pok work.
Pok are accessible from the third dimension, but hold weapons that are hidden in the fourth dimension.
There is a mathematical formula which will tell us the exact area of influence that exists around any given Celestial. Jennifer will explain and/or provide more details on that in her own post.
Third, Celestials are not "contained" by our dimension, anymore than we are "contained" by two dimensions. Picture this: Draw a circle on the ground. Place a stone in the circle. Can you lift the stone out of the circle without disturbing the boundary of the circle? Yes you can. You can lift it "up." To a 2D creature, the stone would seem to disappear.
A 2D creature might be able to comprehend the third dimension, but cannot experience it. In this same way, a Human or Terrapyre can comprehend the Celestial's mass which exists in the fourth dimension, but cannot experience it. He cannot reach into the fourth dimension, grab the knife and prevent the Celestial from adjusting its trajectory, but he can see the result--the knife coming back at him. Just as the 2D creature can see that the stone is now gone.
Celestials exist in three dimensions *AND* in the fourth dimension. They have additional mass in this dimension that Humans and Terrapyres cannot perceive because our eyes and brains aren't set up for that.
In terms of where Outposts exist, yes, they exist in *Earth's* fourth dimension--which we cannot see. Just as the stone seems to disappear from the center of the circle, Celestials seem to disappear when they step into the fourth dimension, in to their Outposts. To other beings who can perceive the fourth dimension, they're simply moving across the room. The three dimensional creatures, they seem to disappear.
Hope this helps.
Cris
12-18-09 Launa wrote: Thank you, Cris. This helped clarify a few things, yes. I think my conceptual problem is simply that I see the circle in the sand analogy too literally. I imagine for a Celestial it's like us walking around a circle the size of the planet, kicking at physical shadows that are the same width as we are (If the 2D creature is the same "size" as we are, of course. Since the 2nd dimension is layered on ours, it has the same length and width as our dimension, yes? We just have the extra dimension, height. In the same vein the fourth dimension has the same length, width and height of our dimension just with that extra 4D something.)
Here's my question, then (I'm so sorry if this is just a "the girl can't comprehend what's right in front of her face" thing. I'm not trying to be annoying )
The fourth dimension is everywhere, yes. But, as you said, we as 3D creatures can not physically see it or manipulate it or interact with it. What gives the Celestials the power, then, to transcend this barrier and be physically, actively present? We can not see the Outposts or the plants that may be right where we are standing, not even a 3D manifestation of them because they are 4D and we are not, but we could see the Celestial (though, no, not their fourth dimension) and they could grab us with their hands and snap our necks. Big-time interacting.
Going back to my analogy of walking through the circle, interacting with physical 2D shadows, the shadow would see the lines that make the bottoms of my feet (obviously not my height or even my width, as they would see one-dimensionally) so leaving the second dimension for our dimension would be like hopping up on a floating platform over the circle (Only not... because we aren't leaving the 2nd dimension for the third as they are not separate)
I know in my analogy Celestials descending to the third dimension would be as easy as hopping off the platform, but in real life we can't just descend into the 2nd dimension to interact with it like pulling a rock out of a circle.
Or can we? Are there just no two dimensional creatures so I have no point of reference? Perhaps I'm just having a problem conceptualizing that Celestials see all 3D things all the time as well as all 4D? And if so... are things really just 3D or just 4D or does everything have multiple dimensions, our minds are just limited to interpreting what we see (like, our minds are what are 3D, not necessarily ourselves). Though... that wouldn't really work in MG3K, huh?
:{
...I really hope that made some kind of sense. Thank you for being so patient with me.
12-19-09 Jennifer wrote: You're both making sense Let me jump in. First, like Cris, I'll share some facts (albeit different facts):
1. Everything has infinite dimensions. That is science fact --not science fiction.
2. No creature has ever been proven to have fewer than infinite dimensions.
3. Outposts and poks are hidden by Celestial biotechnology that fold space-time, not because Outposts and poks are four dimensional.
The whole progression line where the dot (0d) becomes the line (1d) becomes the square (2d) becomes the cube (3d) becomes the hypercube (4d) and so on, was "invented" by Edwin Abbott Abbott. It was not truth, not science fact. It is simply an analogy that is meant to illustrate (to help us visualize) what "dimension" is.
Look at the corner of a room. A corner where the ceiling and two walls meet. See the three distinct lines that meet there? Those represent three dimensions. Now imagine a fourth line meeting them at the same point but that could not be contained/restrained within the three dimensions we already see. That is the fourth dimension.
Right now, sitting in the dark at my XPS, wrapped in my wool shawl, with my dozens of braids and my sniffly nose, I am a four dimensional being.
We all are.
The fourth dimension is not a parallel universe. It is not an impression, repeat or mirror of the third dimension. It is not a dimension like we see in science fiction -- the demon dimension! The heaven dimension! The dimension where H. Clinton was elected president! Dimension, the science fact, is simply, and only, a direction just like height, width, and length.
Let me find the best graphic. BRB
12-19-09 Jennifer continued: Okay. I just went back and re-read what Cris wrote. She promised I would supply the formula for determining the mass of a 4d thing when all we can perceive is its 3d component. I think she is probably testing me
This is actually very, very easy. We can all sit around and be touchy-feely and say: The fourth dimension is time. The fourth dimension is emotion. The fourth dimension is granola.
But the truth is, in mathematics, which, as you know, rules the cosmos because God made them more perfect than pie (and far less fattening), dimension means orthogonal, a manifestation of direction and physicality. Each orthogonal (each dimension) is 90 degrees away from the previous one.
Each higher dimension is orthogonal to the lower dimension just before it. A line is one dimension --> a square is two dimensions -->a cube is three dimensions. The square has two lines that are 90 degrees off of the original line. The cube has sides that are 90 degrees off the square. Etc.
A graphic that explains this:
Now, the limitation here, of course, is that we're drawing these flat (you know, on pretty much 2d paper) so we're not truly orthogonal at all. But I think we should all grasp this now, yes?
Really, though we talk about Calder and Stross here quite a bit, it's Pickover that has the corner on dimension. (Disclaimer: Calder and Pickover -- as authors with personal/published politics that do *not* mesh with MG3K -- are not being endorsed by MG3K or by me. I am simply giving props where they are due. If someone would like the exact titles I'm referring to -- the ones I'm suggesting for further exploration -- please just ask and I'll post.)
Launa? Cris? Does this all help? Other questions?
Here's your fabulous reward 
