

Visualizing up to 10 dimensions - bradgessler
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/08/18/visualizing-up-to-te.html

======
jerf
No, no, no. This blasted video (which just won't stay down) is _anti-_
knowledge. It leaves the viewer with the satisfied feeling that they
understand something deep and profound, while actually leaving them _less_
informed about mathematics and physics simultaneously, in that it builds in
resistance to the actually true and correct ideas. This has no value
whatsoever, not even to attract people to the field, since the field it is
espousing does not exist. In fact, it has less than no value. It is one of the
most pernicious memes of this type I have ever seen.

Watch this video, if only so you know what sort of total bullshit you need to
watch out for if you try to learn about _real_ physics or math. See that
feeling it gives you, that feeling of understanding? Train yourself to run
from it, because it's _wrong_.

~~~
bradgessler
Can you post a link to some research that conclusively proves string theory
being completely, totally wrong? If not, then let string theory stand as a
hypothesis, but don't totally dismiss it (or dismiss it, you may or may not be
wrong).

Also, if you think somebody is going to take a 10 minute web video as the
answer to the universe (everybody knows it 42) and a substitute for an ungodly
amount of science, research, and knowledge then you have mistaken.

~~~
jerf
The only thing that video has to do with string theory is that it contains the
words "string theory". Go read "The Elegant Universe" instead. (Don't watch
the PBS series, _read_ the book. It's not the be-all, end-all of string
theory, but it's actual knowledge, not anti-knowledge.)

Criticizing this video is not criticizing string theory; this video would be
vastly improved if it actually contained any sort of truth about string
theory.

Being short is not an excuse for being grotesquely wrong. Not simplified,
which has its place, but _wrong_.

------
diiq
Aww, man. I am disappointed.

It completely ignores the important distinction between a temporal dimension
and a spatial one; you might claim this little lie acceptable for pedagogical
purposes, but to claim any isomorphism between this and the dimensions of
string theory is balderdash.

------
jacobolus
A mathematician and a physicist are sitting next to each-other in a lecture
about 11-dimensional space. The physicist scrunches up his nose, tilts his
head to one side, and generally appears confused, while the mathematician
smiles and nods as the lecturer writes equations on a blackboard. At some
point, the physicist turns to the mathematician and asks, “How can you
possibly follow this? I can’t visualize more than 3 or maybe 4 dimensions!” To
which, the mathematician replies “Oh, it’s easy. Just visualize n dimensions,
and then set n = 11.”

------
yan
FYI, the 2D people "Flatlanders" thought exercise the video is using comes
from one of the first sort of sci-fi books "Flatland" by Edwin Abbott Abbott
[1]

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland>

~~~
sketerpot
Before I read Flatland, I had never seen a book which combines Victorian
social satire with mathematical pedagogy.

~~~
blogimus
For that matter, have you seen a book after that combines Victorian social
satire with mathematical pedagogy?

------
Vitaly
the mix of the time, space, and 'possibility' dimentions is completely
arbitrary and is not explained at all. There might as well just be 10
_spacial_ dimensions, which this video doesn't help to visualize at all.

~~~
nopassrecover
Well as I understood it the video highlighted that higher dimensions were
about quantum implications (different possible universes) rather than anything
_spacial_.

~~~
diiq
It is important to understand that the many-worlds interpretation makes no
claims about _where_ those worlds exist. The video _proposes_ a heirarchical
order to the universes --- a metaphysical filing cabinet. It labels them; it
does not aid in their visualization.

[Note that all ten of string theory's dimensions would need to be _reproduced_
in each alternate universe --- not the other way around.]

------
Zarathu
How many times is this going to appear on the front page of social bookmarking
sites?

Old.

~~~
calcnerd256
Not just old; old and bad.

~~~
eru
As science it is bad. As a narrative (and flash video) it is not too bad.
Though it should be treated like fiction and be seen on the same level as
Scientology cosmology.

~~~
calcnerd256
I think the problem then is that everything around it presents it as science
fact (to those who don't know better).

------
kqr2
Direct link to flash video:

<http://revver.com/video/99898/imagining-the-tenth-dimension/>

------
joubert
Isn't string theory unscientific?

~~~
ntownsend
Yes and no. There are currently no known ways to verify it epxerimentally,
but, on the other hand, the theory has recently used to explain high-
temperature superconductivity:
[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090706113702.ht...](http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090706113702.htm)

~~~
eru
And this video has nothing to do with string theory.

~~~
ntownsend
Agreed.

------
rincewind
this sounds a bit like timecube

