Firstly, our perceptions of reality are shaped by the kinds of reality we live in and experience. Many of the dimensions shown below can be experienced by ourselves, as alpha beings. We might describe such people as being wise, learned knowledgeable, prescient, well-travelled, snd so forth.
 |
| The "Many Worlds Paradigm" of Multiverses |
Epsilon 8d - Here, an 8d being may randomly chose a point of origin when applying superpositionality and supertemporality. That is, by changing one's "initial conditions" one will most likely produce drastically different outcomes leading to more favorable optimal results. An 8d spacetime is one which integrates chaos theory with experientially determinative results using agency and reflection. This then will allow --> multilocality, multitemporal corporeal travel to explore, experiment and experience infinite regressive possibilities --> resulting in gaining "exterior" perspectives via experiential knowledge.
Ex. The same 8d child/adult may chose to be born to different parents, to live in different conditions, to experience different opportunities, localities, eras, etc.
By application, a living 3d alpha being may live on different continents, under differing cultures and religions, and with later applying these experiences to one's life and ministries, business or community leadership to help lead a community towards some preferred lifestyle. This is most common with military kids, refugees, or missionary kids as they experience goodness or duress, serenity or hardship. All experience can be leveraged to better one's life or help another as opportunities allow. Which is another reason we should always be sensitive to assisting and helping where we can.
Ex. Essentially a 9d being is actively creating a library of all possible beginnings with all possible results. This resembles the god-like being in Star Trek Next-Gen and the cable series Picard known as "Q". A diffident, albeit obsequious, being who taunts and questions, teases, and mocks Captain Picard's human efforts to guide his crew, humanity, and alien life forms, towards a better tomorrow.
 |
| Q's younger and older selves moving together through life events. |
 |
| Q whispering into Picard's ear as either devil or angel, Picard could never be sure. |
 |
| Picard always had the choice to listen while also choosing how to listen. Most times he never knew the end game. |
Let’s unravel the layers of existence that redefine reality. From Alpha's linear perception of time to the unfathomable Omega, where every conceivable reality exists.
Chapters00:00 Opening01:08 Time as a dimension04:28 Multiple time dimensions06:19 The next level of twin paradox08:10 α-Alpha (3D)09:55 β-Beta (4D)11:48 γ-Gamma (5D)14:21 δ-Delta (6D)16:44 ε-Epsilon (7D)19:41 λ-Lambda (8D)22:26 σ-Sigma (9D)24:51 ω-Omega (10D)26:21 The existential question
When we see a rope from large distance, we only observe it's one dimension that is the length. But any insect moving on that rope will also see other dimensions of the rope like its thickness. It will also observe the fine groves and roughness and circumference of the rope that could not be seen by a distant observer.If a person were living in a world of five dimensions then he would be able to play with time in different ways. He could move either in past or in future. It would also be possible for him to be present at different locations at the same time. He would be able to do many jobs or can have many hobbies at the same time. He could be a doctor, an engineer, a cricketer, a poet and anything else at the same time, as he has full control over the time dimension.
In the eleventh dimension everything imaginable or unimaginable is possible. In other words you can say, that there is nothing that cannot happen in the 11th dimension.According to M-Theory the smallest thing in the universe is not atoms, electron, higgs boson or quarks. The smallest thing is much smaller than all these subatomic particles. Actually the smallest thing in the universe is "Strings". You may think, why I am explaining the strings here? Actually strings vibrate in the eleventh dimension that we are going to discuss.Everything present in every universe of every dimension is made up of Strings. All the atoms, subatomic particles, muons, quarks, Higgs bosons are made up of Strings. You will be surprised to know that according to M theory, everything in the universe originated from the 11th dimension not from the first, second or third dimension.
To give you an Idea let's compare the size of a string with the size of an atom.If an atom were magnified, to the size of the whole observable Universe, then a String would only be the size of a tree!!!
The best way to understand dimensions is to start with smaller dimensions than three and work up very slowly so that the analogy is clear. An overage of detail is needed to eliminate confusion. Patience will pay off. Furthermore I hope to point out that a spatial version of Tarski’s undefinability exists in consideration of dimensions without any reference to formal set theory.
1) Creating a space to hold things and defining the relationships.
A zero dimensional object is called a point but a single dimensional “array” used to store it can have infinite points. The array is the actual "dimension" which contains the point objects. (an array in programming looks like this: arrayname[#]) Given that a point has no dimension and is not measurable, it is a bit misleading to insist that a collection of dimensionless points is somehow measurable. In fact, the relationship of the points to each other is utterly undefined until another dimension is defined. An infinite number of them could all be in the same place or they could be randomly arranged in some higher dimensional space. The point is that the dimension or array is a "space" which is kind of like an infinite set of containers. If a higher dimension does not exist, however, our concept of arrangement between them is something we add via imagination because of our concept of a linear arrangement of a number line that we label those boxes with, but that relationship cannot exist in a 1D reality. In a 1D reality there is no spacial relationship between points. Just like higher dimensions, our pre-conceived notions accidentally add things to lower dimensions as well. There’s no collision or direction because there’s no way to define a direction without something for the “line” to traverse. Therefore the following is visualization is misleading without higher dimensions. What it does convey is that we use sets of containers called arrays to store and label things like bits of empty space of whatever size we decide to use for a unit size.
Once the higher dimension is defined, however, (two dimensions) then the relationship of the points (places or bits of space) in that higher dimensional structure is also somewhat automatically defined by cartesian coordinate systems. Suddenly, because there is an external reference, measurability becomes more meaningful. If they were labelled in numerical order then they now exist in a line. There are also now unlimited number of possible locations along a line that a point can exist and the relationship between the points in this higher dimensional reality is numerically labelled in a two dimensional array. (arrayname[x][y]) This is to say that what we think of as lines, can now actually exist since there is some higher dimensional reference. Our labeled boxes for holding points may be labeled along x because that’s what we do for cartesian coordinates, but a general line can go across both x and y axis. The habit of cartesian coordinate systems adds something that isn’t really there for a 1D reality. Without that y axis, the “line”(or collection of bits of space) could be thought of as piled up in one place or tied in a knot and there’d be no way to differentiate because the relationship is undefined. It would all be imagination without that higher dimensional reality to contain and define it.
This means that going from one dimension to two defines a real structure which, filled or not, has unlimited "slots" for the lower dimension. To restate it, while unlimited number of points could have existed in the single dimensional structure before the extra dimension was added to view it from, no relationship between them could be clearly defined. IE The relationships of a dimensional structure we use to keep up with things, cannot have real relationships unless there is a (somewhat hidden or intimated) higher dimensional reality to view it from. We should think of the one dimensional array as the "space" of one dimension and while we might think of it as an infinite line, that straight structure called a line cannot exist without the next dimension. It is arbitrary that we would usually stuff the previous single dimension into the two-dimensional array at the bottom and lay in out orthogonal to the y axis. (arrayname[x] gets put into arrayname[x][0])
Consequently, once a second dimension is added, the "space" of two dimensions now exists whether or not you fill it with lower dimensional objects such as points. Or same-dimensional (2-dimensional) objects such as lines. (unlimited x and unlimited y) This additional dimension now allows us the very first "shape", a line, but it also simultaneously allows numerous lines to exist upon different axes.
A crucial digression on the borderline between dimensions: Above it looks as though I’ve called a line a 2-dimensional object by mistake. A line is conventionally considered a 1-dimensional object. I find this convention to be misleading because points are called zero dimensional. This is a little like timekeeping in that the spaces between divisions can cause a little oddness. So long as one has lives 10 years and 2 seconds that lifetime can span 3 different decades.
Within the conventional terminology, there is the acknowledgement that an arrangement of 0 dimensional objects is 1 dimensional but involves two dimensions. (0th and 1st)
When I called a line 2-dimensional, it was not my intent to confuse, but to bring to mind the reliance upon the second dimension for a line to be in any way line-like. It is crucial to understand this borderline between dimensions and keep it in mind when attempting to grasp the real meaning of dimensions.
Recapping: In the case of going from one dimension to two, simply adding one additional dimension not only defined relationships between 0th dimensional objects like points but also allowed for relationships between conventional two dimensional objects like triangles and one dimensional arrays (lines) can now be curved and have an additional relationship to themselves. We gained not only lines but other shapes such as triangles etc. This idea of additional new relationships between different parts of a line is an important concept moving forward.
Let’s simplify for a moment and just consider dimensions without all the requirements and dependencies and in-between things.
If we intend to extend from dimension to dimension in a way that makes sense, then we can use our first concept of the first dimensional space as an infinite number of points leading to an infinite length straight line as one dimensional space to see that an infinite stack of these lines creates the second dimensional space.
EG: Think of making a line along the very bottom of a page from tiny points and knowing you can do this forever on a page that has no side edge. Now think of making the next line on top of this one and the next on top of that etc. You know you can keep doing this forever and you have now described an infinite plane or two dimensions. (bear with me, while obvious, you'll want to hold this idea in your head for going from the third dimension to the fourth)
This infinite stack which is called two dimensions can now also be stacked. Though two-dimensional space is an infinite plane, sometimes it's easier to conceive of as a sheet of paper. With this concept it becomes easy to think of a stack of paper that can be infinite.
We now have infinite points stacked into an infinite line for the first dimension, infinite lines stacked into an infinite sheet for the second dimension, infinite sheets stacked into an infinite cube for the third dimension. (and you're seeing where this is going)
What we must now realize is, that upon adding a second dimension, it became easier of us to think of a whole universe that is 2-dimensional. An infinite plane is a two dimensional universe and the infinite cube is a 3-dimensional universe.
Just like when we added the second dimension we created a new form of relationship between one-dimensional objects, upon adding a third dimension we have created a new form of relationships between two dimensional objects. Previously with only one dimension we had only one line constrained to be in a stack but then with the second dimension there could be multiple lines with multiple relationships.
When there were only two dimensions there was only a single sheet constrained to be in a plane. Upon adding a third dimension multiple sheets could exist with not only relationships to each other but with relationships to themselves. IE A sheet not only has a rotational orientation but it can now be curved back upon itself.
If we now add a fourth dimension we have created a space with room for infinite three dimensional universes. Consequently we have now also created new relationships between these three dimensional universes such that they can have an orientation and additional relationship to each other. They can now be curved back upon themselves.
This idea of creating an infinite set of sets (adding another dimension) continuously allows new types of relationships to appear (or be defined) with each additional dimension added. An additional dimension allows a set to be bent back upon itself.
Simplifying the 4th dimension.
Given that time is conjoined with space in special relativity, there are some strange conventions that have to be employed to represent rearrangements of the 4th dimension, so lets just start with collapsing spatial dimensions.
We can think of a 2D plane at a sheet of paper with it’s various points and shapes being swept down to the bottom of the page and squashed flat along the bottom line and we’ve compressed 2D into 1D. We can think of doing this for a whole stack of papers and we’ve compressed 3D into 2D.
Now it is crucial to note that when we think of a 3D universe we are thinking of a single moment in time and therefore the universe we think of is already 4D. A 3D array can only hold the information for one single moment of time and would require a 4th dimension to store all the copies of the universe that exist moment after moment.
So, now with our 3D universe compressed to a sheet, we can stack these sheets together to represent a 4D universe. Just like a sheet shape within a 3D plane is not constrained to one axis, we can now define a moment as a slice through that 4D (multiple compressed 3D) universe.
So far this is all pretty easy until we add relativity.
Now, however, upon adding relativity there is a requirement of a 5th dimension.
This is not apparent in the video above, but before relativity the universe was already 4D. A single moment was 3D and there were multiple moments. Upon adding relativity, however, a single moment is fundamentally 4D. One cannot speak about space without mentioning time. Location is dependent upon time.
What this means for the discussion in the video above is that the “loaf” of spacetime they show is only one possible configuration of all the moments. Modern interpretations of relativity state that there is no preferred frame of reference therefore entirely different versions of that loaf are equally valid as the one presented.
When we consider the alien on the bike and the man on the park bench we think of them as definitely directly across spacetime from each other. This relationship, however, cannot be established since another frame’s idea of simultaneous would place them at an angle to one another across the loaf in one direction while another would place them at the opposite angle.
That is to say, there are multiple valid arrangements of the loaf such that if we consider forward time to be x, in one case the alien starts out in front of the man on the bench (further along x) and in another valid arrangement, the man on the bench is in front.
So if we try to think of being simultaneous with another location’s future, how do we determine where the starting point to move forward from is? The relationship is undefined. If there is no singular true and valid arrangement we are actually slicing from then another dimension is required to store all the various but valid alternative configurations of our 4D loaf of the universe.
To cut across a 4D universe a 5th dimension must be added just like to have a line, a second dimension must be added.
Godel and mutual dependencies.
This problem above is an expression of Godel incompleteness and Tarski’s undefinability in yet another form. There are many structures such as lines that we do not think of as actually a comparison or interaction between things and we therefore lose sight of the need for another “thing” to compare or interact with.
Imagine if there was nothing in the universe but two people. Each can say of the other “you are above me” and they might both be considered correct or incorrect because the answer is undefined without an external reference.
What we think of as a river cannot exist if we remove the water. That’s just a dry depression. It cannot exist as water alone. That could be a cloud or an ocean. It is only by the interaction of the water and the depression that a river arises.
There are many instances in which we metaphorically attempt to keep the concept of a river while removing one of the components it is made of. This leads to various problems in logic and attempts to make judgement about things which are undefined.
