Heavy Science. Time Travel.

pepe

Celestial
Natures conjuring trick or the dual slot experiment shows there are certain behaviours we are not permitted to witness.

Some would say we are not yet able to comprehend but it feels more terminal to me.

Individual atoms when propelled toward a one slot screen up front behave themselves and give predicted results on a rear screen. Indicated as a glow in one spot.

Duplicate the slot and repeat. Now it would seem the atoms have conspired to create a wave like pattern on the rear screen. Brightest part being centre. Diffraction into account it was obvious that some had reached points not possible.

Apparatus where used in order to detect which slot each individual one was passing through. None got passed the first screen. What was expected was to see each to go through both at the same time and interact on the flip side, giving reason to where they ended up. Two places in the same moment.

No dice.
 
Last edited:

humanoidlord

ce3 researcher
We don't know that, we haven't the slightest idea what that even means Thomas. I'll bet there's maybe 5 or 6 people on this forum that have any idea what that means. You're provoking the responses that you are seeing as piled on attacks because you're making whole sale claims which are only based on theoretical constructs which are not understood and not even explained with any meaning at all!

I asked you to describe space, figuring you could do that in a meaningful way according to what this metric theory of space is, and so that you could give us an image of what this "Metric" is supposed to look like. I didn't get any meaningful answer so I will do it and you can correct or expand upon this. * Note, I'm giving you plenty of room here to correct/expand/ect.

Now, is it not the truth that in reality metric theories of space are factually nothing more than an arbitrary mathematical model describing space as an interconnected lattice of tetrahedron shape's? However, my question is then why would this be necessary: Why an interconnected lattice work of space in tetrahedron shapes?

So you see first you have describe metrics in a visual format so that people have that image in their mind. Then you have describe why it's is this image. The you have to explain the origins of this idea as being derived from geometry, and hence the reason for the word metric is that it is derived from a geometric description of space?

Now I'm sorry you have to do this because I know this isn't your fault specifically. This is the fault of idiots destroying meaning with the English Language with Gibbonics, or monkey speak, because it's not metrics is it? It's the geometry of space that's being assigned a mathematical model, and so why is that necessary; so that we can possibly predict behavior of energy in space and so forth right? All good and fine, but now how in holy hell did it end up being a fricking tetrahedron shape? That's something I'd like to know. Is it because space is primarily composed of hydrogen and helium?

I don't know why it's so difficult for science idiots to grasp simple communication concepts but they do have a hell of time trying to explain things so that ordinary people can understand what in the hell they are blathering about.

Which by the way, you know how much freaking time and energy it took me to just get enough understanding of what space metrics was so that I myself could visualize it, and just so that I could then give a description of what this jabbering monkey speak was all about? Metric of space?

What the hell is so damn hard that any science major can't describe space metrics in a visual format? Christ it's like trying to break the Japanese Purple Code or some shit. Only to find that these assholes have been describing the geometry of space using half the descriptive linguistics normally associated the meaning of the word geometric, and evidently figuring that as a mathematical model of space it made economical sense to rob half the letters of the descriptive meaning of geometric, figuring in some perverted concept that this then somehow implied it was mathematical!

Contemporary science has only it's self to blame for the back lash it's getting. Nobody want's to waste time and that's what this shit is: It's time wasting by a bunch of idiots who have been free wheeling with creative linguistics and inventing words to describe what's already conventionally understood as something completely un~associated. I think that to most people if you said metrics they would think of a measuring stick, like say a yard stick or a metric meter, and probably not of a mathematical model of a geometric form, which btw is not even mentioned what it hell that might be: A complete mystery needlessly created by idiot savants who have no business creating new words, let alone evidently trying to explain what these words supposedly refer to. Now I don't know about anyone else but that's not my idea of precision which I think is a goal of science generally speaking.

Don't challenge me on this because I'll just bet that if I pull out my 1970 or 1936 dictionary that's over a foot thick there's not a mention of the word metric except as a form of measure.


So now that we have finally understood that the metrics of space is a mathematical model a damned tetrahedron, which isn't yet explained, we can move to why it is so is due to Quantum Theory, and in which it says that this now defined geometry of space is seeded with oscillating mass~less Higgs particles, oscillating along a chiral tetrahedral vacuum lattice, and oh yes, BTW, this lattice is made up of tetrahedron shapes. Chiral we can get in to latter as yet more nonsensical invented hyper~crank head science speak.

Further, according to this quasi~science of so called quantum physics, this then explains gravity by means of the ability to transfer Photon and Graviton information in bunches of oscillations, and which move through the vacuum lattice with the local (mass related) speed of light. How, precisely this explains gravity I have not yet determined myself, but assume it has something to do with dissymmetry of movement.
in the end we can only arrive at one explanation: the universe is a simulation
and the fact the universe is composed of shapes is proof of that just like entertainiment is composed of pixels
 

humanoidlord

ce3 researcher
Man, you're really cursing up a storm in this post Gambeir - chill out buddy, we're only debating physics here, not something really nasty like American politics.

Sorry about the terminology but when you read a bunch of academic papers all the time, the nomenclature becomes habitual because that's how physicists most readily specify what they're talking about. The term "metric curvature" is used to refer to the spacetime metric which is "flat" (i.e., Euclidean, with space and time at right angles to each other) in the absence of matter, and curved in the presence of matter (or energy, that works too because they're equivalent). Physicists say "metric" because relativity is generalized: it doesn't matter what kind of geometry you're using, as long as the angle between space and time is correct for any given situation. Sometimes using the polar coordinate system is most efficacious for studying a given scenario, for example, but the choice of coordinate system is arbitrary.

I don't know where you got this tetrahedral idea; there is no preferred geometric description of spacetime. Any coordinate system will do just fine as long as it's self-consistent and it obeys the correct space and time deformations when calculating relative velocities and gravitational fields. It's good to bear this in mind when thinking about relativity, because it's not a theory of spacetime structure, it's a theory (or rather, theories) of spacetime geometry, and any convenient and applicable geometry will do.


No it's definitely expanding - if it weren't expanding, then we'd need a new and logical explanation for the cosmological redshift that we observe, and frankly nobody sees any theoretical or observational motivation to come up with an alternative explanation because the Hubble expansion looks 100% legit.

We only know of two physical mechanisms for redshift: receding velocities, and gravitational redshift. And since it makes no sense that galaxies of the same size would have stronger gravitational fields at greater distances (and no corollary gravitational lensing effects are observed), then it has to be a receding velocity causing the redshifting, which is greater at greater distances, i.e., the universe is expanding, and the rate of recession is greater as the distance is greater.

I skipped a bunch of posts but I'll have to get back to them when I have more time.

Meanwhile - Gambeir and spacecase0, you guys really need to become acquainted with this excellent review paper; it will answer all of your questions about the experimental and theoretical status of general relativity, and it specifically explains why we're so confident that curved spacetime models are the only possible answer to the observations we've made over the past century:

“The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment,” Clifford M. Will, 2014
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.7377.pdf


We did a podcast about this paper here, if you'd rather listen than read about it:

Post-Newtonian Gravitation | Free Podcasts | PodOmatic"
thx for explaining
 

Gambeir

Celestial
Mass Cancellation.

So see if I have this right;
The idea here in the mass cancellation tests proposed by Harold Puthoff and Davis in Austin is that according to Quantum Theory, by using photonic crystals (presumably left handed ones) enable Quantum Theory, and in which it says that the geometry of space is seeded with oscillating mass~less Higgs particles, oscillating along a chiral lattice in the vacuum. Thus, if excited by Tera Hertz frequencies, the speed of the photonic crystals oscillations should change, and which should alter the relative mass of the material.

I have a theory that in an indirect way. Extreme temperatures could be used to focus and tune space-time. I believe it's possible that the Bose-Einstein condensate under the right conditions. Bose–Einstein condensate - Wikipedia could trigger a black hole, Within a certain critical density. By this reasoning, since extreme cold can affect density, at the very least it can indirectly affect Time. at least relative to the mass affected by the condensate. The Exotic material we need to properly bend space-time Would have to be a metamaterial that creates condensate when it's accelerated. Or at the very least, A metamaterial that can hold the condensed state for a longer period of time.

Obviously, I agree completely it's just that I don't think too many others, if any, have considered temperatures as a form of frequency focusing. Dialing in as it were. Good insight btw. I would have said brilliant but for fear you would accuse me of calling you crazy. :)

Well, let's assume for the sake of argument that the photonic metamaterial now undergoing analysis by doctors Puthoff and Davis in Austin, does in fact lose a measurable magnitude of mass under activation with THz radiation. In that case, we're going to learn about a heretofore unknown coupling mechanism between quantum field theory and gravitation. A rigorous theoretical analysis of such findings should provide the key to a unified field theory, and throw open the door to a gravitational field technology.

Naturally, I'm extremely excited to hear about their findings - because once we have a quantified and qualified experimental result to examine in detail, we won't have to guess about the nature of this pivotal coupling mechanism; we'll be able to reproduce and manipulate it as we desire via the theoretical framework that will emerge.

I don't know anything about the proposed test but even if the test's seem to fail, I personally would have to examine the set~up before dismissing the idea. So if there's any images showing their proposed arrangement for this experiment then I'd like to see those, and the reason is that the cartography of space is modeled as a lattice. While the cartography of gravity is not necessarily that of space. Rather it is very likely that of a tetrahedron.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
Mass Cancellation.

So see if I have this right;
The idea here in the mass cancellation tests proposed by Harold Puthoff and Davis in Austin is that according to Quantum Theory, by using photonic crystals (presumably left handed ones) enable Quantum Theory, and in which it says that the geometry of space is seeded with oscillating mass~less Higgs particles, oscillating along a chiral lattice in the vacuum. Thus, if excited by Tera Hertz frequencies, the speed of the photonic crystals oscillations should change, and which should alter the relative mass of the material.



Obviously, I agree completely it's just that I don't think too many others, if any, have considered temperatures as a form of frequency focusing. Dialing in as it were. Good insight btw. I would have said brilliant but for fear you would accuse me of calling you crazy. :)



I don't know anything about the proposed test but even if the test's seem to fail, I personally would have to examine the set~up before dismissing the idea. So if there's any images showing their proposed arrangement for this experiment then I'd like to see those, and the reason is that the cartography of space is modeled as a lattice. While the cartography of gravity is not necessarily that of space. Rather it is very likely that of a tetrahedron.
Thanks bro, I appreciate it, I obsess over time :) People can probably tell :p
 

Gambeir

Celestial
thats a crank site, right at the banner it has a image of the norway spiral wich was a proven missile launch failure, there were many similar accidents since them

Sometimes you see and sometimes you don't. It's true for everyone. I prize the times I can see with both eyes and not just one. Do not become distracted by insanity but find the creative unseen genius in madness.

I posted the image for a specific reason. You have the ability: I know because I've seen you demonstrate it.
 

humanoidlord

ce3 researcher
Sometimes you see and sometimes you don't. It's true for everyone. I prize the times I can see with both eyes and not just one. Do not become distracted by insanity but find the creative unseen genius in madness.

I posted the image for a specific reason. You have the ability: I know because I've seen you demonstrate it.
i don't deny that the universe may have a specific geometry, i just posted that to warn others about the site
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
The geometry of space As I know it, isn't as simple as a shape you can produce in the second dimension, I think someone mentioned the calabi Yau manifold before?
calabi-spin.gif


Now, The way to conceive this model isn't that it is a factual representation of space. This is a model that really just attempts to describe the way dimensions curl in upon themselves. I believe its precise shape is fairly moot. as it's just a concept. Calabi–Yau manifold - Wikipedia

More or less what to learn from this is, The universe has more shapes and dimensions to it than just this third dimension, So when we think of the shape of the Whole of the cosmos. We must keep in mind Multiple dimensions, In superstring theory, it's 10. In M theory it's 11. In acoustic string theory, it's like, I think it's 21 possible dimensions because of superpositioning. When we think of space. We must account for these other dimensions of reality. if we do not, We are simply doing it wrong. :/
 
Last edited:

CasualBystander

Celestial
seems to me that if you are to correctly model reality in order to get time travel,
you have to get past the space and time linking.
they are 2 clear ideas, and to mix them up seems to limit what you can visualize
so, in a world where you have linked space and time, how do you time travel ?
if you change your point of reference a bit and see time as its own thing, then you have some hope of changing it.

and I have a device that uses counter rotating electrostatic fields (and likely magnetic in there as well) that messes with gravity and time.
pretty sure that a gravity field is not a real thing. but a change in time fields that causes gravity as a side effect.
and that is why they can't find that gravity field
go look at star clusters that "should" collapse on themselves, if it is a change in time field, then they should be stable like we see them in the stars...

as far as the simulation issue,
seems to me that reality is an invention of consciousness
and it was so fantastic that many of us moved into "reality"
and that is why it follows the same rules of a simulation
How about inventing an anti-entropic field so you age into the past?
 

CasualBystander

Celestial
The geometry of space As I know it, isn't as simple as a shape you can produce in the second dimension, I think someone mentioned the calabi Yau manifold before?
calabi-spin.gif


Now, The way to conceive this model isn't that it is a factual representation of space. This is a model that really just attempts to describe the way dimensions curl in upon themselves. I believe its precise shape is fairly moot. as it's just a concept. Calabi–Yau manifold - Wikipedia

More or less what to learn from this is, The universe has more shapes and dimensions to it than just this third dimension, So when we think of the shape of the Whole of the cosmos. We must keep in mind Multiple dimensions, In superstring theory, it's 10. In M theory it's 11. In acoustic string theory, it's like, I think it's 21 possible dimensions because of superpositioning. When we think of space. We must account for these other dimensions of reality. if we do not, We are simply doing it wrong. :/
Why stop at 21???

How about Harp theory at 47, or piano theory at 230?
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
That's the string counts for a orchestra harp and standard grand piano.

However, I do have something for TM to chew on:

New Quantum Theory Could Explain the Flow of Time

Time is equalibration.

oh, I got the reference. You would be shocked by the names some theories have. Plus. I have this penchant That if it doesn't show up on Google scholar. It doesn't exist lol :p But, hell, someone comes in and says. I have Icecream and cheesy poofs, I'm like hell yeah. I want cheesy poofs.
bixw2.jpg


You know? lol
 
Mass Cancellation.

So see if I have this right;
The idea here in the mass cancellation proposed by Harold Puthoff and Davis in Austin is that according to Quantum Theory, by using photonic crystals (presumably left handed ones) enable Quantum Theory, and in which it says that the geometry of space is seeded with oscillating mass~less Higgs particles, oscillating along a chiral lattice in the vacuum. Thus, if excited by Tera Hertz frequencies, the speed of the photonic crystals oscillations should change, and which should alter the relative mass of the material.
No that’s not right – the photonic metamaterial that they're presumably studying right now has been described as very thin alternating layers of bismuth and magnesium, which have nonterrestrial isotopic ratios, and the atoms of these metals in each layer are precisely atomically aligned. No industrial materials on Earth are aligned at the atomic level – IBM has arranged a small number of atoms with this level of precision using an atomic force caliper, but it’s an arduous process and creating a macroscopic sample like this would be extraordinarily difficult and expensive, if it’s possible at all, at present.

In the middle of this previous post I described a viable mechanism that recently came to light within the field of photonic metamaterials research that could, at least in theory, produce an extremely minuscule but nevertheless real reduction in mass via activation with THz radiation:
Heavy Science. Time Travel.

That mass modulation mechanism is based on the stress-energy tensor that describes the properties of a photonic metamaterial, which of course corresponds to the stress-energy-momentum tensor in general relativity. So the coupling mechanism in this scenario would be the pressure terms in the Einstein stress-energy tensor.

I don't know anything about the proposed test but even if the test's seem to fail, I personally would have to examine the set~up before dismissing the idea. So if there's any images showing their proposed arrangement for this experiment then I'd like to see those, and the reason is that the cartography of space is modeled as a lattice. While the cartography of gravity is not necessarily that of space. Rather it is very likely that of a tetrahedron.
I can’t fathom why you’re so convinced of the significance of that Dutch architect’s kooky quantum lattice tetrahedron conceptual art project…but to each his own. This has nothing to do with that, suffice to say.

One of the experiments that we can presume they’re doing, would involve exposing the layered metamaterial sample to a specific frequency of photon radiation in the THz band while measuring its mass with some very sensitive device, to quantify the mass reduction effect that Tom DeLonge first described on the Joe Rogan show about 8 months ago (he starts talking about it around the 33min mark):


I was just poking around on Instagram and was surprised to see these two posts which indicate that they’re about to make an important announcement, which I presume relates to their findings on this subject:


And especially this one that Tom DeLonge issued today:


I’m trying to curb my enthusiasm right now, but it’s impossible, because if this means what I think it means, then we could be about to witness a world-changing moment in human history – the exact moment, in fact, that I’ve been trying to achieve via my theoretical studies for forty years: the discovery of a viable method for manipulating the gravitational field with attainable levels of energy.

But it’s also possible that I’m reading into a series of extremely unspecific cues to see what I want to see, so I’ll be on pins and needles until we know for sure what’s going on here…

Why stop at 21???

How about Harp theory at 47, or piano theory at 230?
You have a dry wit – bravo, good Sir!

Yes – all of this talk about extra dimensions is absolute speculation: there is to date zero evidence for additional physical dimensions beyond the four that we know and love. Superstring theory and brane theory remain nothing more than the fever-dream of theorists who are more enamored with mathematics than physics, imo.

I would love to see some empirical evidence for the existence of additional physical dimensions – however, to date, no such evidence exists. So when people go around proclaiming that this stuff is codified reality, I can only roll my eyes.

But here’s an interesting thought that I had recently: we know via the prevailing model of cosmological evolution that 4D spacetime was created during the Big Bang. So if four dimensions can be created through some physical field mechanism that we have yet to comprehend, then it may be possible to locally synthesize additional physical dimensions within a given volume through some technological means. It’s difficult to imagine what the technological applications for such a technology might be; perhaps a novel method of fusion containment, or perhaps a new type of wormhole for instantaneous travel between two such devices operating in different regions of the cosmos, or perhaps simply a variety of large independent chambers superpositioned within one small craft, or other useful applications that we can’t even imagine yet.

It’s interesting to consider that even if our cosmos is limited to four dimensions, which it appears to be at this point, we may nevertheless be able to one day engineer additional dimensions using a sufficiently advanced technology.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
No that’s not right – the photonic metamaterial that they're presumably studying right now has been described as very thin alternating layers of bismuth and magnesium, which have nonterrestrial isotopic ratios, and the atoms of these metals in each layer are precisely atomically aligned. No industrial materials on Earth are aligned at the atomic level – IBM has arranged a small number of atoms with this level of precision using an atomic force caliper, but it’s an arduous process and creating a macroscopic sample like this would be extraordinarily difficult and expensive, if it’s possible at all, at present.

In the middle of this previous post I described a viable mechanism that recently came to light within the field of photonic metamaterials research that could, at least in theory, produce an extremely minuscule but nevertheless real reduction in mass via activation with THz radiation:
Heavy Science. Time Travel.

That mass modulation mechanism is based on the stress-energy tensor that describes the properties of a photonic metamaterial, which of course corresponds to the stress-energy-momentum tensor in general relativity. So the coupling mechanism in this scenario would be the pressure terms in the Einstein stress-energy tensor.


I can’t fathom why you’re so convinced of the significance of that Dutch architect’s kooky quantum lattice tetrahedron conceptual art project…but to each his own. This has nothing to do with that, suffice to say.

One of the experiments that we can presume they’re doing, would involve exposing the layered metamaterial sample to a specific frequency of photon radiation in the THz band while measuring its mass with some very sensitive device, to quantify the mass reduction effect that Tom DeLonge first described on the Joe Rogan show about 8 months ago (he starts talking about it around the 33min mark):


I was just poking around on Instagram and was surprised to see these two posts which indicate that they’re about to make an important announcement, which I presume relates to their findings on this subject:


And especially this one that Tom DeLonge issued today:


I’m trying to curb my enthusiasm right now, but it’s impossible, because if this means what I think it means, then we could be about to witness a world-changing moment in human history – the exact moment, in fact, that I’ve been trying to achieve via my theoretical studies for forty years: the discovery of a viable method for manipulating the gravitational field with attainable levels of energy.

But it’s also possible that I’m reading into a series of extremely unspecific cues to see what I want to see, so I’ll be on pins and needles until we know for sure what’s going on here…


You have a dry wit – bravo, good Sir!

Yes – all of this talk about extra dimensions is absolute speculation: there is to date zero evidence for additional physical dimensions beyond the four that we know and love. Superstring theory and brane theory remain nothing more than the fever-dream of theorists who are more enamored with mathematics than physics, imo.

I would love to see some empirical evidence for the existence of additional physical dimensions – however, to date, no such evidence exists. So when people go around proclaiming that this stuff is codified reality, I can only roll my eyes.

But here’s an interesting thought that I had recently: we know via the prevailing model of cosmological evolution that 4D spacetime was created during the Big Bang. So if four dimensions can be created through some physical field mechanism that we have yet to comprehend, then it may be possible to locally synthesize additional physical dimensions within a given volume through some technological means. It’s difficult to imagine what the technological applications for such a technology might be; perhaps a novel method of fusion containment, or perhaps a new type of wormhole for instantaneous travel between two such devices operating in different regions of the cosmos, or perhaps simply a variety of large independent chambers superpositioned within one small craft, or other useful applications that we can’t even imagine yet.

It’s interesting to consider that even if our cosmos is limited to four dimensions, which it appears to be at this point, we may nevertheless be able to one day engineer additional dimensions using a sufficiently advanced technology.


In my own eyes. To deny String theory and higher dimensional possibility Beyond 4th is folly.
The math is important. It's what describes relativity in action. Terribly Vital if you ask me.
But then I'm a fan. Its the same approach as demanding proof, evidence, of alien life. Which is totally fair. In that spirit. Here is but one theory on 5th dimension, As a nuclear force interacting with electromagnetism.

Because light, or energy, in Einstein’s theory comes from the interactions of the electromagnetic force, scientists have searched for over 100 years for ways to unite energy or light from the electromagnetic force with the other three forces, which are strong and weak nuclear forces and gravity. Two theories, independently developed and proposed by German mathematician Theodor Kaluza and Swedish physicist Oskar Klein suggested the possibility of a fifth dimension where electromagnetism and gravity unify. Kaluza, Klein and their story of a fifth dimension
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
I mean, Simple probability. states there is a greater probability of a fifth dimension existing than not, really. Unless math fails me. I am basing this on the model that the universe is expanding, and therefore infinite as far as the speed of light is concerned :/ Thus infinite probability, I'm not perfect. Heck, I'm not perfect and I'm no expert at math. I'm working with estimations and odds here:/
 
In my own eyes. To deny String theory and higher dimensional possibility Beyond 4th is folly.
This is exactly why I detest superstring theory - it breaks the empirical thought process in the human mind by asserting its own veracity in lieu of any evidence whatsoever. It's also unfalsifiable, because there are billions upon billions of variations in the idea - one could reasonably argue that any theory which cannot be disproven is inherently unscientific. It has also failed to predict any observable effect, or to resolve any outstanding problem in the edifice of theoretical physics.

Scientific reasoning is based on evidence. Superstring theory is not only devoid of any empirical evidence whatsoever - it isn't even tangentially implied by any observation in the entire field of physics.

So by all scientific yardsticks, these theories remain 100% scientifically worthless.

I'll be the first to sing the praises of superstring theory or brane theory if or when it actually produces something scientifically meaningful. But until that happens, it's nothing more than baseless speculation, and the attention that it has commanded in both academic physics and the pop science literature remains completely unjustified. I shudder to think about the wealth of promising new theoretical ideas that have failed to garner any funding at all because superstring theories have been vacuuming up nearly all of the theoretical funding in academic programs for over 30 years.

The math is important. It's what describes relativity in action. Terribly Vital if you ask me.
No - this is false equivalency: relativity is supported by a profound range of empirical observations. Superstring theory is supported by none. So it belongs in the realm of theoretical mathematics, not theoretical physics, until that changes - if it ever changes.

But then I'm a fan. Its the same approach as demanding proof, evidence, of alien life.
This is another false equivalency: several lines of observational evidence support the extraterrestrial hypothesis; we have thousands of eyewitness accounts of AAVs, and radar tracking data (which is physical evidence), and trace evidence cases. Also, we're now aware that warm Earth-like planets orbiting Sun-like stars are common throughout the universe, and that water and the organic chemistry required for life are also common everywhere. And we also now have a viable theoretical physics model of gravitational field propulsion which offers a conceptual mechanism for faster-than-light travel and which also perfectly describes all of the performance characteristic s commonly reported by ufo witnesses.

So the existence of alien life is now a well-supported and rigorously scientific theory. Superstring theories have none of that kind of scientific support.

Which is totally fair. In that spirit. Here is but one theory on 5th dimension, As a nuclear force interacting with electromagnetism.

Because light, or energy, in Einstein’s theory comes from the interactions of the electromagnetic force, scientists have searched for over 100 years for ways to unite energy or light from the electromagnetic force with the other three forces, which are strong and weak nuclear forces and gravity. Two theories, independently developed and proposed by German mathematician Theodor Kaluza and Swedish physicist Oskar Klein suggested the possibility of a fifth dimension where electromagnetism and gravity unify. Kaluza, Klein and their story of a fifth dimension
It's been a long time since I studied that theory, but as I recall, it was disproved because it makes predictions which are contradicted by observation.

But it's a good example that illustrates how physics have been trying to extend general relativity by adding additional dimensions, for nearly a century - and that approach has never yielded a single useful scientific advancement of any kind. Frankly I think the whole approach is unoriginal/derivative, and that's rarely how physics advances. Progress is made by striking out in new directions, not by trying to repeat somebody else's greatest hits, which in this case, was Einstein's unification of space and time.

The next big leap will almost certainly come from somebody taking an entirely new approach that nobody has even dreamed of yet.

I mean, Simple probability. states there is a greater probability of a fifth dimension existing than not, really. Unless math fails me. I am basing this on the model that the universe is expanding, and therefore infinite as far as the speed of light is concerned :/ Thus infinite probability, I'm not perfect. Heck, I'm not perfect and I'm no expert at math. I'm working with estimations and odds here:/
I'm sorry to say this, but this isn't logical. The scale of the universe has no bearing n the existence of an additional dimension - 4D general relativity models an infinite universe just fine. Probability also can't be applied to the existence of additional dimensions - the two are completely unrelated ideas.

Physics advances by identifying the limits of current physical models and positing viable explanations to those limitations that yield testable scientific predictions. Superstring theories have yet to offer a single testable scientific prediction. They are therefore scientifically worthless.

If that changes one day, I'll be delighted. But I don't expect it to happen, and neither should anyone else. One should never get attached to any theory until that theory provides a valid scientific reason to do so.
 
Last edited:
Top