<gooddad@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> It's geometry. You find the point in the center of the lower
> dimension, and extend outward in a new direction.
> There is more space in the 4th dimension. This is geometry. 0, 1, 2,
> and 3 dimensions are geometry, so I do not see why the 4th dimension
> should not be geometry as well. I see no reason to say the fourth
> dimension is time. There should be an infinite number of geometric
There are many ways to conceive 4D: with a 4th space axis, with a time
axis,
with 2 complex variables...
> dimensions. I learned this in part by reading the book Flatland by
> Edwin A. Abbott. There is also a book called Spaceland by Rudy
> Rucker. But I myself found the points to figure out exactly where the
See his page
http://www.cs.sjsu.edu/faculty/rucker/
> 4th dimension is and should be.
You found a principle, amongst many, not the actual points themselves :-o)
It's more fun to think of ways to represent them anyhow graphically, in 2D
or 3D.
See Rucker's page, see also my
http://home.scarlet.be/~pin12499/qbComplex.html
for complex space
(and
http://home.scarlet.be/~pin12499/qbRelaty.html
for spacetime graphics,
http://home.scarlet.be/~pin12499/hypereal.htm
for higher-dimensional numbers)
guido
|
