Research Indicates A Spherical Universe

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

Animate, plot, graph, gradient vector, etc

[Dubbelosix]

Animate, plot, graph, gradient vector, etc

Bing bash bosh. Why do you speak like an outdated Alice AI?

Edited December 17, 2019 by Dubbelosix

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

Clyde?

[Dubbelosix]

I need to follow Flummoxed and start putting people on ignore.

[Vmedvil2]

No it doesn't, in space, a fourth leg of the triangle is what allows space to manifest observable geometry, a curved sphere in 4D space only encompasses three spatial and one temporal dimension alone. Its not any more special than that. Hypersphere in higher dimensions, clearly has additional physics not encapsulated in a four dimensional model. More over the sphere is no more intriguing than a box in four dimensions (tesseract).

 

I think the universe is a higher dimensional object if you consider that each force has a properties which can be geometrically put into the form of a dimension that is curled up, the universe could even be a 7 to 32 dimensional object with each property being a a space direction that is curled into each point of space.

 

 

One Possible Configuration for the Forces and Space-time as Dimensions of space being 12+1 Dimensional

 

 

Basically with that model ΣE_gravity = ΣE_SNF + ΣE_{Charge/electro-magnetism} + ΣE_{Higgs/Flavour}  the compressed dimensions give rise to Energy that is experienced as Energy-mass, but the model is far to simple to be a actual solution of "Real Universe". It does strangely look like T₀₀ of the Energy-Stress Tensor in different units with more forces added to the list being accounted for other than just electricity and magnetism.

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[Dubbelosix]

Why not simplify and assume a membrane which evolves additional dimensions, not unlike space time, or other dimensions as may or may not be required by a model to explain what is observed or measured. You already have a good idea of the geometry of space time. Assuming it evolves from a membrane, coming into and out of existence at varying rates, depending its environment (mass or massless), not unlike your Ricci flow perhaps. Why involve a hypersphere. 

 

I do believe a fifth dimension is possible, heck, Kaluza and Klein attempted the unification under such a model. The only reason physicists add extra dimensions is to account for other forces. The dimensions may not even exist, but the unification under a five dimensional model, even if it doesn't exist, may still hold hidden secrets we can learn about why such models could lead to a better understanding of nature. But going above this, seven, eight to twelve, I find abhorrent. 

Edited January 13, 2020 by Dubbelosix

[Dubbelosix]

The form or otherwise of an actual fifth dimension is intriguing. Large or small or both? 

 

 

 

I couldn't possibly say, only that there may be a mathematical merit to persue a five dimensional theory.

[Mutex]

I have some problems with this because the research does not really indicate that at all, the question is 'Open or Closed', and the problem with this is that the research shows within the error bars of measurement that it is FLAT. (not open or closed).

 

This is an interpretation that says basically "What if the amount of curve was within the error bars of the observation?"

 

If you make that assumption you can say whatever you want, except say that the research indicates that is the case.

 

My argument is that space is without shape, that is it is not geometrical in nature, it has properties, but like a color it's property is not its shape. 

Also something without boundaries cannot have a shape at all, the universe (space and time) is the universe all the way down (forever), it cannot have a shape.

Things in space can have a shape, (and a color) but space (and color) themselves does not have the fundamental property of shape.