# The 4th Spatial Dimension

## Recommended Posts

The Last Days of Living in a 3-dimensional Universe

I write this speech on the last day of living in a 3d world. Tomorrow, I will post the proof of a fourth spatial dimension in the form of a science rap video experiment. The video/written report will introduce a 4D calculator I named the Universal Grid. It will be an upgrade to the Cartesian 3-space graph which will allow for hyper-dimensional graphing and visualization. It's been almost 7 years since I've made the discovery, and as a layman, I have no other avenue whereas I can publish this historical discovery. So I come to the sites where scientific minds casually meet and in your hands I leave this information.

As this information goes viral, I advise all to use the Universal Grid to solve all of the remaining mysteries of science. The Grand Unified Theory will be close behind this discovery and will go to the one ready to document and interpret the abilities of this graph. The critics of this graph will be few, but to those that oppose it, for them, they will lose all credibility in their discipline. The reasons one would reject this discovery shall be deeply associated with denial. This discovery will/may be embarrassing to the scientific community because it will uncover many erroneous theories accepted as fact that has lead the scientific world astray. At first glance a scientific mind will be able to see the true meaning of "quantum" and and will understand "relativity" at first sight. The mystery of the tetrahedral bond in chemistry will be explained, group theorists will be overjoyed, physicists and philosophers will be confounded by the fact that a layperson has accomplished this. Today I am a quack, tomorrow I will be considered to be one of the greatest minds to ever live. May this discovery reform science forever, and may the scientific community form a committee to investigate and interpret the possible significance of layman contributions to scientific discovery.

Reply if you must, but be careful, for within the next 24 hours or so you will have to give an account of your words of ridicule and/or disbelif, if any. Enjoy your last hours of this age of 3D science - An age that entertained the idea of impossibility.

##### Share on other sites

I just wet my pants in excitement.

##### Share on other sites

My name is Michael Joseph Crosby I am a 34 year old high school graduate, I reside in New Orleans. I have discovered, and in this short presentation I intend to experimentally prove, the fourth spatial dimension. Read this post or Watch the rap video!

The Universal Grid (UG)

This retractable multispace graph will visually reveal all Euclidean 4 dimensional polytopes. This is a 2 dimensional representation of four 3D spaces that move and are situated in the same manner as tetrahedral bond angles, 109.28°. In layman's terms, these are four cubes that come together at precise angles to form a 5th cube. So the 4 directions in space are defined by the simplest volume in the universe- the tetrahedron. Take the tetrahedron, find it's center, then draw lines to each of it's four vertices, these are the four directions in space. It is only logical to measure space and lay the foundation for all space by starting with the tetrahedron. The cube is indeed the most practical application of 3D space in the real world (I can't imagine trying to hang pictures in a tetrahedral room), however, the cube has six planes and the tetrahedron has only four, which makes the tetrahedron the simplest aggregation of planes that form a volume in the universe and the "alpha" of space. In the case of the Universal Grid, the tetrahedron and the cube work together by using the cube to represent the real world and the tetrahedron as the governor of the motion and nature of space.

4D Graphing

Keep in mind that the human eye views the world in two dimensions; any person familiar with computer graphics knows that you can pull up a preset cube, take the wire frame model of it, change the viewing settings so that the perspective is not affected by space, and from a certain angle the cube is actually a hexagon; that same perspective is true of this graph.

Though these hexagons are 120° to one another, an actual model of four connected cubes whose centers are retracted at 109.28° from each other would at a certain angle appear to be situated in the same manner as the hexagons of the UG.

ugrealgraph.bmp

The 3D cubes are represented in 2D by the colored hexagons. Three axial lines are visible, the fourth is represented by the point of origin of this graph; it moves towards and away from the perspective viewer. The blue hexagon of the UG represents the 3D space that moves along the x axis, the green hexagon moves along the y axis, and the red hexagon along the z axis. The black hexagon in the center is the 3D space that moves along the fourth or w axis which is represented as the point of origin. The graph has two positions:

Figure 1: Collapsed - all four 3D spaces fully occupying the same space.

Figure 2: Retracted - all four 3D spaces partially occupying the same space.

Input the coordinates into the UG while the graph is in the collapsed position. If this were a computer program, the data would actually go into all four 3D spaces as the same coordinates in each; I used a red dry erase marker and drew the same tetrahedron on each graph. When the graphs of the UG are retracted along the 4 axial lines that are situated 109.28° from each other, the 4D phenomenon occurs and the hypervolume is revealed. Lets take a look at the UG in action.

Figure 3: The tetrahedron (collapsed)

Figure 4: The hypertetrahedron (retracted)

You can clearly see 5 tetrahedrons, the one in the center is the 3D being. Also note how the revealed hypertetrahedron fits neatly inside of the created 5th cube that is comprised of portions of the other cubes. The three active cubes of this 2D version of the UG overlap to reveal the multi-colored cube; the created tetrahedron within it is almost the same size in comparison as the original inputted volume is to the collapsed cubes. This allows for the created multi-colored 5th cube of space (the new and improved Hypercube) to serve as it's own graph giving the ensuing polytope a unique set of relative coordinates. Carefully observe and compare this polytope to the description of what a hypertetrahedron should entail. The unvisualized mathematically accepted calculation predicts that this simplex should have 20 faces. This polytope indeed has 20 faces.

Findings and Implications

I have discovered a phenomenon, any shape, be it 2D, 3D, or 4D that is imputed in to the graph will produce a miniature replica. I wondered if a asymmetrical shape would display a miniature, indeed it did.

In chemistry, tetrahedral bond angles are the manner in which many atoms bond to form molecules. The implications suggest that the 4th dimension governs the foundation of atomic and molecular bonds. The UG can be improved by allowing the graphs to move beyond the point of origin in both directions. The UG can be used in any of the 2 positions for data entry, collapsed or retracted. You can input a shape into the graph while it is in the retracted position then collapse it to reveal the polytope, or vice versa. I have taken a close observation of many of the measurable parameters associated with the UG; w, x, y, and z axises and the distance each graph moves along these axial lines; the relative size of the polytope in comparison to the original inputted volume; The 4D polytope can be inputted and retracted to reveal the 5D, the 5th inputted to reveal the 6D so on and so forth to infinity.

Multiple points, form a line; Multiple lines form a plane; Multiple planes form a volume; Multiple volumes form a hypervolume. At the very beginning of my scientific endeavors, this statement of fact was my only lesson on the fourth spatial dimension and it lead me directly to this discovery.

Personal Statement

I have noticed that the Universal Grid is pregnant with an infinite storehouse of potential data. I believe that this "key" will unlock the unknown higher dimensions of reality and inaugurate the next age of science. As the creator/custodian of the UG, I deliver this graph to the scientific community with hopes that the ensuing discoveries will be used to make our world a better place. Upon my completion of the initial discovery, a small voice within my being compelled me to write on the folder in which the discovery was contained a phrase that I wish to be accompanied with this graph wherever it shall be duplicated...

"Use this for the benefit and well-being of all mankind."

Please scrutinize this information. Questions, comments, and reactions are invited and appreciated.

##### Share on other sites

As you wish... Check "Relativity Forum" for written and illustrated report

##### Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

Topic moved to Speculations. Please take a moment to acquaint yourself with the rules of the Speculation Forum

##### Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

Mike Infinity,

Firstly, could you please post your speculations in the speculations forum. I'm moving this to speculations. If I've misinterpreted this post and you really don't mean it to be treated as having any sort of validity, then let me know and I'll move it back.

Secondly, this is a discussion forum. Though videos are certainly nice supplements to an argument, they are by no means to be used as a substitute. Some people are not able to watch videos on YouTube, so please could you provide a written summary.

Edit:
!

Moderator Note

Ah, I see. Well, since you now have two topics on this, I'll do you a favor and merge them both. In future, the rule is one thread per topic.

##### Share on other sites

In chemistry, tetrahedral bond angles are the manner in which many atoms bond to form molecules.

Only some molecules. There are countless other molecular geometries, namely octahedral and trigonal planar.

The implications suggest that the 4th dimension governs the foundation of atomic and molecular bonds.

Not at all. The foundation for molecular bonds is a linear combination of atomic orbitals (with coefficients that serve to minimize the energy expectation value) which are solutions to the Schroedinger equation for a hydrogenic atom. Though some of the mathematics behind molecular orbitals are formulated in higher dimensional or infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces, bonds only exist in "good ole" three-space.

The notion of "atomic bonds" makes no sense.

Do you realize that the conceptualization of four spatial dimensions is nothing new? Here let me write a vector in [real] four space for you:

$\vec{v}= \langle 1,5, \sqrt{2}, 7 \rangle$

I don't notice anything special. Why is four so special, why not five, seventeen, or more dimensions?

##### Share on other sites

I give you experimental proof of the fourth spatial dimension.

Do you realize that the conceptualization of four spatial dimensions is nothing new?

Yeah but the visualzation of 4 spatial dimensions are.

Here let me write a vector in [real] four space for you:

Do numbers describe real objects or does real objects define numbers? I give you something tangible, your little vector is meaningless to a high school graduate such as myself. Furthermore, numbers arent real, their only concepts and ideas. Thats why I didnt put any on the graph! I can show you atomic bonds with my next experiment, yeah models of atoms that act and react as real atoms do so you can dismantle that oversized hoola hoop. This is the first of many tangible experiments.

I don't notice anything special. Why is four so special, why not five, seventeen, or more dimensions?

Like I said...

The 4D polytope can be inputted and retracted to reveal the 5D, the 5th inputted to reveal the 6D so on and so forth to infinity.

I hope you got space for me on that podium...

##### Share on other sites

Have to published a paper for the scrutiny of the scientific community?

Because in all honesty, anything that purports to be this "ground breaking" must be tested to breaking point.

Also, why is that vector "meaningless to a highschool graduate such as yourself"?

##### Share on other sites

You can have as many pictures on a 2 dimensional surface as you want, it's not going to ever going to account for the dimension itself, because all of those pictures are made in spacial dimensions, which time is not one of. It can't be described holistically in terms of an axis because it doesn't actually move left and right from a frame of reference, it technically doesn't move at all, it's something different. If there was some actual equation you had to accurately describe it, it might make more sense.

You can try and draw someone walking over different frames, but time is still analogous, you'd have to draw infinitesimal frames.

I guess technically though, it is a 4-dimensional object because it exists on the fabric of space and it has a frame of reference for which time flows for it.

The pictures your drawing are just our own views of how 4-dimensional space looks when it's truncated through 3 dimensional space because we can only physically perceive 3 dimensions.

It's not much different than saying a circle is a sphere because a circle is a shape you get from when a sphere is truncated by a 2 dimensional plane, yet they have different equations to describe their properties.

Edited by questionposter
##### Share on other sites

... If there was some actual equation you had to accurately describe it, it might make more sense.

Totally agree.

Any physical theory must be backed up in mathematics. Einstein could just draw some pictures and say "yeah, so,.. Newton was a bit off, but this should clear things up. I call it General Relativity but the way....".

##### Share on other sites

Again, the numbers can only describe what you see here today. For me to get numbers added to it, it's not a problem. If you dont need numbers to explain the first three dimensions, you dont need it for the fourth either. I offer you the Universal Grid fully operational and still you ask me for more? Wow, thats like me showing you an antigravity device that works and you ask me to write you an equation for it, and if I cant then the antigravity effect is not real and useless. Sounds weird if you ask me.

##### Share on other sites

Again, the numbers can only describe what you see here today. For me to get numbers added to it, it's not a problem. If you dont need numbers to explain the first three dimensions, you dont need it for the fourth either. I offer you the Universal Grid fully operational and still you ask me for more? Wow, thats like me showing you an antigravity device that works and you ask me to write you an equation for it, and if I cant then the antigravity effect is not real and useless. Sounds weird if you ask me.

If you showed us an anti-gravity you would HAVE to have an equation to prove it's actually anti-gravity and not electro-magnetic repulsion.

Edited by questionposter
##### Share on other sites

I guess the Wright brothers gave you all the mathematical aeronautical data to prove that their machine flew... Go figure. I drew the hyper tetrahedron first, from there I used it deduct the graph because there was no 4D graph, it had yet to be visualized. In other words, there was no suitable language to express this polytope. How can you plot a visual 4D shape on a 3-space graph? So I created the graph just for the hyper tetrahedron. But it works on all non-euclidean geometry! It's philosophically logical, intellectually factual, easy to read and ready to be used. And it is to the maximum extent of my academic proficiency. You are asking me to convert the data to inferior language.

##### Share on other sites

I guess the Wright brothers gave you all the mathematical aeronautical data to prove that their machine flew... Go figure. I drew the hyper tetrahedron first, from there I used it deduct the graph because there was no 4D graph, it had yet to be visualized. In other words, there was no suitable language to express this polytope. How can you plot a visual 4D shape on a 3-space graph? So I created the graph just for the hyper tetrahedron. But it works on all non-euclidean geometry! It's philosophically logical, intellectually factual, easy to read and ready to be used. And it is to the maximum extent of my academic proficiency. You are asking me to convert the data to inferior language.

Your not the Wright brothers, and your not the first person to do this, there's even 6 dimensional shapes and higher, http://en.wikipedia....%93Yau_manifold

And even with all the math they have, it's still more or less a fringe theory. Time is just not a spacial dimension, so I don't see why your trying to force it to be one.

Edited by questionposter

##### Share on other sites

Do numbers describe real objects or does real objects define numbers?

From a mathematics perspective numbers are defined axiomatically, from a pure sense, and used as adjectives if you will to describe the real things we see. There is a good deal of debate as to whether or not mathematics is inherently physical, and as far as I have seen the argument most preferred by the relevant individuals is that--in fact--no mathematics is not inherently physical. What this means is that mathematics is something the human mind has created to help itself make sense of what we see.

The "little vector" that mississippichem had offered up was nothing more than an array of scalars. A scalar is a number that represents a magnitude, and as a concept scalars are independent of direction. By associating four magnitudes in a vector we are stating that each magnitude is linearly independent. Linear independence is what you are calling a dimension but from a mathematics point of view; so up/down is linearly independent of left/right. Essentially mathematics does not require a physical representation and actually it tends to prefer that from a fundamental level it not have one at all, in this way it remains pure and more readily applied--as opposed to applied and not so readily pure, and then applied to something else.

Edited by Xittenn

Next!

Well argued.

##### Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

Mike Infinity, your last two posts in this thread have contributed absolutely nothing to the discussion. You dismiss valid contributions by members who took the time to read all your text without even giving them a decent reply.

That behavior stops here and now.

Do not respond to this moderator note.

##### Share on other sites

Well inferior is still better than yours. You don't even have any math while even psuedo-scientists have some.

Edited by questionposter
##### Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

questionposter,
The previous moderator note also counts for you. If you are not contributing to the discussion, don't click on the "post" button.

To everyone, either this discussion continues in a polite fashion, or the thread will be closed.
Read your post again before clicking on the "post" button, and check whether it is polite and on topic.

Do not respond to this moderator note.

##### Share on other sites

Next!

You must understand that if you have a new theory, or you think you have a new theory, you are going to receive opposition.

This is not a personal attack, (most of the time) so don't take it as such.

No theory is apodictically true. Each is a model that must be checked by experiment. And there after either proved wrong or right. (look up: Michelson-Morley experiment)

To check something experimentally in physics you need the correct application of math, that is how we quantify in physics.

If this all seems too much I suggest you read this; http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html

##### Share on other sites

Thanks! For the information and your personal veiws. I am a very keen individual especially in the feild of spirituality. I am a student of the S.O.U.L. (School Of Universal Law) self-educated and inventor of many new and original sciences. As a person you should never need anything external to validate what basic logic can conclude. The data I provided is more than enough to scientificlly prove the 4th spatial dimension, I am smart enough to know that. If you feel that what I have is ordinary and not extraordinary, unoriginal, poorly presented, full of holes, and non-understandable, sorry. To me and to the professors at Dillard University, the ones who put their signature of approval on this concept about 4 years ago and to the other scientific minds from other sites, this is ground breaking and rigorous innovation. So when persons say "i dont see anything special" and "it would be more understandable if..." and "i dont think you should spend anymore time on this" is almost laughable to an above average IQ such as myself. I was in gifted classes since kindergarten so science fairs and regional blue ribbons I am accustomed to. College was too slow for me so I taught myself by reading my friends and family college course books, I took a special liking to philosophy and I reached a plateau of thought which lead to scientific enlightenment. I called it philosophysics. Some of my discoveries and experiments that I will release this year are free energy via my hyperion atom which is a model of an atom that mimics in principle it's function using triangular magnets in the shape of platonic solids and other hierarchies of polyhedra submerged in water as if to polarize the charge of the water. I call it fire-water! Also, if you take these "hyper atoms" and suspend them in a medium of water the magnetic faces of the polyhedra will attract and repel one another and a these units merge to create whatever they will, we can collect the data and see if the hyper atoms form molecules. On top of all this there is still my trism of infinite color, trism acoustics, the sky trism, the Omega Sophia AGHG (antigravity hypergyroscope), the holographic recorder, and much much more! If the Universal Grid dosent woo you, the many that follow will. Even if you cannot understand them, out will be some historical "eye-candy". But for real, isn't the UG beautiful?! I think so!

Edited by Mike Infinity

## Create an account

Register a new account