Alright so I've become a bit interested in this recently,

5D = A "square space" in which a timeline can exist in any form within the boundaries of the square. The timeline can bend into itself, essentially meaning it's possible to visit previous or future points of time contained in this timeline. Two timelines cannot interact, otherwise once again, to the observer it just appears as one timeline. This means we still only have one timeline but a 5D being can view any point of the timeline at will by bending it in on itself, however this being cannot actually change the timeline, only visit various points. Using our video example, the 5D viewer can now jump to any point in the video he wants without having to view the parts in between.
6D = The space in which multiple 5D "squares" form a "cube". These squares each represent the space where separate timelines exist, however within the cube, a timeline can exist in multiple squares meaning timelines can branch off or exist independently but still not touch each other or once again, it's a single timeline. Using the picture, one 5D square is pink, one is green and one is blue; these three form a cube in 6D space. Now let's say each timeline is only composed of three points in time referred to as point A, B and C. A timeline can still exist entirely in the pink square, or point A and B of the timeline could occur in pink whereas point C occurs in green. Point A, B and C could also occur in the pink, green and blue squares respectively, however it's impossible for point C to occur in the blue square if A and B are both in the pink square, and vice versa. This means there's still limits to the forms a timeline can take. Once again with our video example, now we have three different videos. Within the aforementioned constraints, a 6D being could watch sections of one video combined with sections of another.

Continued one more time:

7D = A line composed of our 6D cubes which to us is essentially the same thing as 3D cubes in a row viewed from the side as 2D squares which a being existing in 2D would view as a 1D line. Back to the video example in the 6D example, the 7D being can view the sections of the different videos in any order he wants.
8D = The space in which our 7D line exists, meaning the 7D line can now interact with itself suggesting our limits explained in the 6D section are no longer relevant. Not sure how to continue the video example.
9D = Extrapolate nigga

>>8795495
Your concept of time is misguided. Just like how you go from:
0-D: A point
1-D: A line made of translating the point
2-D: A square made from translating the line in another dimension
3-D: A cube made from translating the square into another dimension
4-D: You are translating these 3-D object through time.

You have trouble visualizing this because in your experience, you've only ever seen one slice of time at a time. It would be like seeing only one slice of a cube (a square).

>>8795495
None of this matters okay

Think of it all as a list of parameters

1d = {a}
2d = {a, b}
3d = {a, b, c}
4d = {a, b, c, d}
5d = {a, b, c, d, e}
6d = {a, b, c, d, e, f}
7d = {a, b, c, d, e, f, g}
...

You can assign interpretations and visualizations to these dimensions arbitrarily. Here is an example

1d = location on a line, (x)
2d = location in a square, (x, y)
3d = location in a cube, (x, y, z)
4d = density in a certain location in a cube (x, y, z, a)
5d = density in a certain location in a cube at a certain point in time, (x, y, z, a, b)
5d = density in a certain location in a cube at a certain point in time in a particular cube (x, y, z, a, b, c)
6d = density in a certain location in a cube at a certain point in time in a particular cube in a particular set of cubes (x, y, z, a, b, c, d, e)

You can go on forever, it doesn't matter.

4D is a timeline, ok
5D is still a timeline except it can, what interact with itself? That's hardly a new dimension, that's just time travel, and it doesn't really imply a new dimension or why two timelines (whatever that means) can't interact with each other otherwise they become one timeline (somehow??? What the fuck is that timeline supposed to look like?).

You do this again at 8D where you think adding a dimension means "interacting with itself" which doesn't make any sense and is bullshit. A turing machine is basically one-dimensional and it's perfectly capable of interacting with itself.

>>8795504
>You have trouble visualizing this because in your experience, you've only ever seen one slice of time at a time. It would be like seeing only one slice of a cube (a square).
Yes, assuming the universe was a cube and every "screenshot" or point in time was one of these cubes, every single cube stacked inside of itself within the space of one cube would be the 4D cube.
>>8795513
Making sense of it rather than mathematical extrapolations is more interesting
>>8795516
If we had a piece of paper and an ant walking on it (old-ass example) it would be a 2D plane, to get from one side to the other, it would need to walk to the other side on the plane. If this paper was now a paper cube with the ant inside of it, there are now 6 2D planes for the ant to walk on and given enough walking, it would end up on the opposite side of the original 2D plane without actually having to walk across the original plane. Originally the ant was bound to one plane, later it could get from side A to side B of the original plane without actually crossing the original plane by walking across other planes, if this 3D cube was surrounded by more 3D cubes on every side and the ant could walk from one cube to another (time travel), the ant could get from one side of the original cube to the other without actually walking inside the original cube. This cube and the surrounding ones existing in the space of one cube is our 4D object. Furthermore if we had a 4D cube surrounded by more 4D cubes, the ant could cross the 4D cube without actually having to travel within the 4D cube and of course, all these 4D cubes in the space of one 4D cube is a 5D cube etc.

Put down the drugs and pick up a book. Holy fuck

>>8795540
Sleep deprivation, not drugs

Time and distance/space exist only in respect to each other. There is no distance between objects if it takes no time to go any distance, and there is no time if there is no space for things to move timewise.

Dimensional ordinality does not exist, once dimensions are delineated and seperated their order is meaningless.

>>8795544
Yeah as I typed the ant example in >>8795533 I sort of came to the conclusion on how it's just endless extrapolation

>>8795547
>on how it's just endless extrapolation
spatially*

>>8795533
>Making sense of it rather than mathematical extrapolations is more interesting

Any way to make sense of it is inherently mathematical

What I've provided is an interpretation of the concept of dimensions. Yours are extrapolating beyond what we know and you're presenting it as "the" interpretation when there are infinitely many depending on what you want to use the dimensional values for

You're confusing the model with the reality

>>8795606
As I said, I never claimed any of it was right and welcomed anyone to correct me. I blame everyone referring to 4D as "time". Anyway saging my dumb thread since I can't delete it

>>8795612
It's not a dumb thread I'm just explaining

>>8795495
Look up on YouTube "10th dimension visualized" and the video with the ant should explain things to you really well.