you are all just 5th dimensional algorithms processing 3 dimensional

Trapped

File: 8a16a61d2195b11dd35fe5a8dd653d7d.jpg (20KB, 236x333px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 236x333px

>>18367198
>processing 3 dimensional space time
4 dimensional space/time*.

I mean, all day I sit in front of a digital terminal built with digital algorithms and process a 3-dimensional space/time. So... it makes feel fractally? I suppose. Is that a word?

If it ever ends, I feel like I'll have some efficient compression algorithms in memory ( applicable on many levels ) that will be worth while.

>>18367198
Useless..i suck at math...would be like a 93 yer old fag with tremors becoming a waiter

>>18367198
Meh. Life is life.

>>18367198
wouldnt be surprised

>>18367375
>4 dimensional space/time*.
we process 3 spacial dimensions and one time dimension

Feels like a waste of potential.

File: anime-reaction-mouf.png (283KB, 500x706px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 500x706px

>>18367613
If the rate of information propagation is constant, then there is no empirical measure that can distinguish which dimension is space, and which is time. Thus, unless you're implying you have knowledge of FTL communication methods, it is empirically true that we are not living in 3 spatial dimensions, and one time dimension. It is true that we are living in 4 dimensions, which are all space/time, with not one distinguishing factor between which is space, and which is time.

Do you have knowledge of FTL communication methods?

Do I need to teach a relativity lesson in this thread?

>>18367198
Like I miss my ex-girlfriend.

File: internallyscreaming.gif (33KB, 245x138px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 245x138px

>>18367198

>>18367631
>A special case of great importance to general relativity is a Lorentzian manifold, in which one dimension has a sign opposite to that of the rest. This allows tangent vectors to be classified into timelike, null, and spacelike. Spacetime can be modeled as a 4-dimensional Lorentzian manifold.

I can wikipedia better than you bro

File: 1472891233217.jpg (47KB, 800x640px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 800x640px

>>18367771
Great. So according to your wikipedia quote, in order to test whether any given dimension is space, or time, you only need to measure the "plusiness" of it in respect to its "minusitude."

I patiently await your results.

>>18367198
My leg hurts a lot.

File: 1476053614727.jpg (224KB, 524x468px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 524x468px

>>18367669
me too, anon, me too

>>18367780
>find 3 dimensions
>they're all positive
>oh huh, maybe the last one is time?
I know you're unfamiliar with the natural sciences, but basic logic is allowed.

>>18367795
What's the empirical difference between a positive dimension and a negative dimension?

>>18367827
It doesn't matter, in this case you only need 3 dimensions acting in the same sign to deduce the 4th is the opposite and therefore timelike.

Empirically, this would look like setting up some sort of tensor equation for measurements where GE is relevant, then finding the eigenvalues.

File: Empirical.png (13KB, 728x286px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 728x286px

>>18367850
>Empirically, this would look like setting up some sort of tensor equation for measurements where GE is relevant, then finding the eigenvalues.

That's not what empirical means.

Tell me what experimental apparatus you need to measure if any given dimension is space, instead of time.

>>18367856
>Tell me what experimental apparatus you need to measure if any given dimension is space, instead of time.

The 5th dimension. Consciousness.

>>18367865
So if I was traveling at the speed of light, relative to your consciousness, and with my consciousness you were frozen in time, then which one of us is traveling in the direction of time, and which one of us is traveling in the direction of space?

>>18367886
>direction
>time

What is this bullshit?

Some of you need to go back to fucking elementary school.

Like I need more phytonutrients

>>18368080
Back to vectors and scalar senpai

>>18367198
Not 5th dimensional, but non-dimensional, "dimension" is physical/form.
And our universe/space is 4-dimensional, allowing 3(and less)-dimensional exist in it.

>>18367198
absolutely no different.

Some of you seem arrogant. I'm arrogant sometimes as well. Study more lessons of love so that we can overcome these primitive emotions. Have a good day :^)

There is not 5th dimension. Anything above 3D (or if you wana call it 4D because of time) is multidimensional and thus cannot be expressed in a linear way with numbers.

File: Cuttlefish-Eye-eyes-28331198-500-400.jpg (59KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 500x400px

>>18368354
In matters of technicality and objective reality, arrogance is how two students of reality show love and affection to one another. It's like a competitive sport--to not be as pigheaded and certain of oneself as possible would be disrespectful to their opponent. Showing each others' proofs and demanding the same is not out of arrogance, but love for objective reality.

File: Hypercube.gif (948KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

948KB, 500x500px

>>18368368
If you want to change that opinion, check out my gif. that displays entirely linear magnitudes.

>>18367198
Wait... i must feel something?!

>>18367375
>>18367631
>>18367780

Why is it always the weeaboos who think they are smart when they are not? Trash never changes