Science and the so-called Supernatural May Bridge!

[George-ananda]

Bernardo Kastrup wrote a compelling description of what human physiology might look like in 10 dimension:

"According to different versions of String Theory, and especially M-Theory, up to 10 dimensions of space are required for describing and explaining the behavior of matter. For years now popular culture has acknowledged this abstraction with a certain degree of wonder, thanks to the likes of Brian Greene and other science popularizers. Yet, there is one remarkable implication of these theories that seem to escape the attention of most of us: If matter exists in 10 spatial dimensions, then our bodies, which are made of matter, also fundamentally exist in 10 spatial dimensions. So the 3-dimensional body we see when we look down while dressing up each day is, in fact, a flattened projection of a 10-dimensional structure way beyond our ability to visualize spatially. ... How many structures are lost when we project a 10-dimensional body onto only 3 dimensions? How many 'organ systems' become completely invisible? How many complex, vital structures inherent to the inner-workings of a living body disappear in the projection? Going from 3 to 2 dimensions, as we all know, implies significant loss of information; and that is just the loss of a single dimension. Imagine the loss of 7 dimensions."



Our minds conditioned by the three dimensional world asks where are these so-called chakras, astral bodies, etc. claimed by many with extra-sensitive psychic (beyond three-dimensional) senses. There is theorizing going on already (string theory) that shows some ability to address these so-called super-natural things.

I suspect we are seeing the dawn of the next centuries of science.

Thoughts? I know these things are all theoretical and not testable at this time. But as I've suspected for some time now, I believe these so-called paranormal Unexplained Mysteries do involve 'real' things we don't understand. I hold this to be the strongest and most reasonable theory out there.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Bernardo Kastrup wrote a compelling description of what human physiology might look like in 10 dimension:

"According to different versions of String Theory, and especially M-Theory, up to 10 dimensions of space are required for describing and explaining the behavior of matter. For years now popular culture has acknowledged this abstraction with a certain degree of wonder, thanks to the likes of Brian Greene and other science popularizers. Yet, there is one remarkable implication of these theories that seem to escape the attention of most of us: If matter exists in 10 spatial dimensions, then our bodies, which are made of matter, also fundamentally exist in 10 spatial dimensions. So the 3-dimensional body we see when we look down while dressing up each day is, in fact, a flattened projection of a 10-dimensional structure way beyond our ability to visualize spatially. ... How many structures are lost when we project a 10-dimensional body onto only 3 dimensions? How many 'organ systems' become completely invisible? How many complex, vital structures inherent to the inner-workings of a living body disappear in the projection? Going from 3 to 2 dimensions, as we all know, implies significant loss of information; and that is just the loss of a single dimension. Imagine the loss of 7 dimensions."



Our minds conditioned by the three dimensional world asks where are these so-called chakras, astral bodies, etc. claimed by many with extra-sensitive psychic (beyond three-dimensional) senses. There is theorizing going on already (string theory) that shows some ability to address these so-called super-natural things.

I suspect we are seeing the dawn of the next centuries of science.

Thoughts? I know these things are all theoretical and not testable at this time. But as I've suspected for some time now, I believe these so-called paranormal Unexplained Mysteries do involve 'real' things we don't understand. I hold this to be the strongest and most reasonable theory out there.

I think it's wonderful speculation, but I don't think it's a particularly new idea...I've read some of his earlier work, as well as that of others, and they have discussed this issue...at least 10 years ago, if not longer.

And, I doubt that there is any way to reliably test it any time in the near future.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Thoughts? I know these things are all theoretical and not testable at this time.

No, they're perfectly testable:

If we had "organ systems" that interact with the parts of us that we see, but these "organ systems" aren't visible to us because they're in other spatial dimensions besides the three we can perceive, then our bodies would appear to violate the law of conservation of mass and the law of conservation of energy.

We can test this.

 

[George-ananda]

No, they're perfectly testable:

If we had "organ systems" that interact with the parts of us that we see, but these "organ systems" aren't visible to us because they're in other spatial dimensions besides the three we can perceive, then our bodies would appear to violate the law of conservation of mass and the law of conservation of energy.

We can test this.

To that I would think the events affect the physical at the subtlest (quantum) level. Why does quantum behavior do as it does? It’s a mystery from our three-dimensional perspective. Other dimensions affecting the physical??

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

To that I would think the events affect the physical at the subtlest (quantum) level.

Well, no. You said that we're talling about organs. They would affect things at the level of our physiology.

An "organ system" - even one in a hypothetical parallel dimension - would have mass and energy flows in and out.

Nutrients, waste products, neuronal signals, etc. to and from this unseen "organ system" would, from our perspective, disappear from and poof into existence.

This "organ system" would also have mass. This mass would give the person's body an unexpected excess of inertia, which could be measured.

The excerpt you quoted used a 2-dimensional world as an analogy; think about that. Imagine someone defined some plane through a 3-dimensional world as their 2-dimensional world and then tried to explain the movement of the things in that plane in terms of only forces and observable things in that plane; it wouldn't work at all. Everything the flatlander could see would behave wildly differently from how Newton's laws predict, because he wouldn't be accounting for forces and velocities in the dimension he can't see.

Again: we can test this.

 

[George-ananda]

Well, no. You said that we're talling about organs. They would affect things at the level of our physiology.

An "organ system" - even one in a hypothetical parallel dimension - would have mass and energy flows in and out.

Nutrients, waste products, neuronal signals, etc. to and from this unseen "organ system" would, from our perspective, disappear from and poof into existence.

Why do you think it must poof into the existence of our three dimensional senses except in ways we can not directly detect (at the quantum level)?

This "organ system" would also have mass. This mass would give the person's body an unexpected excess of inertia, which could be measured.

This is outside my expertise but I believe in quantum mechanics electron energy states are effected in ways not yet understood.

The excerpt you quoted used a 2-dimensional world as an analogy; think about that. Imagine someone defined some plane through a 3-dimensional world as their 2-dimensional world and then tried to explain the movement of the things in that plane in terms of only forces and observable things in that plane; it wouldn't work at all. Everything the flatlander could see would behave wildly differently from how Newton's laws predict, because he wouldn't be accounting for forces and velocities in the dimension he can't see.

Again: we can test this.

Normal two-dimensional physics can describe two-dimensional billiard ball movement accurately. Now if someone puts some English on a shot you are involving some third dimensional forces that would just look like a mystery to the two-dimensional senses. Perhaps mysterious quantum behavior is extra-dimensional forces at play?? Just rough thinking an analogy here.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Bernardo Kastrup wrote a compelling description of what human physiology might look like in 10 dimension

If the string theorists are correct about anything or have anything other than some mathematical results, then if what they are correct about includes the necessity of extra-dimensions (which basically all the various incarnations of so-called string theory require), then human physiology will look like it does now. A major result from string theorists includes first showing that it is possible to compactify the extra spatial dimensions rigorously and then next (unfortunately for them) that there are infinitely many ways of doing this which are non-trivially related. The point is that if string theorists are correct, then human physiology is already 10 or 11-dimensional or rather that our physiology is part of a universe that is.

Thoughts? I know these things are all theoretical and not testable at this time.

What isn't testable is not whether or not there exist extra dimensions in the manner you suggest. This is demonstrably testable: no such dimensions exist. If string theoriests hadn't been able to explain why we could live in a universe that we experience as 3D actually has a bunch of extra spatial dimensions, then it would have been dead in the water. It is possible, however, to consistently compactify the extra-dimensions which can explain how we have been living as 11-dimensional beings or experiencing 10-dimensional space (or 26, or whatever turns out to be required to get the symmetries and so forth to work out correctly) but it in a reality that so well approximates 3 spatial dimensions we didn't notice.

But as I've suspected for some time now, I believe these so-called paranormal Unexplained Mysteries do involve 'real' things we don't understand. I hold this to be the strongest and most reasonable theory out there.

Dimensions here simply refer to bases of a space or simplistically to the number of coordinates. They do not refer to supernatural realms or dimensions of thought or any other kind of use of the word. In statistical mechanics and quantum field theory, one is often working in spaces that have many billions of dimensions, and in statistics and modeling more generally it is quite common to require spaces of tens of thousands of dimensions. Moreover, it is often more "bizarre" when the spaces are not endowed with the typical structures we equip the n-dimensional spaces with. For example, it is a simple matter to treat time as an extra-dimension in non-relativistic physics (in fact, often enough in basic undergraduate calculus and mechanics classes you probably did this, or something that could have been exactly this, when treating systems parametrically with t for time as the parameter or as an argument of functions). Likewise it is often convenient to have 2 or 3 spatial dimensions but have one or more dimensions representing coordinates for e.g., temperature or pressure or altitude or even income! But in relativistic physics, even when we are dealing with systems with only 1-degree of freedom (so e.g., a train or car moving only along one spatial dimension), we can't treat time like this because the geometry of the space is changed so we can treat appropriate equivalence classes of observers equally.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

To that I would think the events affect the physical at the subtlest (quantum) level. Why does quantum behavior do as it does? It’s a mystery from our three-dimensional perspective. Other dimensions affecting the physical??

In quantum mechanics, the states of virtually all systems exist in infinite-dimensional spaces.

 

[George-ananda]

If the string theorists are correct about anything or have anything other than some mathematical results, then if what they are correct about includes the necessity of extra-dimensions (which basically all the various incarnations of so-called string theory require), then human physiology will look like it does now. A major result from string theorists includes first showing that it is possible to compactify the extra spatial dimensions rigorously and then next (unfortunately for them) that there are infinitely many ways of doing this which are non-trivially related. The point is that if string theorists are correct, then human physiology is already 10 or 11-dimensional or rather that our physiology is part of a universe that is.



What isn't testable is not whether or not there exist extra dimensions in the manner you suggest. This is demonstrably testable: no such dimensions exist. If string theoriests hadn't been able to explain why we could live in a universe that we experience as 3D actually has a bunch of extra spatial dimensions, then it would have been dead in the water. It is possible, however, to consistently compactify the extra-dimensions which can explain how we have been living as 11-dimensional beings or experiencing 10-dimensional space (or 26, or whatever turns out to be required to get the symmetries and so forth to work out correctly) but it in a reality that so well approximates 3 spatial dimensions we didn't notice.

Dimensions here simply refer to bases of a space or simplistically to the number of coordinates. They do not refer to supernatural realms or dimensions of thought or any other kind of use of the word. In statistical mechanics and quantum field theory, one is often working in spaces that have many billions of dimensions, and in statistics and modeling more generally it is quite common to require spaces of tens of thousands of dimensions. Moreover, it is often more "bizarre" when the spaces are not endowed with the typical structures we equip the n-dimensional spaces with. For example, it is a simple matter to treat time as an extra-dimension in non-relativistic physics (in fact, often enough in basic undergraduate calculus and mechanics classes you probably did this, or something that could have been exactly this, when treating systems parametrically with t for time as the parameter or as an argument of functions). Likewise it is often convenient to have 2 or 3 spatial dimensions but have one or more dimensions representing coordinates for e.g., temperature or pressure or altitude or even income! But in relativistic physics, even when we are dealing with systems with only 1-degree of freedom (so e.g., a train or car moving only along one spatial dimension), we can't treat time like this because the geometry of the space is changed so we can treat appropriate equivalence classes of observers equally.

Well you have always been thorough legion.

What do you briefly and simply think of the OP quote. Possible? Impossible?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Well you have always been thorough legion.

What do you briefly and simply think of the OP quote. Possible? Impossible?

Either
1) The string theorists are correct, and our universe really does have 10 or 11 dimensions, in which case human physiology will be what it always was (hence compactification).
2) The string theorists are wrong, in which case the whole question is moot.
These exhaust the possibilities. The viability of string theory rests on its ability to ensure that the extra dimensions required are irrelevant even at the atomic scale. Mathematically, theorists have shown how it is possible for us to have been living in a 11-dimension world that is so close to the 3D spatial universe that the difference is irrelevant to us and the protons and so forth of which we are composed. Physically, it is unlikely we will ever obtain direct evidence for the extra dimensions precisely because the theory requires them to be irrelevant at all measurable scales.

 

[George-ananda]

Either
1) The string theorists are correct, and our universe really does have 10 or 11 dimensions, in which case human physiology will be what it always was (hence compactification).

Are you familiar with the claim of chakra energy systems in various eastern and western esoteric traditions? People claim to clairvoyantly see these things and I have read lengthy dissertations going into the details of what they see, I would assume using 'psychic senses' (another one of the non-physical organs perhaps),

Well I am thinking Kastrup is considering the possibility of things like chakra energy centers that include matter which I would speculate is detectable only in some fourth or fifth dimension so we can not directly detect with three-dimensional senses.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts and if you could in your best effort keep at more of an educated layman's level. I am not deep into physics like the majority here. I just have come to believe dramatic real things are out there that MUST eventually have a scientific explanation even if at some future date.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Are you familiar with the claim of chakra energy systems in various eastern and western esoteric traditions? People claim to clairvoyantly see these things and I have read lengthy dissertations going into the details of what they see, I would assume using 'psychic senses' (another one of the non-physical organs perhaps),

Well I am thinking Kastrup is considering the possibility of things like chakra energy centers that include matter which I would speculate is detectable only in some fourth or fifth dimension so we can not directly detect with three-dimensional senses.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts and if you could in your best effort keep at more of an educated layman's level. I am not deep into physics like the majority here. I just have come to believe dramatic real things are out there that MUST eventually have a scientific explanation even if at some future date.

I can't comment generally on the possibilities for scientific explanations of psychic phenomena or parapsychology, as that would be too far afield. What I can say is that you would probably be best served if, whenever you come across references to this or that dimension or dimensions in physics to mentally replace the word "dimension(s)" with "coordinate axe(s)". The term dimension has meanings in common use and elsewhere that it doesn't have when used in the context of string theory, M-theory, spacetime, etc. If you have the familiar (x,y) plane you have two dimensions. If you add a third dimension you get another coordinate axis. If you add another dimension you get yet another coordinate axis. And you can keep going indefinitely.
The problem is that while it is often quite convenient to work in various higher dimensional spaces, models of spacetime or the universe in physics have to account for what we observe and experience (whether in high-energy particle experiments or walking around). We experience higher dimensions all the time in the sense that we can always talk about the world we experience as having three spatial axes and in addition having additional axes that allow us to define time, temperature, etc. But string theories require extra spatial dimensions. So in order for them to work, they must be inaccessible to us for any theory to be remotely plausible.
In short, this isn't the place to look for something akin to the extra dimensions you are talking about. These extra dimensions are like adding another coordinate axis to space, but one that will always appear not to be there. You could think of it as if, when looking at graph paper, the lines that look as if they were lines are actually tubes that will always look like lines no matter how closely you examine them. That's because if a tube is small enough, it will look like a line (the same way a small enough sphere will look like a point).
The extra coordinates in string theory are like this. They are extra spatial axes that are rolled up like the "tubes" on graph paper so that they are undetectable.
Also, unlike with dimensions in the sense of e.g., the astral plane or a spiritual dimension, you cannot ever experience or access one of these extra coordinate axes. You must always be in all of them all the time, just as when you move around now. When you only turn left/right, you only turn in one dimension, but you continue to experience three spatial dimensions. If string theorists are right, then you are actually turning along one spatial axes while your body continues to exist in 10 or 11 coordinate space, while most of the coordinate axes are wrapped up so tightly that you only feel three spatial directions not 10 or 11.