A space and the Universe question

[rusty JEDI]

The post with whats south of the south pole reminded me of something i used to wonder about.

Is space totally 3 dimensions or kind of just lying on a flat plane.

Say from earth do you have to just fly left to jupiter and further left to neptune. Or do you have to fly 10 units left and 6 units up for jupiter, and 20 units left and 5 units down to get to neptune?

It seems all the models of our solar system show the planets on the same axis. What if you flew straight up from this? Why are there no planets spinning on a vertical axis around our sun instead of on a horizontal axis?

Thanks

rJ

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

Is space totally 3 dimensions or kind of just lying on a flat plane.

[/ QUOTE ]

String theory suggests that the universe has no fewer than ten dimensions and that we are only capable of seeing three of them.

Wrap you head around that.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/

[scotty34]

Space is in 4 dimensions and is actually known as space-time.

To get to Jupiter from Earth for an example, you will need to travel 4 units on the x-axis (forward), 12 units on the y-axis (left), 6 units on the z-axis (up). Given that Earth is the origin (0,0,0) on the x-y-z plane, you must arrive at your destination of (4,12,6). However, this is not enough. You must also add in the time coordinate to ensure that you arrive at Jupiter. You must arrive at point (4,12,6) 4 hours (units) from the present time 0 or else Jupiter will have continued on its rotation around the sun, and will no longer be there when you arrive.

To intersect with Jupiter at the same point in space and time, you must travel to point (4,12,6,4) in 4 dimensional space-time.

[jgorham]

The reason planets are always depicted on the same horizontal aspect is because they are. Some are more declined than others from this plane, but in general all the planets are pretty much rotating in the same direction on the same plane.

The main theory which explains this phenomonen is that Solar systems are created from clouds of interstellar dust. The gravity of these unfathomably giant clouds eventually overpowers the natural force which holds the particles apart, and they begin to combine. As a result of this process, the dust and planetary forms all begin to spin (conservation of rotational forces). Its this spin that accounts for the same direction in the orbits of the planets and the fact that the planets all exist on the same plane.

[Brainwalter]

Yes, space is 3-dimensional, but I believe (someone correct me if this is wrong) the planetsof our solar system ARE on the same plane (roughly?). Pluto might be different though

[scotty34]

roughly yes. Just like the matter orbiting around Saturn in its rings is in roughly the same plane. However, some of those chunks of matter can be above or below other chunks on a vertical axis as well.

[jgorham]

I love that video Dynasty. Everyone should watch it.

[AEKDBet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Is space totally 3 dimensions or kind of just lying on a flat plane.

[/ QUOTE ]

String theory suggests that the universe has no fewer than ten dimensions and that we are only capable of seeing three of them.

Wrap you head around that.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm with dynasty on this one. Anyone remember CERN from Dan Brown's Angels and Demon's. They accelerate particles around a track and have them collide. They are watching for a gravitron to slip into another dimension or to actually see a sparticle (which is so dense that it can't be seen by our technology yet) These things would help to prove string theory, which for now is an unprovable theory - I mean how can we check out the other dimensions right?.

The latest that I know about the whole 10+ dimension thing is that there are actually 5 correct string theories.

That is they worked out all the crazy math and got rid of all the anomolies. One guy (Whitten is is name I think) gave a speech describing how disappointing this is, since string theory is supposed to be the unifying theory for both relativity (large physics - planets moving etc) and quantum mechanics (really small physics like atoms). And now they have 5 correct sting theories???

The way he put it was that the universe was actually in 5 "slices" of reality (I guess thats the word).

We exist on one "slice" and can never cross over into another slice. Another slice could have a whole different set of rules and existance that are ruled over by one of the 5 string theories. All very interesting and mind boggling stuff.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
One guy (Whitten is is name I think)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, Ed Witten of Princeton. The releavant theory is Seiberg-Witten theory.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
One guy (Whitten is is name I think) gave a speech describing how disappointing this is, since string theory is supposed to be the unifying theory for both relativity (large physics - planets moving etc) and quantum mechanics (really small physics like atoms). And now they have 5 correct sting theories???

The way he put it was that the universe was actually in 5 "slices" of reality (I guess thats the word).


[/ QUOTE ]

Don't worry. In 50 years, someobdy will work out more advanced theories. And, then those theories will be expanded on 50 years after that.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
I love that video Dynasty. Everyone should watch it.

[/ QUOTE ]

what video?

[lucas9000]

is this a joke?

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I love that video Dynasty. Everyone should watch it.

[/ QUOTE ]

what video?

[/ QUOTE ]

The Elegent Universe

I linked the website above.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I love that video Dynasty. Everyone should watch it.

[/ QUOTE ]

what video?

[/ QUOTE ]

The Elegent Universe

I linked the website above.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea. I went to the website. There's a bunch of stuff there. I guess he's talking about buying the video they have fvor sale?

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
String theory suggests that the universe has no fewer than ten dimensions and that we are only capable of seeing three of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dynasty beats me to the punch again.

[[censored]]

Is of the dimensions a universe where everything is opposite what it is here? This is known as the Bizaaro theory.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
Is of the dimensions a universe where everything is opposite what it is here? This is known as the Bizaaro theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://rds.yahoo.com/S=96062883/K=mr+spock+beard/v=2/SID=w/l=IVI/SIG=12gprs8du/EXP=1110489904/*-http%3A//www.trek5.com/caps/tos/39_MM/thumbnails/39_MM-049.jpg

[andyfox]

jgorham gave a good response as far as the orbits of the planets are concerned. There is no up and down in space. Our convention of putting the North Pole at the top of our globves and maps and the South Pole at the bottom is just that: a convention. It was adopted because Europeans lived in the Northern hemisphere.

[jimdmcevoy]

Another thing that's interesting is that our magnetic North pole is actually a South pole. The north end of a magnet when aligned with the Earth's magnetic field points north, aligning with Earth's South magnetic field. But I think we call it the North Magnetic Pole to avoid confusion or something

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
Another thing that's interesting is that our magnetic North pole is actually a South pole. The north end of a magnet when aligned with the Earth's magnetic field points north, aligning with Earth's South magnetic field. But I think we call it the North Magnetic Pole to avoid confusion or something

[/ QUOTE ]
Convention.

[jimdmcevoy]

I wouldn't exactly call it convention, it's actually wrong i'd say

North magnetic poles don't align with North magnetic poles, you could call our North pole the North magnetic pole, but then in line with that convention you'd have to change what we call North and South on all other magnetic fields

[M2d]

which dimension(s) is Azkaban in?

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't exactly call it convention, it's actually wrong i'd say

North magnetic poles don't align with North magnetic poles, you could call our North pole the North magnetic pole, but then in line with that convention you'd have to change what we call North and South on all other magnetic fields

[/ QUOTE ]
You can call either one whatever the hell you want because it's just convention. Also, why hasn't someone come in yet with the crap about how the north and south poles switch polarity every however many thousand years?

[TimM]

Talking about string theory and the curvature of space in reference to our own solar system is like talking about the curvature of the earth in reference to your backyard.

[jimdmcevoy]

You can't really, because of this fact:

like poles repel and dislike poles attract

this is not a convention

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
which dimension(s) is Azkaban in?

[/ QUOTE ]

Azkaban is located on an island north of Great Britain. Here's a picture of it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v720/DynastyPoker/prisoner_300.jpg

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
You can call either one whatever the hell you want because it's just convention. Also, why hasn't someone come in yet with the crap about how the north and south poles switch polarity every however many thousand years?

[/ QUOTE ]

mumble mumble Rocket Science mumble mumble

[Sweaburg]

[ QUOTE ]
You can't really, because of this fact:

like poles repel and dislike poles attract

this is not a convention

[/ QUOTE ]

PDPG is right. It doesn't matter what you call North or South...Take this scenario: I give you two bar magnets each one with an N and and S painted on them. When you bring them close together the two N's attract each other. Which one is the 'real' north pole?

He's also right about the polarity of the Earths magnetic field reversing occasionally too. So calling it the North pole really is just convention.

Randy

[EliteNinja]

According to current M-theory, the universe is made up of 11 dimensions.

[TimM]

This reminds me of a puzzle.

You have two steel rods, identical except one is magnetized and one is not. How do you tell which is which, using nothing but the rods themselves.

[Eihli]

i got it via torrent a while back, might still be up somewhere if you look.

[CORed]

The "north pole" of a portable magnet is called that because it will point north if the magnet is allowed to move freely. Some people use the term "North seeking pole" The "north magnetic pole" is called that becasue it is near the geographic norh pole. It is inface a "south pole".

[CORed]

Take one of the rods and put the end of it near the center of the other rod. The end of the magnetized rod will attract the middle of the non-magnetized rod strongly. The end of the non-magnetized rod will have very weak attraction for the middle of the magnetized rod.

[CORed]

Space as a whole is layed out in three dimensions (or four if you include time). The major planets, and most of the asteroids in our solar system orbit in approximately the same plane (called the plane of the ecliptic). The orbits of some comets, OTOH are highly inclined relative to the ecliptic.

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Is space totally 3 dimensions or kind of just lying on a flat plane.

[/ QUOTE ]

String theory suggests that the universe has no fewer than ten dimensions and that we are only capable of seeing three of them.

Wrap you head around that.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/

[/ QUOTE ]

The Elegant Universe is great. Also, isn't it generally conceded that there are exactly 11 dimensions?

In regard to the original question, all of our nine major planets orbit the sun on roughly the same plane (called the ecliptic) except for Pluto, whose orbit is ~17 degrees off of the others. All orbits except for two, Pluto and one other (maybe Mercury?), are nearly circular. They all orbit in the same direction relative to the sun, and all but three of them spin in that same direction (don't remember which three except Earth is not one of them).

GoT

[guller]

You can watch the video from that link. Just watched the whole 3 hours straight, very cool.