1. “Dimension” is a term that may refer to more than things you can see on a ruler. Remember that we accept time as a dimension, yet we can’t see it. So the difficulty in understanding a “dimension” that is to small to see may just be due to the word not being perfect. The growth of our vocabulary lags the growth of our knowledge. Also, creative thinking “leads” our knowledge, because it considers what “might be”, not “what is”. So there will be a large gap between creative thinking and the vocabulary that supports it.

2. Please do not limit your thinking by applying our limited math to it. Our math is not nearly well developed enough to describe many things. This has been a problem throughout the growth of civilization, and number systems have evolved and expanded to accomodate the needs of the civilization. Imagine trying to do the math we do but using Roman numerals.

The Japanese didn’t have “zero” until Western civilizations brought it to them, and they spent more time on art that on math, look at them now…

Our number system is digital, and does not accurately describe things, such as length, without splitting a digit into smaller divisions, maybe again and again, giving us all those numbers below “1”, such as “0.075” and things like that. Numbers less than one don’t work well with math, as the measuring standard division will distort things. Try doing the same math on an item that measures 0.080 inches, and then compare the results to the same thing done in Metric, using 2mm instead of 0.080 inches. The answers are completely different.

For example let’s say we have a rule that a weld spot size should be “five root T” of the thickness of the metal. We mean that you find the square root of the thickness and multiply it by five, and that is the ideal weld spot diameter.

So two pieces of metal 2mm which are to be welded… the root of 2mm is 1.41, and 5 times that is 7mm. That is our spot diameter.

Now try it in SAE dimensions: root of 0.080 inches is 0.28 Times 5 is 1.4 inches…

Way different results.

Try square roots of negative numbers. Our system is so bad we have added the letter “i” to identify that the value came from a negative number.

We also base everything on “10”, (radix), hmmm, we can count that on our fingers. What if we were a 3-toed sloth, would our radix be the same?

So when space visitors arrive and we try to establish communications by spewing out prime numbers, try to look in the window of their ship and see how many fingers the radio operator is scratching his head with. If it isn’t ten, then you know why he is scratching his head…

So keep an open mind, we aren’t ready to understand a lot of this, so don’t think that something that is not understandable is impossible.

Thanks for listen.. oop, ..reading this.

]]>But how these effects can be used for superluminal propulsion? This doesn’t seem real at all for me. As a much more viable appears the concepts of Woodward’s, Shawyer’s or Heim’s drive, which are based on the way, by which the jellyfish is moving through watter.

]]>First, who are you and why are you an authority? (For those who haven’t noticed, the book he’s posted and is referring to is one he wrote.)

Second, if universes can’t exist in other than 3+1, then you should probably tell string theorists about it since most string theory appears to work with 11 dimensions.

Third, your book has 1.5 stars on Amazon, out of a whopping two reviews. While Amazon is hardly an authority on good scientific texts, I hesitate to describe your book as a “good scientific text” based on the evidence.

And finally, when I search for “R Mirman” on Google, a stunning number of the results are you advertising your book. This is, likewise, not a good sign.

]]>