What's the point?

Modern science describes the universe in terms of forces and dimensions. We all know force, that which can do work, often called energy. And we’ve all heard of three dimensional space, if not four dimensional space-time. But these common terms are misnomers, there are in fact four dimensions of space, not three.

The simplest, most elemental dimension of space is the point, a theoretical dimension without length, width or height, a zero dimension, sometimes called a singularity. Trying to imagine a theoretical point is as difficult as trying to imagine space or time continuing on for ever, without end.

String an infinite number of points together, end to end, and you have a one dimensional line. Now we can all relate to a line, something to hang the clothes on. But a theoretical line cannot be observed, since it has only length, no width or height. To the naked eye, it would be invisible.

Stack a heap of lines on top of each other and we have a two dimensional plane. This we can easily imagine, it looks like a wall, or a flat screen, but again, these everyday examples are an illusion, an imagining, since we know that all examples of planes are actually surfaces of “three dimensional” objects. A theoretical plane, having only width and height but no depth, would be invisible.

So far, we’ve identified three dimensions of space; the point, the line and the plane, which means the next dimension, the one called “three dimensional space”, is actually the fourth dimension of space, since it contains all of the three simpler dimensions, point, line and plane.

Now we can be sure that “three dimensional space” really does exist, it’s not just theoretical, it’s not an illusion, we know three dimensional space exists because we can walk around in the room and feel it. But what if that space existed for no time at all, could we say it really existed? Can there be existence without duration? Can space really exist without time? We know it always takes time to move through space, but apart from that, there is no obvious connection between the four dimensions of space and the fifth dimension of time. Whereas the four dimensions of space are bound together in a theoretical hierarchy, from the simple point, through line, plane to volume, time is an entirely different concept, yet in a way, essential to our observation and understanding of space. Notice this curious interdependence between the various dimensions, each one seems to rely on the others and/or human imagination to exist.

To this point, we have described an observable, multi-dimensional environment which we call the Universe. We can all agree that this environment exists, because we live in it, we experience it. But would it exist if there was nothing to observe it? If we could not imagine the first three theoretical dimensions of space - the point, the line and the plane - would we be aware of space? Would it exist? This is a question that continues to puzzle philosophers and theoretical physicists. The science of quantum mechanics recognises the integral role of the observer in constructing theories and modelling sub-atomic events. Maybe the human imagination, or the experience of mind, is yet another dimension of reality, interdependent with the others.

A theoretical point doesn’t really exist, but is contained within a theoretical line, which doesn’t really exist either, but is contained within a theoretical plane, which likewise doesn’t really exist but is contained within a theoretical volume which doesn’t really exist except that it is contained within time, and since we can observe it over time, we can be sure it exists. So has the Universe created us to observe and imagine itself, or have we created the Universe through our observations and imaginings?

Just wondering.

American humour

The Washington Post headline reads

U.S. Warns Russia to Act More Like A Democracy...

Haha hah a haha hah ahaha hahaha hahaha, hahahahaha hah a haha haha hah ahah allah akbah ah ahahaha hahahahaha, haha hahahaha haha haha haha hah a haha hah aha hahahaha hahahahaha haha hahahaha hahahahahaha.

Ha haha? Hahaha haha. Ha hah a hate hahahaha haha hahahaha. Ha haha liar aha hah a hah aha. Haha hahahaha haha hahaha hah aha haha hahahaha – hah ahahaha hahaha hahahaha. Ha hah ahahaha hahaha hah a haha hah a haha hahahaha haha. Haha haha haha haha haha kill aha hah ahaha.

Ha hahahaha haha hahahaha, hahahaha hah a haha hahaha hah aha, haha haha hahahahaha hahaha hah ahaha hahahaha. Haha hah ahahahahahaha hill aha haha – haha hahaha, haha hahaha, haha hahaha-hahaha. Ha haha haha hah aha haha. Haha haha haha?

Ha hah aha haha hahahaha. Hahaha hah aha haha hah a 9/11 haha hahaha hah aha hah ahaha ha, hahaha hah a hahaha hahaha. Haha hahahaha haha hahaha fall aha hahahaha hah ahahaha, hah aha haha hah ahaha hahaha. Hahaha hahaha hah ahaha hahahahahaha hell ahaha hehe hahahahaha.

That's a good one :-0

Is it "Do as I say, not as I do"

or should it be

"Practice what you preach"

“America has a choice to make, and there is no question that a return to democratic reform in America will generate further success for its people and greater respect among fellow nations.”

Digging up the past

The Howard government has quietly stifled debate about the war in Iraq, and the opposition seems content to let the matter lie. The mainstream media is similarly disinclined to revisit the ugly episode that led to the invasion of Iraq. The whole topic is now officially taboo.

It’s old news, the warmongers murmur, there’s nothing to be gained by digging up the past, let’s move on, after all, we’re at war now, not a time for disunity or self-criticism.

Yet every day, the violence and chaos that Bush, Howard and Blair unleashed, takes its toll on human life and the environment in Iraq, and each day heralds anew this crime against humanity, while our politicians and media commentators gloss over the polity’s hypocrisy and culpability.

There has been no expression of regret or contrition on the part of those who actively championed aggression against Iraq and who did so in defiance of international law, with reckless indifference to the consequences and little more than contempt for the life and rights of Iraq’s innocent civilians.

Indeed, despite conceding that Iraq had no WMD or links to al Qa`ida, and in the face of a disastrous security situation, the proponents and instigators of the Iraq war continue to insist they did the “Right Thing”. From their point of view, the facts on the ground are irrelevant.

It is tempting to view the current crises in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran and the Levant as the intended consequence of the Bush administration’s “Global War on Terror”, a shadow-war that has reinvigorated the Pentagon, nourished the US armaments industry and pushed up the price of oil, to the benefit of US oil majors now reaping record profits.

Is it merely a coincidence that Bush, Rice and Cheney are all closely associated with the US oil industry, or is there a conflict of interest in the White House? Are the best interests of the citizenry completely compatible with the corporate interests of big oil and the weapons industry?

Is Australia sending armed forces abroad to kill foreigners so that US capitalist heavyweights can maintain their unfair advantage on the world market? Do we benefit from the wanton slaughter of innocent civilians in far flung places, and if so, by how much?

Howard and his ministers have never even attempted to explain exactly what we're doing with the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, there has been no intelligent debate or discussion in Parliament or the media ... it’s just been shut up, keep quiet, don’t say anything ... and from both sides of the political divide.

If this keeps up, I fear we’re cruising for a bruising.