[futrethink]

---Mohan.C.

---I must apologize for the misperception of your statement and my incorrect answer for it

A line cannot be have more than 2 dimension so practically it is a measure of distance between the two points if you don't want to measure it it just connects the two points. ---Hypothetical experiment: if a line of two dimensions was to pass through your body, from one side to the other, what would happen to you?

---I was looking at it the wrong way. I will have a better answer, for a line being perceived as only having two diMEMsions, in a later post.

[Mohan.C]

I think I should have said it is zero instead of saying it's like zero. And a point does'nt have a non-existence existence it is non-existent. Zero is not non-existent existence it is complete absence.

[JAK]

Originally Posted by Mohan.C I think I should have said it is zero instead of saying it's like zero. And a point does'nt have a non-existence existence it is non-existent. Zero is not non-existent existence it is complete absence.

I beg to differ. Yes, "zero" covers non-existence. But a point is not zero, thus it is separate and must exist. You have defined a point paradoxically. If a point exists within a 3 dimensional universe, then your require an aether, a concept that others are promoting.

[futrethink]

Mohan.c.

---It’s not hard to see where this is going to go. Sigh.
---An argument between a mathematician/believer in all things numerical and an, attempting to be, objective philosopher about subjective and objective nonexistence.
---Ah well. Into the fray of the paradox.

And a point does'nt have a non-existence existence it is non-existent. Zero is not non-existent existence it is complete absence.

---For something to have a complete absence is to have no knowledge of it, by anyone or anything within existence.
---Since you have knowledge of ‘zero’ and a belief about the concept that it attempts to describe, both have an existence. The existence arises from a temporal/past perception. It has no existence in the present or ever will in the future.
---The concept itself, outside of existence, has never existed, does not exist and never will exist. It is the nth unknown variable.
---It’s (the described concept) nonexistence creates an effect with all things that exist.

A line cannot be have more than 2 dimension so practically it is a measure of distance between the two points if you don't want to measure it it just connects the two points.

---A perception of a one dimensional line would be a physical perception of the first diMEMsion/membrane and a mental construction of the second diMEMsion/membrane.
---Take it away. Time for the numbers and the religious belief in their truth.

[bottomlander]

Originally Posted by futrethink Mohan.c. ...the first diMEMsion/membrane and a mental construction of the second diMEMsion/membrane.

Dear Mohan.C.

I think you have a good reason to make the MEM be emphasized and changed the word dimension into a new spelling.}|
Are you implying it as a sub-dimension of a membrane?


Best Regards. Bottomlander

[Mohan.C]

I am very sorry for a big mistake in my earlier post. A line is single dimensional isn't it. It only has length.

[Mohan.C]

JAK,

I don't believe there is a need for anything like aether. And a point cannot exist in a 3d space it is perceived for convenience in mathematical calculations, it has to be zero. If it is anything more, then a line will also have to have the dimensions of the point. A line is single dimension, a plane which needs a minimum of three straight lines is two dimensional. It can have length and breadth. An object which is a composition of planes is 3 dimensional, it has length breadth and height. An object in existence in the universe can have another dimension of time.


May be refer to point as the annihilation of dimensions. All dimensions are annihilated at the point and all dimensions start from the point. I don't mean the beginning of the universe or anything like that.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by bottomlander Dear Mohan.C. I think you have a good reason to make the MEM be emphasized and changed the word dimension into a new spelling.}| Are you implying it as a sub-dimension of a membrane? Best Regards. Bottomlander

I think futrethink is treating membranes as dimensions. As I am not familiar with the membrane theory and as I am also not sure in which understanding futrethink has replied it would be inappropriate for me to comment as the understanding of each of us differs.

[Mohan.C]

futrethink I think you are talking of the presence of an object in perception, not physical. Is that right.


P.S. Thanks for referring to me as a mathematician, I dreadfully hate that subject and very weak in mathematics. But its really nice to be referred to as one.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by futrethink Mohan.c. ---For something to have a complete absence is to have no knowledge of it, by anyone or anything within existence. ---Since you have knowledge of ‘zero’ and a belief about the concept that it attempts to describe, both have an existence. The existence arises from a temporal/past perception. It has no existence in the present or ever will in the future. ---The concept itself, outside of existence, has never existed, does not exist and never will exist. It is the nth unknown variable. ---It’s (the described concept) nonexistence creates an effect with all things that exist.

I think that is why I have more belief in the logic of computers(binary system). Its either true or false. 0 or 1. It exists or it does not exist.