Diamond's theories

User avatar
Diamonds
subbot maintenance
Posts: 161
Joined: 04 Dec 2012 23:47
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Contact:

Diamond's theories

Post by Diamonds »

i've got a creeping feeling that this may be a duplicate theory, but here goes nothin.

we, the Skutnik fandom, have already established that the coordinate system in sub5 (cipher plates) is two dimensional and that the teleporters we're more familiar with are three dimensional. (credit to Zerpentos.) i've also come to the idea that the lighthouse teleporter from sub2 may have been an attempt at a 1-dimensional teleporter, but I've dismissed that idea as I did not have sufficient evidence, although it was an intriguing concept. now that sub8's come out, I came back to the idea of dimensions after reading old theories.

please note: "dimension" is not referring to worlds; it refers to actual spatial dimension. (i'm ignoring time as a dimension to make things less hard to understand.)

the layers are like pieces of paper laid on top of each other, are they not? put your pencil on the stack and it's the same spot all the way through those pieces of paper. if these layers are the same spot but with a different surrounding, a different certain... variable, be it 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or even the unknown 8. it is this variable that determines the surroundings. what could this variable represent if not a coordinate in a 4th dimension?

my further evidence for the skeptics is that these layers cannot represent different worlds because different worlds cannot share areas, because they are wholly separate. were two "worlds" to share a coordinate in any way, they would be connected, and thus actually the same world. the layers are not separate realities; they are different aspects of the same reality, or rather, different positions in an extra dimension.

thus the small device that we use to switch layers is nothing more than a portable, single dimensional teleporter. a portable proto-submachine.

what intrigues me is whether this 4th dimension mechanism applies to the 2 or 3 coordinate system as well, or whether it doesn't. is 2 coordinate system functioning in two of our familiar three dimensions, or is it functioning in a 4th and 5th? maybe it's even functioning in one of the familiar three and a 4th dimension. similarly, does the 3 coordinate system function with our familiar three dimensions and the player is simply moving around the subnet? maybe we are moving through the 4th, 5th, and 6th dimensions? or are we moving through a combination of the two?

the take-away (TL;DR): we're moving through a 4th spatial dimension in sub8 using a single-coordinate portable submachine, and the layers are merely different positions in the 4th dimension. does this imply that the multi-coordinate submachines might also be moving the player in extra dimensions?

===EDIT===

as i said below...

in between layers there's either more layers or kind of medleys between the two surrounding layers. this depends on whether objects in the subnet extend in the 4th dimension (the latter) or whether they are simply three dimensional objects (the former.) the medleys wouldn't be like 50% opacity layer 1 on top of layer 2, because that'd be like saying that something from layer 1 is only half there, which is silly (we're not talking about quantum mechanics!) an object is either at a specific location or isn't, and two objects can't overlap (usually.) however, what i believe would happen is like taking bits and pieces of both layers and kind of just poking them in at different spots. just think of the layer system as a different dimension; a different direction to move. the simplest comparison i could think of is thinking of a number line. "line segment AB is present at the coordinate 1, but not at 2. this means that the line must end somewhere in between." line segments, 1-dimensional objects, don't just fade away. similarly, 4-dimensional objects wouldn't just fade into nothing.

it's really abstract, so it might be hard to wrap one's head around.

quickly drawn diagram for anyone who wants

the boxes represent objects
the x-axis represents position in the 4th dimension, or layers
the y-axis represents position in a "regular" dimensions, or one of the first three

the box representing a sign is irregularly shaped to show that maybe just parts of objects can poke through into the in-between areas.
Last edited by Diamonds on 24 Feb 2014 02:56, edited 4 times in total.
I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
User avatar
ENIHCAMBUS
karma portal traveller
Posts: 8653
Joined: 04 Feb 2013 22:17
Location: Pastel Lands.

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by ENIHCAMBUS »

gemini wrote:Hey dude, could you change the color of your text. Red on white background, not good for the eyes. At least mine.
Yeah, my eyes hurt.
ENIHCAMBUS: State of the Art Scanning!
🧐
User avatar
Diamonds
subbot maintenance
Posts: 161
Joined: 04 Dec 2012 23:47
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Contact:

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by Diamonds »

alright. =|
I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
User avatar
Vortex
Murtaugh's hunter
Posts: 12140
Joined: 03 Dec 2012 17:11
Location: Spain

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by Vortex »

yeah, I think it might be a duplicate, but it's a good theory nonetheless.

But I think there's a problem, there's a finite number of layers, so that dimension has to be a discrete dimension unlike the spatial ones, that are continuous. If not, there must be something between two consecutive layers, but I can't imagine what might be.
User avatar
Diamonds
subbot maintenance
Posts: 161
Joined: 04 Dec 2012 23:47
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Contact:

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by Diamonds »

in between layers there's either more layers or kind of medleys between the two surrounding layers. this depends on whether objects in the subnet extend in the 4th dimension (the latter) or whether they are simply three dimensional objects (the former.) the medleys wouldn't be like 50% opacity layer 1 on top of layer 2, because that'd be like saying that something from layer 1 is only half there, which is silly (we're not talking about quantum mechanics!) an object is either at a specific location or isn't, and two objects can't overlap (usually.) however, what i believe would happen is like taking bits and pieces of both layers and kind of just poking them in at different spots. just think of the layer system as a different dimension; a different direction to move. the simplest comparison i could think of is thinking of a number line. "line segment AB is present at the coordinate 1, but not at 2. this means that the line must end somewhere in between." line segments, 1-dimensional objects, don't just fade away. similarly, 4-dimensional objects wouldn't just fade into nothing.

it's really abstract, so it might be hard to wrap one's head around.

EDIT:

quickly drawn diagram for anyone who wants

the boxes represent objects
the x-axis represents position in the 4th dimension, or layers
the y-axis represents position in a "regular" dimensions, or one of the first three

the box representing a sign is irregularly shaped to show that maybe just parts of objects can poke through into the in-between areas.
I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
User avatar
Vortex
Murtaugh's hunter
Posts: 12140
Joined: 03 Dec 2012 17:11
Location: Spain

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by Vortex »

but a "dimension" as a place is not the same as a spatial dimension.
and Mateusz made me sure that he knows the difference. I remember the post, we were discussing about the third dimension note, and I suggested that perhaps Mateusz confused the two meanings. the answer was something like "do you think I'm idiot?" :oops:
User avatar
ENIHCAMBUS
karma portal traveller
Posts: 8653
Joined: 04 Feb 2013 22:17
Location: Pastel Lands.

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by ENIHCAMBUS »

Layer and Dimension. In Submachine's perspective I don't see any differences. Do you?
ENIHCAMBUS: State of the Art Scanning!
🧐
User avatar
Vortex
Murtaugh's hunter
Posts: 12140
Joined: 03 Dec 2012 17:11
Location: Spain

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by Vortex »

ENIHCAMBUS wrote:Layer and Dimension. In Submachine's perspective I don't see any differences. Do you?
Come on...
the theory says:
Diamonds wrote:please note: "dimension" is not referring to worlds; it refers to actual spatial dimension
it's clear that the Submachine doesn't have 7 spatial dimensions XD

also, I'll look for Mateusz's post in my copy of the Old Forum, it has to be there.
User avatar
ENIHCAMBUS
karma portal traveller
Posts: 8653
Joined: 04 Feb 2013 22:17
Location: Pastel Lands.

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by ENIHCAMBUS »

I mean Layer = Dimension
ENIHCAMBUS: State of the Art Scanning!
🧐
User avatar
Vortex
Murtaugh's hunter
Posts: 12140
Joined: 03 Dec 2012 17:11
Location: Spain

Re: Diamond's Theory of 4th Dimensions

Post by Vortex »

yeah, and the only meaning that makes sense is the dimension as world.
Actually I like the name "layer" much more that "dimension" for that concept, it makes so much more sense... I wish I could force all the sci-fi writers to use that name when they mean parallel world :P
Post Reply