More on dimensions, random, and priority

The introductory chapter of my recently aquired book, Warped Passages – Unraveling the Mysteries of the Universes’s Hidden Dimensions, by Lisa Randall, has inspired a new wave of thought within my mind. What Linda does is define dimensions, and like I, tries to get across to the reader the idea that multiple dimensions is not such a great deal, once you realise that your mind operates upon thousands of “fictionary” dimensions per day. These dimensions are not something we see or directly feel, but something we with a great ease imagine, and base both our concious and unconcious choices upon. Now the easiest way to show this is to base the answer upon a simple and concious example like buying coffee at a coffee shop:

Let’s imagine you have 1,75 USD in your pocket. A regular large coffee costs precisely 1,75 USD, but your nose grips the small of the seductive French Vanilla taste coffee, which costs 1,75 for a small one. Let’s stop there and try to find the imidiate concious dimensions – price, taste and size. I imagine this identical to picking a random point on the x, y and z axes. If not that is clear enough, please leave a comment.

Now comes a bit of an interesting question, will you pick the cheaper cup of coffee, or the better tasting, but more expensive one? Which one is better, what defines better? Now we all know ying yang, the good is not good without the bad, I believe the same logic applies here. Now to our concious mind this might seem like a totally random choice, but I believe that it isn’t. Let’s roll back to dimensions, and try to see why it is still so hard for people to see dimensions beyond the obvious. 

Imagine a 3D donut:

Now take out the third dimension(become a flatlander):

The shape looks nothing like a donut, unless you know it’s a donut. Now the big question would you still have the same defintion of a donut if you only could see this? If you had to imagine the donut in 3 dimensions when all of your life you have been in a 2 dimensional realm, it’s about as hard as imagining the extra dimensions of space. In fact (this is a simple shape, but imagine a complex 3d shape), if you had no idea about the 3rd dimension, you would most likely define this as a random set of points, the geometrical connections are mathematically visible, but you have no idea of the way this looks like in 3 dimension. This leads me to an essential point in which I strongly believe – there is no such thing as random, random is just another pattern(in higher dimensions) that we can’t immediately see.

So why are there so many things we can’t see? The mind is smart, or well just not trained enough. It would take too much power to compute every single dimension that goes into an action. You expect the doorhandle to be there when you see a door, and you reach out your hand as a reflex, only to at times later to see that there is no handle.

Secondly we don’t have nearly enough senses to track all the dimensions in the world(an Internet AI might change that), in fact, it is simply impossible(a word I use rarely). It is precisely therefore that the choice of coffee will seem random rather than anything else, but in the end, what we want at that specific point depends on what we had the day before, the month before, whether we’ve tasted the French Vanilla coffe or not, and a billion other things. The immidiate point of choice seems random, but in reality is so complexly interconnected with the past points in the trillions of dimensions, that we can’t see the pattern, so it is just easier to say the choice was random, even though it really wasn’t(same goes for creativity, brainstorm and innovation).

Now the right thought to be thinking, is that I’ve just contradicted myself. I say that the mind can’t possibly track all changes in the world, and yet it makes decisions on the basis of concious and subconcious dimensions. This is not a contradiction, this is simply a question of priority. 

You can with simple common sense come to at least the 3 following reasons why some events, or points in the dimensions might seem more significant for that or another decision:

  1. The frequency of having to make this decision in time. One that is made more frequently, is easier to choose the answer to. (Frequency in time)
  2. The actual size of the choice, for example the size of the cup of coffe (The area/Frequency in the 3 dimensions of space)
  3. The importance of this dimensions to the different aspects of life, such as health, finances, family, exetra. (Frequency in random dimensions)

Now out of my defintion that everything is a dimensions this leads to the following simple definition – the priority of considering specific past experiences in making a decision, depends on the frequency of those experience on the dimensions related to the decision.

So we will choose the coffee upon our appritiation of taste, our current financial status, our level of irritation to regular coffee, and so on. Many of these have just become so monotoneus that the mind can make these decisions instantly via the reactive mind, if so is required.

Alright, I’ve got 9 hours till my trip back to DK, which will take about 20 hours, so I’m gonna get myself some French Vanilla Coffee and do some more reading, enjoy 😛


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s