What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
59 Comments
- exobyte, on 10/12/2007, -7/+60But will it ever leave Beta?
- baldr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24Google Earth 3 is out of beta. Google Earth 4 is still in beta. Technically the entire project is out of beta.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+23Uhh, they didnt skip the third dimension.
- alternative724, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21@insert31190
the fourth dimension is referred to as time because of 3d charting.
Say you have a 3d chart of two airplanes travelling through the sky, and they both cross through the point x,y,z. That is a measure of depth, height and width on a coordinate map.
Now, that would mean that the planes crash at that point. But they dont necessarily crash because there is another dimension involved, time. The way real world events are charted involves length width height and time when. That means its XYZ time. that makes time the 4th dimension.
If you are talking about another direction beign the 4th dimension, then when we discover how to move in that direction, time will be the 5th dimension. - Mist0r_Wiggles, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Maybe it'll travel to the future to should us a world when Google products are all out of beta. Now that'll be impressive.
- Gootch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_dimension):
"The fourth dimension is often identified with time" - gfixler, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Dimensions are whatever you say they are. You can map whatever you wish to any dimension to help you make sense of whatever it is you need to accomplish. I'm tired of hearing people balk at putting a particular dimension to a particular number. Dimensions are like variables. They're essentially ranges with directions, and the directions are debatable, and don't necessarily have to be spatial.
Max and Maya are 3D packages used for creating things in a conceptually 3D space (typically projected to 2D monitors). Most Max people work with the Z axis pointing up. Most Maya folks tend toward Y up. Does this mean Y is the second dimension for Maya people, but maybe the 3rd for Max people? No. It's arbitrary.
I often like to think of time as a 4th dimension, for the purposes of understanding certain concepts in different ways - e.g. time travel. If you imagine a room as being a contained 3rd dimensional box, and then step back from that box to view it from outside, you can also imagine an infinite number of these boxes placed end to end in discrete steps from left to right, which each represent instances in time, in order. Now you have chunks of 3-dimensional reality at discrete, temporal steps (again, arbitrary - billionth of a second, 1 year, whatever) along an axis that looks in this example like the left-to-right axis (X in Maya), but which represents a time axis, which I'm more than free to call the 4th dimension in my example. In my case, the 4th dimension represents change, which is measured in time, which is an existent entity (I hope :), as we can (at the very least in our minds) roll back in time, along time's "dimension," to see how all of the 3-dimensional things look at any point. Time is containing all 3 dimensions, and can thus be called a higher dimension, or the 4th.
You're also more than welcome to think of the 4th dimension spatially, but none of us can see that, so we have to rely on projections down to our 3 dimensions, or "shadows" cast by them, or pure mathematics, or some pretty good drugs. - archlich, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Wait... if they skipped 3d, does that mean the world is flat?
- znicket, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13He he.. Digg readers are fantastic. Somebody points out a new feature on Google Earth and the whole comment section is invaded by geeks arguing whether or not Time can be called the 4th dimension.
- rompom7, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Monolith2: No, the earth is round in Google Earth, and you can see terrain like mountains in 3D if you zoom in.
Anyway, the real problem here is that time isn't 4D.. Its the fourth dimension, but it isn't 4D.
A 4D object extends into Hyperspace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4d - DaveMode, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13ORLY?
- vsujohn2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8If time isnt the 4th dimension, then what is?
@Urusai, you are speaking mathematically, we're talking real world (literally) terms. - DaveMode, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Protip: Attempting to read the above comments in a Stephen Hawking style robot voice helps the digg experience in this case.
- phenolholic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3a cool site to multiple dimensions. time is empirically considered as the fourth as a result of hierarchial placement of space and time.
http://www.tenthdimension.com/flash2.php - quickgold192, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well I'd really be impressed if google managed to capture images in the fourth spacial dimension.
- phenolholic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6mauu: what are you trying to say? you're stating the obvious. also, the fifth dimension is a unit of space-time, not temperature, so in context, your comment is arbitrary.
- ahawks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6alright... how do I enable/get these fangled new maps? Might be nice to mention that in the article, eh?
- ajaydsouza, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5To use this new feature, expand the Featured Content -> Rumsey Historical Maps in the Layers panel.
- Crave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah, but for some reason all the countries are called "China" on the future maps.
- eean, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime
- Gootch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3in the "layers" panel, you can select "Featured Content -> Rumsey Historical Maps"
- Insert31990, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I'd like someone to explain to me why they believe time is the 4th dimension, when the three before it are based on coordinates and physical value.
Think of making a cube, you fold six 2D squares aligned in a cross to form yourself a cube.
Now, make a 3D cross with eight cubes, and fold them within each other. In theory, this is what the 4th dimension should be in physical value ...
Now someone enlighten me with their views on time as a 4th dimension, I'm not arguing, I'm learning. - Denster23, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I don't see it in beta 4. I see Jane Goodall's Chimpanzee Blog....hrmm....but no damn Historical Maps
- aerogant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Not only do we not know of anything moving backward in time, but also we don't know of collisions of things going forward and backward in time. And by going backwards in time, I don't just mean time travel to the past, but actually constantly moving backwards, like an old man getting younger until they are a baby and going into a womb and disappearing (this is how someone going backwards in time would appear to us).
You can say that it is the 4th dimension, but in doing so you neglect the differences that are there for us in our reality.
I'm actually interested in David Humes work in causality. He suggested that there is no real cause and effect, that there is only a correlation. In thinking that way a person could imagine that we could be seeing reality backwards from what it really is. - DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1gfixler:
"I'm tired of hearing people balk at putting a particular dimension to a particular number. "
Well that's what's you proceeded to do later in your post, by trying to demonstrate how time can be more conveniently called the 4th dimension than space, trying to give a concrete example about it, and then while saying that people can imagine a 4th space dimension, associating this idea to something intangible as opposed to time which is so tangible :)
"Dimensions are like variables. They're essentially ranges with directions, and the directions are debatable, and don't necessarily have to be spatial."
They are variables that have particular relations to each other. Space dimensions are perpendicular to each other, the fact that people can label dimensions as X, Y or Z and that the their labels are arbitrary is not relevant.
The first dimension is one direction, the second is a direction perpendicular to the first, and the third is perpendicular to the first two. You cannot simply consider time as perpendicular to the three first dimensions as you could for a fourth space dimension.
The relation between space dimensions and time is not the same than between the space dimension themselves.
Here's the proof (well a glimpse at the proof).
The Pythagorean Theorem that we mostly know about is 2d.
c^2=a^2+b^2
Let's say we replace the variable letters with something more convenient:
r^2=x^2+y^2 (r is for radius)
The Pythagorean Theorem can also be used in 3d, it goes like this:
r^2=x^2+y^2+z^2
If you had to use it with 4 space dimensions it would look like this:
r^2=x^2+y^2+z^2+w^2 (w would be the fourth space dimension)
But if you have to calculate a distance using the same theorem for space-time, that is space for the first 3 dimension plus time as another dimension, you couldn't use this equation, you'd have to use this one...
r^2=(t^2-((x^2+y^2+z^2)/c^2)) (t would the time dimension, c would the speed of light constant)
That's a little more complicated, and as you can see, space dimensions are substracted from the time dimension, and the speed of light constant has to be part of the equation somehow as a conversion factor between space and time dimensions. Time is a different kind of a dimension, relatively to the space dimensions, so that's why I take issue at people calling it "the" 4th dimension. You may say that time "contains" space dimensions, but the 3rd dimension doesn't contain the two first etc.
This special relation between time and space is not only applicable to the Pythagorean Theorem, but to any calculation you want to do at a space-time level.
This whole confusion comes from over-simplification of the Relativity Theory. Einstein stated that time was a dimension, and since we "mere mortals" only knew or perceived 3 dimensions, we decided to call time "the" 4th dimension, adding it to the end of the list. But his theory was about showing the relation between time and space, as two different things that are interrelated.
While it can be interesting to swap time with one of the space dimension for demonstration purposes (like in your box demo), it can confuse people into thinking that time is really interchangeable with individual space dimensions, but it's not.
Space dimensions beyond the third can be useful in science. Maybe we cannot see them and they make no sense whatsoever in our human world, but they can be called "space dimensions" too because they are by definition in the same category. A fourth space dimension would be perpendicular to the first three. Like I stated before, that cannot be said of time.
I guess though, that the title of the article is not inaccurate, because time is a dimension so 3 space dimensions + 1 time dimension =4 dimensions= 4D. Unfortunately though, it can reinforce the idea that time is simply "the" fourth dimension.
My only real issue is to see people here stating that "time is the 4th dimension".
If I was forced to put a number on the time dimension, I would call it dimension Zero! :) - DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow, by only clicking a checkbox on Google Earth my 2d flat panel will become 3d? Incredible... Google people are really wizards!
- wesball, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I assumed title meant "in 4 dimensions". Not the 4th dimension.
- aerogant, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6I don't understand why people act like dimensions are real. The concept of dimensions is something we created in order to understand our observations of the universe and to help us in our own relative space survive and better ourselves, but they are not the universe themselves, and at certain points our concepts become meaningless, unhelpful, and possibly detrimental.
The problem with calling time the 4th dimension or even treating it as a dimension, is the fact that it appears to only go in one direction. While you can move up down left right forward backward, with time we don't know how to go backwards. - djneonshadow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2How exactly is time a dimension? The only "dimensions" are spacial; the fourth dimension is the fourth "spacial" dimension. You only get time as a dimension in science fiction works.
- nasarius, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I'm looking, but I can't figure out how to view these maps. Details, anyone?
- ostracize, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Notice how the world map of 1790 doesn't show Antarctica at all.
I know it hasn't been discovered by that time but it's cool that the map doesn't show anything there - monteng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's not unreasonable to consider several types of dimensions. Not all dimensions are spatial. For example, if you are discussing ways to file data you could have data located in a row (1), a column (2) a worksheet (3), a folder (3), a drawer or a shelf (4), a cabinet (5), and so on.
Even in spatial dimensions, there are many different ways to describe it. There are also different types of coordinate systems, such as rectangular, cylindrical, polar and spherical. A fourth dimension most definitely could be time or era. - DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I knew this would happen even before I entered the comment section...
- ostracize, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For those of you can't see the historical maps, you probably have an older version of beta4. Check for updates first.
- dan2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have beta 4, it's in there.
- Insert31990, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@Alternative724;
"He also invented the words "kata" (from the Greek "down") and "ana" (from the Greek "up") to describe the two opposing fourth-dimensional directions — the 4-D equivalents of left and right, forwards and backwards, and up and down."
Under what you said, I'm assuming ANA is forward in time, and KATA is backward in time?
The above quote was from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Howard_Hinton. - TheWorm, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Yes, on google earth the world is flat.
- eean, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I guess its a blog and not an article. Which I guess is ZDNET's excuse for not telling me how to actually find this feature that they are talking about. :|
- NV0U, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I had to select All Layers (it was at Core) and then it popped up. But, it said for the Rumsey stuff that I had to update. So, that's what I am doing now.
- rmspangler, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3umm google earth didn't skip the 3rd dimension, you just need to click the checkbox to turn it on...seriously.
- yujie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Do they have a map of the future earth?
- JorgeGT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i don't see it in beta 4. maybe USA/English only (because I have featured content in Spanish and I don't think that's common xD) Well, we can always view Jane's diamond mine..
- mtownand1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2don't you mean new-fangeled old maps?
- shobon, on 05/18/2008, -0/+0very good
- shobon, on 05/18/2008, -0/+0good
- Lahonda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm glad it's China... I just luv Chinese food!
Better than the UK for sure... their grub just sucks! - overbyte, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1brilliant - stole my comment :D
- bangmalley, on 08/30/2008, -2/+1cool!
- Blazekun, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2for good ideas about what dimensions really are check either Dr. Quantum in Flatland from What the bleep.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BWyTxCsIXE4
Or this flash movie explaining dimensions.
http://www.tenthdimension.com/flash2.php
Time is the 4th dimension whether you want to believe it or not. -
Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is