this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
55 points (87.7% liked)

Showerthoughts

29819 readers
605 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
vatlark@lemmy.world
forkball@lemmy.world
quinten@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
55
If simulation is possible, we could upgrade reality to 4D (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 2 months ago by LambdaRX@sh.itjust.works to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

If we knew how to create world simulation, and how to make it working 4D, then humans would be able to plug themselves in, and experience 4D space. Alternatively there could simulated 4D beings, whose sentience could be transferred to robot body in our real 3D space.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There’s no reason why a brain can’t interact with 4 dimensional space. You just have to feed accurate 4D data into the brain and it will learn.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Interact with, yes. Process and perceive it as it truly is? I don't believe so, no.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That’s what interact with means: navigate, orient, decide, etc.

There’s nothing about our neural architecture that has “3D” built into the information it can process.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I disagree. I think we are very much hardwired to innately understand 3d space in an intuitive level. All else about higher and lower dimensions is learned experientially and/or academically, and it's near impossible not to understand it in terms that relate to 3 dimensions or math. I also think that thinking about 4 dimensions in relation to 3 dimensions makes it impossible to truly understand 4 dimensional space as a whole. We can describe every detail of it mathematically, but still not be able to visualize it in whole. Regardless, given the fact that there is no 4th spatial dimension, I doubt either of us will ever have a definitive answer.

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 1 points 2 months ago

There’s nothing about our neural architecture that has “3D” built into the information it can process.

I think we are very much hardwired to innately understand 3d space in an intuitive level.

Is that just based off of something more concrete than what feels right to you? If a neural network on a computer can interact with four dimensional data, why wouldn’t we be able to?

It isn’t as automatic in three dimensions as you make it sound. Based off of the amount of learning and experimentation we do as infants, it seems reasonable to theorize that if a human were to be born in a fourth dimensional realm and to be implanted with some sort of sensory organ(s) that function in the fourth dimension, they would be able to gain an intuitive understanding of that world in the same way that they gain intuitive understandings of this one.