SteveKlinko wrote: ↑Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:29 pm
Age wrote: ↑Sat Aug 01, 2020 12:32 am
Also, and by the way, who wrote 'that' in the link?
That one has NOT YET even understood the most basic fundamental parts of the Universe. When these two very basic fundamental things are understood, properly and fully, then discovering and/or learning absolutely EVER thing else is also very basic, simple, and easy to understand, AS WELL.
Why did that one only 'try' to understand 4 dimensional space? Why not 'try' understanding 5 dimensional space, or even 6 dimensional space, or even more?
Also, why bother 'trying to' understand these 'things', which may or may NOT exist, BEFORE they properly and fully understand the very basics of this actual Universe FIRST?
I wrote that, of course.
WHY did you write, "of course"?
How would I KNOW you wrote it?
SteveKlinko wrote: ↑Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:29 pm
I do understand 3D so trying to understand 4D is logical.
You have one concept, or one perspective, of 3 dimensional space, relative to your views and definitions. But, if your view of 3 dimensional space is NOT unified with EVERY thing else, then your 'understanding' is NOT necessarily the true nor full
understanding.
SteveKlinko wrote: ↑Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:29 pm
Why would you want to jump to 5D before you understand 4D?
That's not logical.
That was my point. Why is it logical to jump to 'trying to' understand 4 dimensional space or 'trying to' understand absolutely ANY thing that MIGHT or MIGHT NOT even exist, in the beginning?
See, I prefer to just look at
what IS, ONLY, instead of 'trying to' look at what might be or what could be.
If you ALREADY, supposedly, understand 3 dimensional space, then you will have ALREADY understood how this works in PERFECTLY with how the Universe actually works.