Reply to post: Re: Would you like another dimension with that, sir!

Re: Would you like another dimension with that, sir!

>>>>"Right or wrong, their theories are steps towards understanding the workings of our universe."

>>or another hurdle to overcome before we set off in a more considered direction.

What's the difference between your "hurdle" and my step? You can't know if your direction is wrong until you go some way down the path. A lot of Science is about crossing off what's false and arriving at what's left. The point is this is productive scientific work and no less so if it finds something isn't true than if it is.

>>"Having stuff disappear off into another dimension is only a problem for those who cannot let go of some tenets of physics, that are similarly stifling debate and alternative reasoning"

See, it's phrases like "stuff disappears off into another dimension" that fail to convince me you have a better line of enquiry than plugging holes in some of our existing theories - which this work does.

>>"So what if an asteroid spinning wildly out of the Crab nebula cannot point back at the miscreant that nudged it, as it no longer exists in our concept of universe?"

Then our concept of the Universe is not our end concept. Hence work like this to move that concept forward.

>>"For all practical purpose our physics hits the mark, for strange events involving transitions into another dimension they don't, but why should they."

You talk from a position of belief that what you say is true. Science isn't about belief, it's about making predictive models. It's pointless to make a statement like "our Physics can't model the way things move into another dimension". If it can't, then you don't know that such a thing is happening. You need to build a model that does and then test it.

>>"It would be like demanding all vehicles had to be fitted with an altimeter, because some vehicles fly."

That analogy is atrocious.