[MHGinTN]

Thank you for the link. Informative.

As you know, I've used the notion of a wall inside a room, a wall that is one boundary of the room, and related our spcetime to the wall and the room to the volumetric spacetime we do not have access to but as a boundary wall we are a part of. A being of our brane/wall would not sense a being of greater spacetime volume except where that being intersected our brane/wall. In my book, that's the explanation I use in discussing the Daniel Chptr 5 handwriting incident. One could just as easily use the notion of a sphere as our brane and the tube for which the sphere represents the end of the tube, or a cube and the trunk for which the cube is the end of the trunk, it's just a matter of temporal reference frame.

[Alamo-Girl]

As you know, I've used the notion of a wall inside a room, a wall that is one boundary of the room, and related our spcetime to the wall and the room to the volumetric spacetime we do not have access to but as a boundary wall we are a part of. A being of our brane/wall would not sense a being of greater spacetime volume except where that being intersected our brane/wall.

Indeed. Your speculations are quite compelling!

[Alamo-Girl]

As you know, I've used the notion of a wall inside a room, a wall that is one boundary of the room, and related our spcetime to the wall and the room to the volumetric spacetime we do not have access to but as a boundary wall we are a part of. A being of our brane/wall would not sense a being of greater spacetime volume except where that being intersected our brane/wall. In my book, that's the explanation I use in discussing the Daniel Chptr 5 handwriting incident. One could just as easily use the notion of a sphere as our brane and the tube for which the sphere represents the end of the tube, or a cube and the trunk for which the cube is the end of the trunk, it's just a matter of temporal reference frame.

I’ve been wanting to get back to you on your above speculation to explain how I am interpreting it.

Here is a great website which takes the reader through special relativity using animated graphics: starting point, postulates of special relativity

One of the postulates of special relativity is the space/time continuum – four dimensions, three of space and one of time. If you were to look at it at rest it would look like this:

Of course, the more expanded dimensions of space and/or time, the more complex the cube would be. And in general relativity it is warped, not smooth, with high gravity points/objects being indentations and negative gravity points/objects being outdents.

But space/time is not at rest. It doesn't "pre-exist" so that objects are stationary in space/time. It is expanding – which the measurement of the cosmic microwave background radiation showed us back in the 1960’s.

Moreover, our existence “in” space/time – as you suggest – is on a “plane” or “membrane” or “brane” moving in the hypercube of the whole of space/time. IOW, we are not at rest either.

So, following your speculation, the wall moving through the volume of the room represents a plane coming to the foreground in the animated hypercube as follows:

In other words, I’m very much “on board” with your speculation – but see it as a dynamic rather than a static situation.

Our plane is moving through whole which consists of past as well as future. Indeed, our senses are picking up information from the recent past. But our minds are processing on the plane which is the “present”.

Every field exists at all points in the hypercube - and thus we intersect all fields on the plane moving through hypercube.

The hand writing on the wall (disassociated from the body) is our mortal perceptible set of coordinates in the whole. All that we can perceive with our vision and minds is 3 spatial and 1 temporal dimension - from the perspective of our space/time coordinates on our plane.

IOW, if we could see in more than 3 spatial and 1 temporal dimension – we’d see a hand here, an arm there, etc. If we could move in more than those dimensions, we’d be able to remove the contents of a box without opening it.

Any hoot, that’s my “two cents”…