The Instigator
mongoose
Con (against)
Losing
35 Points
The Contender
mongeese
Pro (for)
Winning
112 Points

There is a 5th dimension

Do you like this debate?NoYes+7
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 24 votes the winner is...
mongeese
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/18/2009 Category: Science
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 11,867 times Debate No: 7886
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (34)
Votes (24)

 

mongoose

Con

There is no 5th dimension. I will continue my argument after my opponent's response.
mongeese

Pro

Thank you for posting this debate.

To start with, a quote from Wikipedia:
"Abstract five-dimensional space occurs frequently in mathematics, and is a perfectly legitimate construct."

The fifth dimension in mathematics occurs when N=5.

Here are some diagrams that explain the tesseract, which is essentially a five-dimensional cube.

http://robertinventor.com...

There is a fifth dimension in mathematics; thus, there is a fifth dimension.

I rest my case.

Thank you for your time.
Debate Round No. 1
mongoose

Con

I thank my opponent for responding in a timely manner.

Math does not truly "exist" in life. It is abstract, and not entirely there. It does not take up matter. It is an idea.

Definition of "dimension": a property of space; extension in a given direction: A straight line has one dimension, a parallelogram has two dimensions, and a parallelepiped has three dimensions.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

5D objects cannot be created in real life, for the sole reason that the 5th dimension does not exist.
mongeese

Pro

Thanks for the quick response.

"Math does not truly 'exist' in life. It is abstract, and not entirely there. It does not take up matter. It is an idea."

Morals do not truly "exist" in life, either. However, if I were to say, "There are morals," that would be a perfectly valid statement. Same applies to the fifth dimension.

Just because we cannot create something doesn't mean it can't exist.

Now, your definition is not entirely correct when applied to math. In mathematics, it is defined as the number of coordinates needed to specify a point on an object. http://mathworld.wolfram.com... For example, in a 1-D number line, only one number is needed to specify a point. In a 2-D coordinate plane, two numbers are needed to specify a point. In a 3-D XYZ depth graph, three numbers are necessary to identify a point. This continues for each dimension, even if we cannot grasp the concept with our minds. This picture attempts to illustrate this concept:
http://upload.wikimedia.org...
However, we don't understand it, because we only live in three spatial dimensions.

Also, in Rick Osborne's and Ed Strauss' "Bible Angels and Demons" http://www.zondervan.com..., heaven is described to be an alternate dimension. Obviously, it is not length, width, height, or time, so it must be a fifth dimension. When you die, your mind and soul are sent off to a fifth dimension. Where else could it go? According to Acer, when you sleep, you feel your mind sinking. Your mind can't be sinking into one of our four dimensions; it must be a fifth dimension.

There. Two possible explanations. And your only argument against the first one is that humans can't comprehend it.

Thank you again, and good luck.
Debate Round No. 2
mongoose

Con

I am not saying that the fact that we can't create it is the reason it can't exist. I am saying that it can't exist so it can't exist. It is not possible for an object to be in the the 5th dimension, because there are only 4: Height, Length, Width, and Time.

In order to win this debate, you must prove, without a doubt, that it does not exist, which you have not done.

The concept of infinity is similar. There is no infinity existent, and it is impossible. It does not exist, but can be thought of. The same way you might think of a unicorn. It is a word, but it does not exist.

Heaven is a parallel universe, not a dimension. A dimension would be capable of going on to infinity (which it never will, but it could), but there are not infinity different universes. It has a limit.

Your evidence for the feeling of your mind sleeping is from Acer (http://www.debate.org...), a new debater. That is not a source at all.

A await your final response.
mongeese

Pro

"I am saying that it can't exist so it can't exist."
Just because you say it can't exist doesn't mean it can't exist. If I say that pies don't exist, pies will still exist.

"In order to win this debate, you must prove, without a doubt, that it does not exist, which you have not done."
I disagree. Why would I want to prove that the fifth dimension doesn't exist?

"The concept of infinity is similar. There is no infinity existent, and it is impossible. It does not exist, but can be thought of. The same way you might think of a unicorn. It is a word, but it does not exist."
Infinity is not impossible in math. Infinity does exist, in math. There is a fifth dimension. In math. Note that you never actually responded directly to the comparison to, "There are morals," and you didn't dub it irrelevant, so I assume that you conceded that point.

"Heaven is a parallel universe, not a dimension. A dimension would be capable of going on to infinity (which it never will, but it could), but there are not infinity different universes. It has a limit."
Searching "parallel dimension" in Wikipedia redirects to "parallel universe". Parallel dimensions, acting as a fifth dimension (alternate), is a popular idea in science fiction. It is applied to the real world in heaven. In what direction does your soul travel when you die? The fifth dimension, obviously. You gave no explanation for this, so I assume that you conceded that point, as well. Also note how you don't explain why the fifth dimension would have any limit, or why a dimension needs to go on into infinity, a concept which you ironically stated was impossible.

"Your evidence for the feeling of your mind sleeping is from Acer, a new debater. That is not a source at all."
Here are some sources, then:
"As the tide of our reflections is only changed by a gradual recess after we sink into repose..." (http://chestofbooks.com...)
"We seem to run; and, destitute of force Our sinking limbs forsake us in the course..." (http://chestofbooks.com...)

"A await your final response."
Um...

CONCLUSION:
In math, the fifth dimension is a perfectly legitimate construct. Just because we cannot perceive or create it doesn't mean it can't exist. Furthermore, the travelling through the fifth dimension is evidenced by the direction the soul travels upon dying, as it can't be any of the previous four. It must be a fifth dimension.

Thank you for this debate, and good day.
Debate Round No. 3
34 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Agreed. And there are so many of them, too.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
It really only depends on the definition of dimension.
Posted by tBoonePickens 7 years ago
tBoonePickens
That's a tough one. I always thought that time is a bit different than the other (fundamental) dimensions. It's a tricky one.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
I'm still thinking of an argument though...
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
Send a challenge, then!
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Mongeese, I'd like to debate you on whether or not time is a dimension.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
The geometric argument killed CON, in addition to his failed "alternate universe" response.
Posted by tBoonePickens 8 years ago
tBoonePickens
There are 3 geometric dimensions and 1 time dimension, at least that's the way it's done in physics now. M/String theory is full of it; there's no empirical evidence for virtually any of it. The only reason they stop at those specific dimension counts is because it fits their theory.

Our Universe if (geometrically) 3 dimensional wouldn't have to be a cube necessarily; it could be a sphere, or any other 3D shape. But really, it doesn't have to be (and isn't) any particular shape. Why? Because that would imply that there is something outside of it, for if not then there can be no boundary or shape to such. Truth is, is that there is nothing outside our Universe. However, I have noticed that most are referring to different universes within a larger Universe (or Multiverse as they say in the comics) then there may be something outside a universe but the Universe. This is of course by it's very definition: the Universe is all that is.
Posted by ToastOfDestiny 8 years ago
ToastOfDestiny
Or, as in M-theory/String Theory, Dimensions 5-10, 5-11, or 5-26, depending on the theory, are curled up to be infinitesimal (not infinitely tiny, just extremely so.)

There is no "point outside the cube" which we need to define. Our universe, on the large scale, needs 4 coordinates: 3 of space and one of time.
Posted by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
"In a 3-D XYZ depth graph, three numbers are necessary to identify a point."

The universe is considered three dimensional but it would have to be a "cube" in order for it to only need three points to find a specific point. What about finding a point outside the cube? And what about time combined with expansion? One would need 7 points. The 7th point being the point of origin. But this still wouldn't work because everything inside the cubed universe is moving and who knows what is going on outside the cube. The universe is not a cube from all available data. A fifth dimension can only exist if mathematicians make it so on paper otherwise one could never locate a fifth dimension in the real world. The fifth dimension would have to be the space outside the known universe using the 3 or 6 point location system. It could not be within or be part of or blend with the 4 dimensions of our universe. Opinion of course.
24 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Zapurdead 8 years ago
Zapurdead
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by ToastOfDestiny 8 years ago
ToastOfDestiny
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by asyetundefined 8 years ago
asyetundefined
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Lazy 8 years ago
Lazy
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by philosphical 8 years ago
philosphical
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Marine1 8 years ago
Marine1
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by GeoLaureate8 8 years ago
GeoLaureate8
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by fresnoinvasion 8 years ago
fresnoinvasion
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by trendem 8 years ago
trendem
mongoosemongeeseTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03