Hey thanks for listening and welcome back to the forum
Okay
Some insight on that one: Rutkowski and I, and I think
@marduk too seem to be all on the same page with this one. I admire Sagan, but forget his whole flatland analogy. Secondly, people constantly conflate spatial dimensions with the variable of time. People who try to explain this shouldn't be saying time is the "fourth dimension". More accurately they should be saying it's the fourth
variable together with the first three variables, which are the spatial dimensions ( for 3 spatial variables and one temporal variable ).
The next is to grasp that spatial dimensions have a hierarchical dependency, which is a fancy way of saying that there cannot be a second dimension without a preceding first, and there can be no third without a preceding first and second, and when you get to 3D, it extends infinitely in all directions, so there can be no "fourth" or "fifth" or "sixth" spatial dimension. Even if we imagine that there could be, because of hierarchical dependency, any 4D skyscraper would still be fully visible in all the preceding 3D spatial coordinates.
When you get how that works, you can extrapolate that all possible spatial dimensions must exist simultaneously everywhere, because you just can't leave one out or the whole thing collapses. So there can be no 3D beings that magically appear out of the "Fifth Dimension" ( unless maybe you're talking about the band members ).
Every single example I've looked into where dimensions above 3 are being used to describe some theoretical situation, they are in-fact using the term "dimension" as another convenience term for theoretically micro or macro separate 3D spaces within the same larger infinite 3D realm we're in, but located or configured in a way that their 3D borders don't intersect with ours. For example, other universe like the one formed by our Big Bang may exist at some distant location beyond our ability to detect it. But it's all still in the same "space".
It gets really interesting when you start thinking about the possibility of generated constructs like in
The Matrix where we're looking at virtual dimensions. But that's a whole other conversation. Basically. You can write the IDH ( Interdimensional Hypothesis ) off as pure sci-fi.
The TTH Time Travel Hypothesis breaks down into the same sort of pure sci-fi as the IDH. The closest it can work out to is a parallel universe evolving identically to ours that either started sooner or later than ours, and beings are moving between the two, which would look like time travel from their frame of reference ( but it's not time travel — not really – not like we imagine it to be ).
Yup.
Project Blue Book pegged the Unknowns at around 26% during one of their studies, so you're not far off on that one.
Lots of UFO
reports ( not to be confused with UFOs themselves ) turn out to be aircraft of some kind.
I agree that 5%
Other is generous given our current understanding of the world and what possibilities there could be. I suppose maybe the VRH ( Virtual Reality Hypothesis ) might fall into the
Other category though, and philosophers like David Chalmers think there's a much higher chance than that, that we are living in one such VR construct. Food for thought. ?
