________________________________________________________________________________________


     Home                    Book WGDE                    Glossary                    Extinction   

    Last modified 01/19/08


        Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008

    The idiot-language that the mathematicians have invented has no bounds. For example, the mathemati-
    cians have come up with the incongruous notion that a dimension is a property of space and that it is
    space that has dimensions:

    “ dimension: a property of space… a measure of spatial extent.”  [1]

    “ Does Space Have More Than 3 Dimensions?... What happens if we
       add yet another dimension to space? …we live in a universe with,
       at most, three spatial dimensions…”  [2]

    “ The least number of independent coordinates required to specify
       uniquely the points in a space.”   [3]

    How can space have dimensions when it doesn't have shape? Even under the mathematical definition
    of dimension, how do you locate a point on the which has no surface or body?

    Of course, now and then you find mathematicians that say it like it is:

    “ the number of coordinates needed to specify a point on the object.”   [4]

    “ the property of length, width, or depth of an object" (p. 61)   [5]

    Wolfram and the Mathematics Encyclopedia got this one right: length, width, and height comprise a
    property of objects dubbed three-dimensional.

    I only see two problems:

    •        relativists give lip service to length, width, and height and explain everything
              with coordinates
    •        this definition of dimension doesn't belong in encyclopedias of Mathematics.

    So let's resolve this issue once and for all. If it were true that space has dimensions, we should be able
    to run a simple thought experiment to verify this claim. Let's remove all matter from the Universe and
    leave you alone with a ruler in empty space. The trick is for you to measure the width or the height of
    space! Will you be measuring the property of space or of the ruler? How many numbers are needed to
    locate a space within space?

    Clearly dimensions are properties of objects and not of space. Why else would relativists resort to the
    geometrical figures 'triangle' and ‘square’ as examples of the 2-D? The mathematicians are using their
    words inconsistently. They are in effect saying that a triangle is ‘a space’, whatever that is. In Physics, it
    makes no sense to talk about the dimensions of a 'given' space. In Physics, space is non-dimensional. It
    is a physical object that has length, width, and height.
You're crazy, Bill! Tables and cubes
don't have length, width, and height. It is
space that has length, width and height!
Adapted for the Internet from:

Why God Doesn't Exist
In Mathematics, it is space and not the
geometric figure which has dimensions
Sorry that we had to
wake you up like
this, Bill, but the
mathematician
urgently wants to
measure the
dimensions of space
that you occupied.


    Pages in this module:


    2.    This page:  In Mathematics, it is space and not the geometric figure which has dimensions