It is said that while we exist in 3 dimensions, we really only observe in 2; that depth perception is a sort of optical illusion, one which we must use to get around effectively. Essentially, we see the world as a flat painting, and then our cognitive system interprets a third dimension (though it does exist).
Our auditory faculties, however, hear in a full sphere, not a 360 degree circle, but quite literally all around us, and then of course we move in 3 dimensions.
But why do I bring this up?
I was thinking about how we access data; either physically as in reading or looking at pictures, or say, reading an Excel spreadsheet. They all appear to us in 2 dimensions, and generally speaking, we learn from 2 dimensions. (Referring to learning academic concepts, not life experiences).
For those of us familiar with Systems Analyses, however, we do have a chance to essentially learn or cogitate in 3 dimensions, as we find data charts linked to several other data charts, which can be conceptualized as existing in layers, or 3 dimensions.
Regardless, most of us focus on our sight for learning; when we learn alphanumeric sequencing, we essentially picture numbers of letters in our heads. When we solve for x, we write down our formula and visually inspect the data. Pretty much everything is a visual afterthought, and only in 2 dimensions.
Now, I got as far Calculus, and in Calculus, there are graphs and charts which do exist in 3 dimensions, and Algebra, Geometry, and Trigonometry support the study, but why is 3 dimensional thinking reserved for such higher concepts? What are we missing from the multiverse around us when thinking in only 2 dimensions? The automotive engineer may yet visualize his design in three dimensions, as does the architect, but what about the guy down the street that’s just really good with cars but flunked out of high school, or the aged father, who can build an entire house from foundation to roof, yet only ever worked as middle management in a retail store? Did they fail to think in 3 dimensions?
Of course there’s an endless supply of variables here; they didn’t enjoy the work, they had a family and too little money to pursue the required education, etc., etc. My point is an abstract-in wonder-of how people think, and what intelligence truly is, to what a thought amounts.
Then we go back to this multiverse; it’s all but proven that there are several dimensions, or layers of membranes of space-time, which don’t interact, and furthermore that matter essentially breaks down to simple strings of vibration-M Theory, but then we also have Quantum Loop Theory, which describes something similar only arriving to tiny circles of vibrations. Now, here we are again. A circle is a 2 dimensional construct and so is a line, but vibrations are not 2 dimensional. Is it possible, then, that the two theories are the same, but observed from 2 perspectives? If I hold a rubber band before you, you see it as a circle, yet if I turn the rubber band a perfect 180 degrees to reveal only its side, does it then not appear as only a line?
Truthfully, I don’t know enough about either theory to make a judgement call. Maybe you do, or maybe you know enough to bring to light a perspective I haven’t, or maybe you don’t care, and that’s fine too, but hopefully I got your gears turning, and now you’re thinking about thinking.