Talk:Higher dimension

I believe "higher dimension"'s meaning is context dependend. In some it may mean "higher than 3", in others "higher than 5". On top of that I don't think an article can be written about this vague term. --MarSch 11:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, well, I think there are many people who do not have a clue about what "four dimensions" are, and it would be nice to have an article accessible to (non-mathematical) grade-school and high-school students that reviews the concept of dimension, in both math and physics, in a lively way. The current article dimension is a bit dry and unapproachable beyond the first few paragraphs. On the other hand, I wouldn't object to a VfD/merge, as this article is ... lacking ...  linas 14:19, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

'Higher dimension' could be OK, but the reason &ge; 5 is used in manifold theory deserves to be mentioned. There are obvious problems with the abstract mathematics page. Calling a 'fractional dimension' a dimension with the same status is confusing/buzzword generation; to say this properly, something about what dimension theory is (intrinsic definition of dimension) is probably necessary. So it could be omitted. Charles Matthews 21:32, 10 September 2005 (UTC)