>>15091337Think of it this way; on a Cartesian plane, there's a spacial relation between X, Y and Z ergo 3 dimensions. Say this cartesian plane is a 3rd model in motion, If you introduce time as a 4th dimension, then much like how X and Y both interact with Z, you end up with interactions between all 3 spacial dimensions and time.
You can make geometric shapes with n spacial Dimensions (4, 5, 6 spacial axis, so an x, y, z, a, b and c axis) and represent them in 3d space spacially. See picrel, it's a tesseract.
Say we then introduce multiple, discreet models to the plane, say a basketball and a hoop and some players, grouping each models geometry as an object, then creating rules about how the object interacts with itself, the basketball court, the ball, the hoop and so forth, one could have said to introduced multiple other dimensions.
Foundational to this is the concept of relational databases and object oriented programming, however those systems generally are not solving for NP Complete problems, and are generally solving on dimensional subsets of reality. Within the realm of relational databases, a dimension would be simply an additional table that represents some data you want to relate to other databases. For example, names and addresses in one table, and job information in another table.
We don't know if spacial reality is a subset of something else or not, so for example spacial reality is a subset of time or vice versa. For all we know the Masons could have it right with their 2 fundmental elemental forces but IMO that stuff is hocus pocus.
>>15091347I do bad things to computers, and to people's heads.
