Planes

High-altitude vehicles whose outer shell is composed primarily of aluminum are extraordinary marvels of modern engineering and quantum leaps beyond the flying machine of the Wright brothers – but these are not the planes that I wish to discuss. My concern here is the planes of dimensionality. An infant can grasp up to three dimensions – literally and metaphorically. It may require a slight bit more mental exertion to conceptualize beyond the third dimension. Some physicists and other philosophers of science (since today’s physicists often tend to fall more towards the end of the spectrum of philosophy rather than hard Newtonian mechanical science – of which this is not a diatribe against, but simply a recognition of such)…some of these philosophers of science conceptualize the fourth dimension as time, and movement through the three-dimensional space over the units of this more unique dimension is what comprises the fourth dimension. If one had an infinite series of freeze frames and could trace the movement of an object through space over ‘time’ then one would be viewing the fourth dimension – think of the pictures of cars’ headlights and taillights that seems to stretch over the entire road because of the length of ‘time’ that the aperture was left open. Again, philosopher physicists theorize that up to 11 dimensions actually exist, most of which are wrapped over themselves in nearly infinitely small ‘space.’ Conceptualizing beyond the fourth dimension is difficult. However, Edwin A. Abbott, the author of “Flatland” has helped us a little in this endeavor. “Flatland” was originally written as a commentary on British societal hierarchy, but its more enduring legacy is an exploration of dimensions. Abbott speculated about two-dimensional beings that were assigned a tier in society based on their number of angles, with triangles and squares being among the lower echelon and circles, with infinite angles (or no angles depending on the perspective) being nobility. These two-dimensional beings would have no conception of a third dimension, though I suppose the analogy goes awry eventually since they would have to experience time, in some regard. Nonetheless, if a three-dimensional, or higher, being such as ourselves were to interact with their world, they would merely perceive us in two-dimensions. Also, we would be able to interact with multiple individuals of this two-dimensional world, without their perception of how this would be possible, simply by placing both of our hands over two or more of these beings some distance away form one another. This would seem impossible to them, but simple to us. In the same way, though again, the analogy must break down at some point, a ‘higher being’ could interact with our three-dimensional world, even inserting Himself at a certain point in time, if He so desired. This would seem nearly impossible and even confusing to us, but simple to Him. Not to mention, other things would seem grand or bizarre to us, but simple to Him, such as walking through walls (or at least what appears as ‘walking through walls’ to us, just as a ‘Flatlander’ would perceive us sticking our hand on one side of a line and then pulling it up and out of their plane and sticking it on the other side of the line as ‘walking through a line’)!... “While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, ‘Peace be with you.’ They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds?” (Luke 24:36-38)