# If mass density curves space-time, then why isn't density (at each $x$, $y$, $z$) considered a dimension in space-time? [closed]

"Theodor Kaluza theorized that a fourth spatial dimension might link general relativity and electromagnetic theory. But where would it go? Theoretical physicist Oskar Klein later revised the theory, proposing that the fourth dimension was merely curled up, while the other three spatial dimensions are extended."

We know high mass density creates gravitational waves that compress length and time (relative to an observer at lower ambient gravitational waves). Why not include density as a dimension in space-time?

## closed as unclear what you're asking by ACuriousMind♦, Jon Custer, Gert, user36790, John RennieOct 1 '16 at 5:49

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

• I don't understand what you mean by "include density as a dimension in space-time". – ACuriousMind Sep 30 '16 at 22:30

One way to understand the dimensionality of space is to examine the nature of the length element. In three dimensional space (and with a Cartesian basis) it is $$(\Delta s)^2 = (\Delta x)^2 + (\Delta y)^2 + (\Delta z)^2 \;,$$ which you will note has three terms. In four-space it would be $$(\Delta s)^2 = (\Delta w)^2 +(\Delta x)^2 + (\Delta y)^2 + (\Delta z)^2 \;.$$
Density doesn't add a term to the length element, instead it effects the coefficients of the sum. Something like $$(\Delta s)^2 = c_x(\Delta x)^2 + c_y(\Delta y)^2 + c_z(\Delta z)^2 \;,$$ with no guarantee that the $c$'s are unity. That's a different kind of modification to the meaning of space.