[fartsucker69]

Until we get evidence of such a thing, those ideas have little credibility though they are nice thought experiments.

What they're really seeing is that mathematically something can be expressed with less dimensions or degrees of freedom than what you observe in the real world, and then make the conclusion that therefor the dimensions and properties etc. that we observe are some emergent property and not fundamental.

But you can't make this conclusion from the mathematical model.

For example, if I have a finite sized two dimensional plane where each point is associated with some function f(x,y),you can trivially express it as a one dimensional system where all the rows of the plane are sort of unwound onto a single line. This trick does not work for infinite 2D spaces but there are other ways to remap infinite sized spaces onto finite ones (e.g. via tan).

Yet there's nothing fundamental about this, it's just a mathematical modelling trick.

[ouid]

this trick works for infinite sets of the same cardinality and in fact works continuously for the case you are describing. there is a surjective continuous function fron R to R^n for any n