String Theory

Discussion in 'Community' started by Durandal7, Aug 13, 2003.

  1. Durandal7 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #1
    String theory is an intriuging idea but the way I see it, it fails in a few key areas and will not become a "theory of everything."

    First off, I think it's key failing will be it's attempt to explain gravity in terms of "graviton particles." I think that a new theory will have to be devised to explain gravity and it will most likely have to bridge the gap between matter and time and the distortion effects that gravity has on time.

    Even worse, string theory has yet to offer a solid explanation for dark matter and it's place in the universe as well as it's apparent "anti-gravity" effect on the universe.

    Having said that, I think that string theory is great for dealing with bosons and their interactions.
     
  2. NavyIntel007 macrumors 65816

    NavyIntel007

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #2
    In the words of the cartoon mouse pinky... TABOO :confused:
     
  3. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #3
    Haven't got a clue. I think I remember that "bosons" are sub-atomic particles and I've heard of string theory and dark matter, but I sure couldn't explain them. Durandal7, your topic makes me feel like your Nolte avatar looks. I better go to the "have you ever been drunk" thread. sorry.
     
  4. Powerbook G5 macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #4
    It's been years since I've heard anyone talk about the TOE! Memories...but yes, it does seem like it has been dying out over the years as theorists have made little headway in describing what these various dimensions and properties of cosmic strings are and whether or not they can lead towards a more common view of the Big Bang/Great Redux relationship.
     
  5. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #5
    I still think that if we ever get the Grand Unifying Theory figured out it might all make sense.

    There have been recent attempts to visualize gravity, but I haven't read or heard about any successes yet.

    Its nice knowing that there is so much more still left to figure out - one of the reasons I'd love to live several hundred years or more just to see the discoveries....:D

    D
     
  6. frescies macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #6
    Remember... A graviton is an imaginary particle. It does not exist. It has only been conjured up to make the math work. Not to say that the math is wrong or has some false figures. In the equations regarding gravitational distortion and attraction (particularly time dilation), the math has been broken down to reflect "particles" the way an anology is used to make things easier to understand. But, fortunately, this does not make the math any less valid.
     
  7. Cubeboy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2003
    Location:
    Bridgewater NJ
    #7
    Please excuse my lack of knowledge in this subject but can someone enlighten me on exactly what string theory (which basically states that the universe is composed of strings and that subatomic particles are actually vibrations of the strings), has to do with the graviton (a theoretical particle that transmits the force of gravity).

    Anyone else think this is a really complex theory? I mean I can't see how one can even begin to contemplate what ten dimensional supersymmetry would look like. The whole theory is so complicated that it can never be tested, not even mathematically. From what I hear, most physicist aren't even able to fully comprehend it. ;)
     
  8. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #8
    -Durandal7

    I think the advancement of String Theory is on hold until the scientists can identify the Higgs Boson - and until the Super Hadron collider is completed at CERN, it is unlikely that will happen.
     
  9. neut macrumors 68000

    neut

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2001
    Location:
    here (for now)
    #9
    silly humans

    if it doesn't make sense to you now...it never will.

    most theory's are correct from a certain perspective, but not all perspectives. there is no Unified Theory. how could we even grasp the concept. we could find more truth in sorcery than we can in science. after all...it doesn't really exist unless we agree to it. no more puzzle games for me. im out.

    keep falling? no thanx, i'll fly.
     
  10. dynamicd macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #10
    Where's Steven Hawking's when you need him??? ;)
     
  11. Durandal7 thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #11
    String theory states that gravitons are in fact sub-atomic particles that are vibrations of strings.

    At least some string theories do, there are about 10 flavors of it.
     
  12. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #12
    -All

    String theory is what happens when cosmologists get frustrated with not coming up with the answers, get blitheringly drunk, and think about it again.
     
  13. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #13
    It's crap.

    It's closer than much other crap that's come out of Assademia over the years but it's still crap.

    I'm convinced that a Unified theory will require someone like Tesla who was so intuitive that nobody could believe even half of the things he could demonstrate, let alone the things he theorized.

    I feel that a Unified theory will be recieved with the classic Reubic-solve response:

    " Damn! It's so simple! How come we couldn't see that?!?"

    On the subject of physics sets:

    I've got a good alternate ready for review as the model used by the Alien species in the writing I have in the Macscene forum.

    Please put yourselves on the mailing list if you want to see it.

    I already have your response Durandal. ;)

    -M
     
  14. Doctor Q Administrator

    Doctor Q

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #14
    I saw mention of "dark energy" the other day. I understand (I think) the dark matter issue, but what is "dark energy"?
     
  15. Durandal7 thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #15
    Re: It's crap.

    If people bothered to listen to Tesla then we would we be about 50 years further on the technology path then we are now.

    I look forward to reading the physics set :) I have always been a science junkie.

    It's the energy counterpart to dark matter. If we knew anything else about it then it would not be an issue.
     
  16. Cubeboy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2003
    Location:
    Bridgewater NJ
    #16
    Ahhhhhh *cracks open another beer*
     
  17. Dale Sorel macrumors 6502a

    Dale Sorel

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    #17
    Re: Re: It's crap.

    Tesla was way ahead of his time.
     
  18. Durandal7 thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #18
    Re: Re: Re: It's crap.

    I don't buy the existence of the Higgs Boson or the graviton. Mass seems too related to gravity which is tied to time for their to be seperate explanations.

    Any unified field theory will probably have to roll the Higgs and the Graviton into one concept that will be tied more to the structure of spacetime then any sort of particle.
     
  19. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #19
    Re: Re: Re: Re: It's crap.

    Bingo.

    I've been doing some research into just the observations that lead to all these bizarre ideas. I can tell you that the Higgs/Graviton/String theorems are the most rationally sound of the bunch by sheer volume of Mathematical backup.

    The bitch of it is that the Math that's used to turn all the observations into theorems seems to revolve around physically inexpressible values that never ballance out (Square roots of negative numbers and such).

    It seems that Gravity is an issue that should really be studied out in open space where there's no huge gravity wells to scue the data. Studying gravity from the relative bottom of two huge, overlapping gravity wells is self defeating.

    I have a hunch that it'll all turn out to be like Velikofski and Tesla first thought it was: EM fields that go with everything, but only the ones with the most powerful fields (planets & stars) measureable as Gravity when you're so close to one.

    It may not seem to make much sense but the observational data does suggest that even "non conductive" matter has an inherent field that can be excited through addition of potential into an observable state and that exceedingly powerful EM fields can alter gravitation specific to the area of their influence.

    IE: It's all EM. It's just a matter of scale, composition and application of potential that determines the observed outcome.

    (shrug) The words Scientists hate saying most are:" I don't know... It just IS." But sooner or later they always have to.;) :rolleyes:
     
  20. Dale Sorel macrumors 6502a

    Dale Sorel

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    #20
    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's crap.

    What else is new :rolleyes:

    LOL :p
     
  21. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #21
    -Durandal7, mischief

    Here's an interesting tidbit. Before CERN had to shut down to begin construction of the Super Hadron, they found the trail of what they believe was the Higgs Boson.

    Unfortunately, they had to shut down only days later before thay could prepare the next shot. So until the Super Hadron, the Fermilab Pea-Shooter has to make do filling in little components.

    What this means? Well, they are on the right path to proving or disproving the the existenc of the Higgs Boson - and that, will be newsworthy.
     
  22. Durandal7 thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #22
    Some assorted ramblings from yours truly:

    Perhaps the distortion of time is not only a symptom of gravity but the cause as well? What if in an area of space where there are no effects of gravity time moves at an infinite pace? What if linear time only exists because gravity slows time down to something less then infinity?

    What if dark matter is normal matter hidden away in parts of the universe that are adjacent to us on spatial axises that we cannot see? Would gravity defy 3-dimensional space? It already defies the speed of light so it's not too much of a strech.
     
  23. Durandal7 thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #23
    Gravity slows time so it goes to figure that time moves faster where there is no gravity. Perhaps time would move at an infinite pace in this place. There would be no areas like this left in our universe since gravity permeates everything to some degree. Before the Big Bang however there was no matter, and therefore no mass and therfore no gravity. This means that time would move at an infinite pace and that the moment the singulairity that became the universe was born infinite time halted. Since time is moving at an infinite pace it makes the idea of "before" the big bang quite irrelevant since there would be no before, there would only be the single instant. The moment a single particle with mass popped it's head up, time as we know it began.

    It also seems fairly likely that the universe is a multi-dimensional structure (IE more then 3 spacial dimensions.) If we can account for 5% of the matter in the universe then it is reasonable to assume that the remainder of the matter is adjacent to us on a 4th or even 5th spacial axis, if this is the case then it could even allow for the many worlds theory in quantum physics. Additionally, gravity would bleed across all axises of space, since it is not in fact a spacial particle but a function of temporal dimensions and therefore will defy the laws of space including the speed of light.

    Whew.
     
  24. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #24
    One good pondering deserves another....

    The whole big-bang thing is nicely romantic and a good emotional replacement for Genesis but has some serious flaws. Not the least of which is to assume that the Infinite is Finite (Universe has an "edge").

    It has struck me that if energetic principles are similar across the spectrum, only getting more "particulate" as you get into higher potentials, than it's likely that "redshift" is more a function of distance than velocity.

    This would shoot the Big Bang theory in the ass. It seems to be a simpler model if it's a Universe that exists with no beginning or end and shifts energy around with several similar, parallel ones the way heat moves through strata in water.

    The sheer number of exceptions and the extreme complexity of the model tells me that the problem is being approached rather backwardly. Nature is the essence of simple elegance, even in the most complex systems.
     
  25. patrick0brien macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #25
    -Durandal7

    Excellent thinking. Ergo the Universal Gravitational Constant.

    However, the grip that time has on gravity is still only circumspecctually proven. E=MC^2 is a convenience.

    This isn't me talking - I would never be so presumptuous. The Special theory or relativity holds that E=MC^2. I've had many discussions with folks from Cal-Tech, Princeton, and others - but that's beside the point.

    The point is that when looking at all of this, the interface of light speed with gravity then time, is tenuous. It's only used because the math happens to produce expected results. But as we advance, this is beginning to break down. They admit, there is no actual connection that can be found. There are rumblings, that there is a connection, but it's merely a part of something greater - a differential player in a bigger equasion. It's not just the Higgs Boson - of lack therof, but the connections between the Forces.

    The kicker is the fact that the concept of time is considered a humen invention. And explanation of something beina able to move - to vibrate - to age.

    Time itself, has not proven to exist, due to the fact that it can't be poked and prodded. It can only be measured - by an invention of ours, the clock.

    (not to say that I personally don't believe it - look at my location)

    As a result, gravity-time connection is calculable, but not the entire story. This is why the experiments abbout the Higgs Boson is so important.
     

Share This Page