String Theory

[welshjon81]

I'm not an expert by far but does anyone know of anything that string theory has helped explain.

I suppose maybe the curled up extra dimensions could maybe/possibly justify spooky action at a distance between particles but thats pretty much all I can think of...

Have the worlds physisits been barking up the wrong tree for the past 30ish years??

I'd like to learn a lot more about the subject.

Thanks!

[stew-S160]

It provides lots of theories but no answers to anything at all. Proponents of it won't let it die, they just keep on coming up with fantastical new mathematical formulas which could possibly explain something which they don't yet know nor are able, or ever likely to be able to test said theories.



Oh look, flying monkeys...

[welshjon81]

This is pretty much what I thought... I love the idea of a multiverse/parallel universe's and time travel being possible but I just can't get my head around the fact of any of it actually being more than just imagination or theory.

I mean people like Brian Greene and Michio Kaku have made good livings out of this over the years and they have no proof whatsoever right?

I'm not being close minded here by the way but I just can't see any of it actually leading anywhere!

[welshjon81]

This is pretty much what I thought... I love the idea of a multiverse/parallel universe's and time travel being possible but I just can't get my head around the fact of any of it actually being more than just imagination or theory.

I mean people like Brian Greene and Michio Kaku have made good livings out of this over the years and they have no proof whatsoever right?

I'm not being close minded here by the way but I just can't see any of it actually leading anywhere!

[V8LM]

Can't comment, but opportunity to post this again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rjbtsX7twc

[hornet]

I don't really see the issue with theoretical physicists theorising? May well be barking up completely the wrong tree, but ruling that tree out may well prove as useful as ruling it in, and you never know what might be found along the way. Sometimes the right thing is found in the wrong place, just ask Flemming.

I tend to view this sort of thing as a detective investigation. You can go down many dead ends and blind alleys, but eventually you'll find a lead, often when/where you were least expecting it. If the theorists need to construct masses of seemingly abstract mathematical ideas and pretend universes to scratch away at the real thing, I don't see the harm?

[stew-S160]

It's nice that they come up with all these fantastic theories, but that's all they will ever be, because like I said, there is no way, nor will there ever likely be any way of actually testing them.

It's a bit like religion...

[Jinx]

If the theories were correct they would have led to something useful by now (much like if "back radiation" existed we would have IR powered torches) .
If it's not testable it's not science

[Russian Rocket]

particle = wave = both at the same time


father = son = holy spirit


its not hard to see why people get confused



(DOI I am a born again Atheist)

[The_Doc]

V8LM said:

Can't comment, but opportunity to post this again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rjbtsX7twc

Just fabulous!

Every once in a while I find something, surfing around on the internet that really, really makes me smile and marvel at the inventiveness of people.

And that's one.

Thank you

[Moonhawk]

stew-S160 said:

It's nice that they come up with all these fantastic theories, but that's all they will ever be, because like I said, there is no way, nor will there ever likely be any way of actually testing them.

String theory is testable.......in theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory#Testabi...

"Cannot be tested for" is not the same as "cannot be tested for.....yet". Many theories couldn't be tested for at the time of their formulation or proposition due to lack of suitably advanced technology. Some prime examples are the atomic theory of matter, black holes and lasers......all of which we now have a relatively good understanding of or have confirmed the existence of.

Edited by Moonhawk on Monday 25th November 17:10

[paranoid airbag]

The_Doc said:

V8LM said:

Can't comment, but opportunity to post this again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rjbtsX7twc

Just fabulous!

Every once in a while I find something, surfing around on the internet that really, really makes me smile and marvel at the inventiveness of people.

And that's one.

Thank you

It is pretty awesome, I think it edges out my old favourite "finite simply group (of order two)".

This being the internet, it's only a matter of time before someone brings in xkcd... and this time it's me!

[maffski]

Well, it seems string theory has finally come up with an answer to one of the most vexing of all questions. Why are celebrities so shallow?

It's because our entire universe is a projection from a one dimensional flat universe.

For people like me, the Daily Mail link is here.

For people that can read statements like '...resembles a group of idealized springs, or harmonic oscillators, attached to one another.' without laughing, the Nature version is here.

And for people that enjoy bedtime reading with titles like 'Quantum Near Horizon Geometry of Black 0-Brane' the original paper is here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.7526

From what I can understand this new stuff is all good because it ties up classic Einstein type gravity and quantum level weirdness and manages to express both behaviours via the same mathematics, however it does this by explaining our classical universe as a projection of a multi-dimensional string universe which is itself a projection of a universe that has a single dimension, no gravity and just consists of a 'quantum soup'

[Halmyre]

maffski said:

Well, it seems string theory has finally come up with an answer to one of the most vexing of all questions. Why are celebrities so shallow?

It's because our entire universe is a projection from a one dimensional flat universe.

For people like me, the Daily Mail link is here.

For people that can read statements like '...resembles a group of idealized springs, or harmonic oscillators, attached to one another.' without laughing, the Nature version is here.

And for people that enjoy bedtime reading with titles like 'Quantum Near Horizon Geometry of Black 0-Brane' the original paper is here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.7526

From what I can understand this new stuff is all good because it ties up classic Einstein type gravity and quantum level weirdness and manages to express both behaviours via the same mathematics, however it does this by explaining our classical universe as a projection of a multi-dimensional string universe which is itself a projection of a universe that has a single dimension, no gravity and just consists of a 'quantum soup'

Sounds like Plato was right all along - the observable world is only a projection of the real world.