Strings are made up of energy.....

Stephen Hawkings has it wrong.
The n-th parell universe is just a scalar product of the two vectors orthogonal to our own universe, and this being said a further look reveals a function that is not constant whose partial derivates give an interesting view upon the current status of our own universe. If we use the e expansion as the growth of our own universe, defined by the de Broglie and Schrodinger wave functions, and plug in function for the n-th parell univers "x", spectral analysis shows that the two origonal vectors orthogonal to our own are in fact not orthogonal at everypoint. Though a point cannot not be given explicity along the projection of these vectors, proof shows that a point exists, and I am saddened to say that this point, I believe, expands infinitely and cannot be obtained.

So much for Stephen Hawking.

For What it's Worth--

One can even set up quite ridiculous cases. A cat is penned up in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat): in a Geiger counter there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer which shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has decayed. The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it the living and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.

[edit on 29-1-2007 by Ed Littlefox]

Originally posted by Soitenly
Stephen Hawkings has it wrong.

I agree (aswell as Einsteins relativity being majorly in need of an update)

TL: You obviously don't understand what your preaching.

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

Originally posted by Soitenly
Stephen Hawkings has it wrong.

I agree (aswell as Einsteins relativity being majorly in need of an update)

TL: You obviously don't understand what your preaching.

Explain what I don't "understand".

Originally posted by TL
Explain what I don't "understand".

I said before: "So tell me, how does this theory answer the question of "where did we come from?" any more than what was known before?"

What makes string theory more truth than anything we had already? Its just a convienent excuse (ST) to keep us focused on how important "matter" is. Not only that, it has hypothised something so infinitely small you can't measure it, only calculate it.

how is that any different to the theories on the "ether" of reality?

Why should anyone buy into String theory over even religious beliefs about reality/existence? Smashing particles together is fantastic, but formulae and calculations are next to nothing compared to actually experimenting with reality.

What makes mathematical equations closer to the truth than say, an experience with '___' or '___'? It can tell us how these things occur, but never WHY. It does not account for the observer, human consciousness.

Why should anyone buy into String theory over even religious beliefs about reality/existence?

Because string theory is backed by mathematics. Religion is not. That is why it takes 'intelligence' to understand one and 'faith' the other. Mathematics is just logic (1 thing + 1 thing = 2 things). So when it comes down to science its just logical. Religion cannot be proven and that's what makes it so great. You are forced to make up your own mind. No-one can prove that it exists or it doesn't (besides you shouldn't need proof). Don't blame science for trying to understand why things are. It does its best by using the tools that are available and comprehendable. At least it can prove its theories based on the reality you and I exist in.

Science = You prove
Belief = You imagine

Smashing particles together is fantastic, but formulae and calculations are next to nothing compared to actually experimenting with reality.

So are you saying that particle are not part of reality? I don't get what your saying here. Experimenting with reality is what science is all about.

Oh and just for arguments sake, gravity is by FAR the WEAKEST force in existence. It takes matter on the scale of the planets for it to have any measurable effect. It is however, very far reaching. Using the bending of light as a tool for measuring the strength of a force wont work. Matter and gravity co-exist and are totally dependent on each other. Gravity is a byproduct of matter's effect on space and time.

Originally posted by Toasty
[
So are you saying that particle are not part of reality? I don't get what your saying here. Experimenting with reality is what science is all about.

Oh and just for arguments sake, gravity is by FAR the WEAKEST force in existence. It takes matter on the scale of the planets for it to have any measurable effect. It is however, very far reaching. Using the bending of light as a tool for measuring the strength of a force wont work. Matter and gravity co-exist and are totally dependent on each other. Gravity is a byproduct of matter's effect on space and time.

Hi--

Just adding a little thought to Toasty's post, for the sake of clarity? Maybe?

I don't get what you are saying, either. But, then again, maybe it is that you are, somehow, trying to compare belief in a Scientific Theory with Belief in a Higher Being? If that is the case, then you are talking Apples and Oranges, and I am going to state why.

When you deal with God and Religious Teaching, you are dealing with 3 Realms of Knowledge--the Known, the Unknown (which can be known eventually), and the Unknowable, (inclusive of the True nature of God, the stuff of Miracles--etc.). Though, like the Particle and Quantum, God cannot be seen, that is where the similarity Stops dead. While God defies measurement, Particles and Quantums do NOT.

Though we cannot see Quantums or Particles, it is not a matter of whether either or both exist, as both can be and have been measured, identified, and worked with in Real Time and Reality. What makes Physics look a bit like Religion to some people is that the Math proposes quite a number of events, probabilities, and Ideas that we cannot directly measure YET, and YET is the keyword here. These Theoretical Ideas are not some wild think-tank fantasy pulled out of someones scientific arse. They are based in the universal reality of observed behavioral phenomena, and are an attempt to discover why these phenomena occur, all based on what we already know.
For instance, the Reality of the 2nd Theory of Relativity, E=mc2, was proved beyond the shadow of a doubt in 1942, when, at the University of Chicago reactor, Enrico Fermi oversaw the first controlled energy release from the nucleus of the atom. E=mc2 became, in part, a Scientific fact.

This is the way it is with Science and Theory. Everything starts as a Theoretical Proposition, and, through subsequent Research and Repeatable Experimentation, Theories become Facts--or NOT!.

Lastly, and for what it's worth, and as Toasty has pointed out, Gravity is an extremely weak Force and one that has almost no effect on anything in the world of the very small. To put it mathematically, the Repulsion force of 2 Protons is 10e36 times greater than that of Gravity. The Gauge Boson designated for Gravity is the Graviton, and Gravitons are like God--they have never been Scientifically proved to exist, and have never been detected. So then, does Gravity actually exist? Well-- obviously, or I'm floating above the chair! We know Gravity exists with Massive bodies and controls the motion through space of all Massive bodies in the Universe--even if we cannot detect the carrier of it in the micro-world.

Reality, my friend, includes a far greater number of things than one can get his hands on and work with--even God. Einstein thought that about God, and so do I.

[edit on 30-1-2007 by Ed Littlefox]

[edit on 30-1-2007 by Ed Littlefox]

Originally posted by Toasty
Because string theory is backed by mathematics. Religion is not.

That's funny, noboddy but mathematicians care about mathematics.

That is why it takes 'intelligence' to understand one and 'faith' the other.

Are you certain of this? What do you know about systems of differential equations, existence and uniqueness, geometry of manifolds, the expansion of e and infinite series? Even if you did know everything, understanding the math behind string theory and the theory itself are completely worthless.

Mathematics is just logic (1 thing + 1 thing = 2 things). So when it comes down to science its just logical. Religion cannot be proven and that's what makes it so great. You are forced to make up your own mind. No-one can prove that it exists or it doesn't (besides you shouldn't need proof). Don't blame science for trying to understand why things are. It does its best by using the tools that are available and comprehendable. At least it can prove its theories based on the reality you and I exist in.

No, you are wrong. Religion makes as much sense as science. Apple? See, you dont know what I mean. Your math could not help you there.

Originally posted by Soitenly

Originally posted by Toasty
Because string theory is backed by mathematics. Religion is not.

That's funny, noboddy but mathematicians care about mathematics.

That is why it takes 'intelligence' to understand one and 'faith' the other.

Are you certain of this? What do you know about systems of differential equations, existence and uniqueness, geometry of manifolds, the expansion of e and infinite series? Even if you did know everything, understanding the math behind string theory and the theory itself are completely worthless.

Mathematics is just logic (1 thing + 1 thing = 2 things). So when it comes down to science its just logical. Religion cannot be proven and that's what makes it so great. You are forced to make up your own mind. No-one can prove that it exists or it doesn't (besides you shouldn't need proof). Don't blame science for trying to understand why things are. It does its best by using the tools that are available and comprehendable. At least it can prove its theories based on the reality you and I exist in.

No, you are wrong. Religion makes as much sense as science. Apple? See, you dont know what I mean. Your math could not help you there.

Exactly.

I used to be hypnotized by science, it really interested me as a kid. I also used to deny religion and the possible existence of a higher power. I realised religion was a form of control, and that science explained the world around us alot more than some text does...

I have gone from one side of the coin (science vs religion), being on the side of science, to sitting on the edge of the coin, respecting both science and religion, because i realise now there is truth in both.

Science can only go so far. Mathematics and equations are all good at explaining how are reality can work in a given situation, but what it can not do is predict/tell us why certain things happen in a situation. It does not deal with free will and the observer (humans) interacting with reality itself.

Anyone whos tripped, meditated or spoken to a shaman will know that we are NOT seperate from reality, we are connected on a level that would shock most people. Because science can not measure this connection it means that it hasn't bothered to delve into this area.

That is sciences problem. It is far too concerned with whats going on "out there". The truth is not "out there", it is within all of us, and is available to anyone who honestly seeks the truth with intention.

It is so obvious once you realise it, you can't really explain it to people, its something they have to come to realise themselves. Why? Because only they can change their own ego, and admit their understanding of reality is half baked.

I hate it when people say you have to be intelligent to be good at science. Half the time it is just memorising information, rather than actually applying what you know.

There has not been an update of the main principles of science, such as relativity, or any loan "crazy" scientists discovering new things, because science has become a business. It is now a tool to keep our focus on the material world, and mislead us, ie with global warming, which is really earth changes/end times.

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

Originally posted by Soitenly

Originally posted by Toasty
Because string theory is backed by mathematics. Religion is not.

That's funny, noboddy but mathematicians care about mathematics.

That is why it takes 'intelligence' to understand one and 'faith' the other.

Are you certain of this? What do you know about systems of differential equations, existence and uniqueness, geometry of manifolds, the expansion of e and infinite series? Even if you did know everything, understanding the math behind string theory and the theory itself are completely worthless.

Mathematics is just logic (1 thing + 1 thing = 2 things). So when it comes down to science its just logical. Religion cannot be proven and that's what makes it so great. You are forced to make up your own mind. No-one can prove that it exists or it doesn't (besides you shouldn't need proof). Don't blame science for trying to understand why things are. It does its best by using the tools that are available and comprehendable. At least it can prove its theories based on the reality you and I exist in.

No, you are wrong. Religion makes as much sense as science. Apple? See, you dont know what I mean. Your math could not help you there.

Exactly.

I used to be hypnotized by science, it really interested me as a kid. I also used to deny religion and the possible existence of a higher power. I realised religion was a form of control, and that science explained the world around us alot more than some text does...

I have gone from one side of the coin (science vs religion), being on the side of science, to sitting on the edge of the coin, respecting both science and religion, because i realise now there is truth in both.

Science can only go so far. Mathematics and equations are all good at explaining how are reality can work in a given situation, but what it can not do is predict/tell us why certain things happen in a situation. It does not deal with free will and the observer (humans) interacting with reality itself.

Anyone whos tripped, meditated or spoken to a shaman will know that we are NOT seperate from reality, we are connected on a level that would shock most people. Because science can not measure this connection it means that it hasn't bothered to delve into this area.

That is sciences problem. It is far too concerned with whats going on "out there". The truth is not "out there", it is within all of us, and is available to anyone who honestly seeks the truth with intention.

It is so obvious once you realise it, you can't really explain it to people, its something they have to come to realise themselves. Why? Because only they can change their own ego, and admit their understanding of reality is half baked.

I hate it when people say you have to be intelligent to be good at science. Half the time it is just memorising information, rather than actually applying what you know.

There has not been an update of the main principles of science, such as relativity, or any loan "crazy" scientists discovering new things, because science has become a business. It is now a tool to keep our focus on the material world, and mislead us, ie with global warming, which is really earth changes/end times.

And that theory is also unprovable. The only way you can prove it is by dieing. And if you find out it is correct, no one will know about it because you are "dead". Yes, you are right, the string theory says muliverses are created when two branes with multiverses collide in the 11th dimension, this is mathematically possible, BUT it does not say how the FIRST and second multiverse was created. How could a multiverse be made if there weren't 2 multiverses before it that collided?