It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I am a Scientist.

page: 14
83
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 


Thanks for your time in answering the questions
Helped me somewhat in understanding bits and pieces here and there
I do have some questions that have been bugging me for sometime ..



    In one of your replies you mentioned that there are only 26 dimensions or so in all ? But doesn't one of the string theories have just 10 or 11 dimensions ?

    Is time another dimension ? Can time be considered as just change in space ? Time is ultimately change right ? So Time as such doesn't exist, but only space exists ? Because ultimately time is just a measure of change ( fixed in terms of movements of seconds) ? The physicality of time is something I am struggling with.. would appreciate a physicist's help


    So the string theory in one line is : strings > nuclear forces ( strings ) > atoms > Planets > gravitational forces ( diff strings) > Boundaries of the universe> Multiverses ?

    We do experience thoughts. Do you think thoughts have a dimension ? Is it possible for string theory to explain thoughts in the vague sense just in terms of pure physics ( rather than bio/psycho-logy?

    Do you think that string theory would be able to describe consciousness at some point in the future ? I am very interested in studying mystical experiences scientifically, for I have come across some interesting articles on it. So was curious as to whether string theory would be able to describe consciousness at all. If the world is made of strings, vibrating in 26 dimensions, definitely, the consciousness of an individual beyond the QM effects should be within the strings as well ?


As a side note, I do beleive that the string theory has promise. Also, even though mechanism for reincarnation isn't scientific yet, too much anecdotal evidence, and scientific research and verifcation of facts suggests that it does.

Thanks again for the interesting discussion on it
Would also love to hear string theory books you would recommend for an average joe




posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Welcom to ATS, not much time, but I thought I would ask this question.

Have you read my theory on physics? If so, what do you think. It is similar to string theory, but in my concept the electron is string like, or more like a strand of hair. I thought of the concept in the eighties, so before string theory came out.

Oh, besides a good laugh, ATS serves up a great deal of imagination. Good food for the brain.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moduli

Originally posted by CLPrime
It is, in fact, an action. Let me, using the given variable substitutions, revert to its original equation:



Plus, I'll give you this:



That should help.


It's hilarious that you think that's what that was supposed to mean. theta=0 was my favorite part. Second only to the random insertion of integral dtheta. But really all of it was pretty hilarious.


Hm. As a String Theorist, I would've assumed your ability to extrapolate and apply would be better than this.
Do you even know what the second function is?



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by AceWombat04
what are some reliable books or at least sources for the layperson to learn more about all of this if learning calculus isn't an option?

Peace.


I would personally recommend, as a layperson, to pick up the video series by NOVA "The Elegant Universe" for a intro to string theory (they also have a really good bonus disk about physics and quantum physics included).

Its still a bit mystical, however, they do a much MUCH better job than the bleep thing...they actually try to explain a lot of the curiousitys and understand they are aiming at a low to mid level education crowd..so they try to supress the math as much as possible.

Your head will explode about 8 minutes into it and you may leave more confused than you started for the first 3 or 4 times you watch it, but its still a good intro.
edit on 26-6-2011 by SaturnFX because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by j-man
reply to post by kurifuri
 


Ok here's some psychology for you to debate, i gave you a quick analysis of your actions:

You never had a lot of real friends. Since that gives you a lot of spare time you were able to read a lot of books about space with pretty pictures. You thought, I want to understand this better, so you bought scientific books. Unfortunately the content of most of those books was to difficult for you to understand, so you just got the overall picture. You learned words like quantum physics (most likely from Stephen Hawking's 'A brief history of time'. and got on the internet to search if someone could break down these problems. You found this site, lingered a while to read other peoples findings, amateurs like yourself giving opinions and was enjoying it.

Then today: the thread you've been waiting for! An actual scientist willingly answering every question you present him. A dream come true! But hey, other people seem to dismantle him... Don't trust him... Noo... Your dream thread... NOOOO! Well then you just go trolling around right.

And since I am a psychologist this is fact...

Oh, and knowing stuff doesn't make you intelligent Per Se... Think about that one...



LMAO owned I wouldn't be surprised if this was pretty spot on haha

Oh, and knowing stuff doesn't make you intelligent Per Se... Think about that one...

^^ so true thank god were not all crazy loons with no understanding of the human experience or how the world works..



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 



Thanks for answering my questions. It is appreciated.

I know it is probably frustrating to you to see pseudoscience passed off as fact (and for those of us on ATS who who just want to get at the truth of whatever it is we're interested in and are faced with hoax after hoax after hoax as well as unsupported claims or claims later proven to be gibberish, I can assure you, you don't have to be a physicist to feel that frustration.) And I have to suspect that may be the source of your derision of many posts you've read on ATS. I would ask however that, if you are willing, you consider taking it easy on us as a community if possible.

I like to think of it in terms of the food chain. We can't all be the biggest fish. Likewise, we can't all have genius level IQs. I'll even go a step further. We can't even all be mentally healthy. But we still all have curiosity and a need to understand the universe and our place in it. With that being the case, I think it's human nature to try to fill in the blanks of what we don't know with assumption and intuition based on what we do know - even if we don't realize we're doing that at the time as we form our beliefs - whether the results we end up with are anything resembling reality or not. I think that's why there are so many disparate world views, religions, outlooks, philosophies, political ideologies, and feelings. All of those things, for better or worse, make up the human species. And the species is what it is.

So, I guess what I'm saying is, consider the decorum and respect I've tried to show you despite being a layperson and someone who no doubt has made a lot of factual mistakes in my life, and try not to judge ATS so harshly if you can. We are what we are.

But by all means, do continue your efforts to educate. I can think of no more worthy pursuit, frankly.

Thanks again and peace.

reply to post by SaturnFX
 


And thank-you for that recommendation, as well.
edit on 6/26/2011 by AceWombat04 because: Acknowedging further recommendation from SaturnFX



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by j-man
 


Uhhh... no. Your not a psychologist because that is not how psychology works. You do not just look at someones post and make assumptions about them, no matter how logical they might seem. Sorry, my interest in astronomy has nothing to do with friends or the lack of them, it stems from seeing a spectacular comet that shot across the sky on my move to Oklahoma when i was like 5. We were on a mountain in Tuscon for some reason and the stars were so bright and seemed so close that i felt as if i could touch them. Then the comet flew by. And the rest is history.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by j-man
 


Bit rough, don'tcha think?



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
What do think about the theory that CO2 drives climate?

It's a theory that seems to have been adopted my many in science even though it ignores the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

And, have you read Hal Lewis' letter of resignation to the APS?

If so do you agree with him?



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Do you know Brian Cox?



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 

Liar. There's one glaring falsehood that gives you away. There isn't anyway to prove string theory is correct. I'm not a professional physicist, but I have close contact with one. He clearly stated that it is impossible to prove based on the very nature of the theory. So until you can clarify how that's done, I'm calling B.S. on the OP.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


The second paragraph i can see, but the first one i have trouble with. At any rate, i cant prove otherwise as i am relatively new to the site so i will keep an eye as per ATS paranoia policy.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by kurifuri
reply to post by j-man
 


Uhhh... no. Your not a psychologist because that is not how psychology works. You do not just look at someones post and make assumptions about them, no matter how logical they might seem. Sorry, my interest in astronomy has nothing to do with friends or the lack of them, it stems from seeing a spectacular comet that shot across the sky on my move to Oklahoma when i was like 5. We were on a mountain in Tuscon for some reason and the stars were so bright and seemed so close that i felt as if i could touch them. Then the comet flew by. And the rest is history.


Comet or meteor? if a comet zipped by, that would be an impressive sight...considering...well, just going to go with you seen a bright shooting star....



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Liar. No true theory is impossible to prove.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
250 replies in five hours...that's gotta be a record. I think another member here is phd candidate who appears to add to the knowledge base here. Hopefully you do as well.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Guys i suggest you read this book.

Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory and the Search for Unity in Physical Law


Great Link
www.math.columbia.edu...
edit on 26-6-2011 by solid007 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColeYoungerThis is 'Science'. You want Philosophy. That's two doors down.


Yeah, I know. Guilty as charged. *blush* I am looking for the overlap between the two. And QM seems like a reasonable place to look.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Making it to the end of this thread was like trying to sit through " Fantastic Four". Fun to watch the train wreck, however, it's taxing!

But I must say, regardless of who's right and who's wrong or who's a legitimate scientist (or who haz potato), this has been 100% more entertaining than the usual doom/gloom thread. It ranks up there with "Hidden_hand" and her/his/it's dramatic threads


SaturnFX is as usual, abrasive and entertaining.

Carry on, I just wanted to express my exhaustion and amusement.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by kurifuri
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Liar. No true theory is impossible to prove.

Um based on all current knowledge it is impossible to prove scientifically. So the OP making such a big claim, better have extraordinary proof. And the only proof he needs is a logical explanation for how they can prove it correct.


edit on 26-6-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Which force, or forces, are responsible for assembling trillions of atoms into 'me'? It surely can't just be an interaction of gravity and electro-magnetism. I understand that I'm a bilogical system, but it should still be describable in terms of physics.



new topics

top topics



 
83
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join