I am a Scientist.

reply to post by Moduli


My question is a simple one, and short.

"String theory is definitely correct. It's not a "speculative" or "controversial" theory".

If this statement you made is true, then why isn't it called String Law?

To anybody who hasn´t got the hint yet:

Elvis (the OP) has left the building! Repeat....Elvis has left the building!

You can continue screaming, but the lights are on and he isn´t singing for you anymore!

reply to post by Moduli

Hi for ol granma here. I'll keep this short. I think you are here to learn what you can or to see what is
going on. There are far too many accidental coincidences involving ex scientists for it to all be a coincidence.
I used to admire you guys ( scientists ) in a naive kind of way back when I was young and I knew I could
never do what you do. I'm so glad for the good and honest work and for any known cures for diseases.
However, I cannot believe it's all black and white but exists in shades of gray out there..If someone asks
you would you like to see or do something specutacular I'd think twice..no three times. Sometimes it's good
to keep the old job and old salary etc..just the way it is. I don't think you are here to discredit anybody.
You'll never know how many times I thought somebody was just a good honest "Joe" then ..hot oh..
Just my personal howbeit sometimes dumb take on it all.

reply to post by Moduli


What the world demands are real scientists who can find solutions to eradicating toxins from our oceans and lands. Solutions to the world's actual problems. What we don't need is an antiquated theory from 1969 that is a theory trying desperately to unify everything on tiny threads of energy. We are a dying planet and in need of every scientist! What seems ludicrous to me is spending valuable time, money and mental prowess on string theory.

Threads or frequencies, it is all the same. A thread that vibrates is ultimately a frequency first. Now can we get on with it and find solutions to the world's real problems?

www.guardian.co.uk...

Welcome to ATS

Originally posted by mb2591
Well to be fair he/she didn't say it was a phd but did say they had 10 year of schooling..
May I point your attention to page 20 at the bottom a post by CLPrime I think this will be all you need to understand what I am saying

Erm... mostly, I just don't get it. Math isn't my thing. (That is math, right? There are an awfully large number of letters and squiggles in there.) I just like to make broad, sweeping generalizations about the universe and those who inhabit it, and then whittle those down to factoids over years of constant revision.

Of course, I've also worked in the fascinating world of data validation on executive reports, and I can tell you first hand that the same information can be used to justify so many different actions (not using the term "action" as it was used in that particular post, because I lack the context), and to generate so many different results, all depending on what you brought into it. (Now, I look back at this paragraph, and think "You could have said that in fewer words!" but at the moment, I just can't think of how. Blame it on my ADD.)

Er. Stopping there.

Originally posted by Sover3igN
Have a few questions for you, hope you can help.
Been pondering over who actually was first, the chicken or the egg.

Egg.

We have fossilized eggs that are over 160 million years old. Calcined shells seem to have evolved around 140 million years ago or so. The oldest known bird is only 130 million years old or so. Wet/runny eggs (like frog eggs) just don't do well on land, and birds don't lay eggs in the water. Hence, a solid shell is needed before you get egg laying creatures on land or in the air.

Plus, why are banana's bent?

One side of the fruit grows slightly faster than the other (true fact.) It's an adaptation.

Would like to see you come up with an answer on these two, and a more serious question:

Is God anywhere in your research?

Since science involves testable theories, how do you make a test for a deity (and a particular one... not just any old deity) that you can test and get a measured response from? In other words, how does one invoke a deity so that anyone (no matter what religion) always has a pony appear in their kitchen every time they say a certain formula in a certain way.

Deities aren't testable.

reply to post by Moduli

Here's one that should be interesting. What are your thoughts about the second law of thermodynamics as it relates to gravity? The more technical your answer the better. Next I'd like to know what your thoughts are on the casimir effect and Dirac's comments about the vacuum? I know these are advanced subjects, but please humor me.

Another question , someone might have mentioned it already ..

what about quantum entanglement ? Does string theory talk anything about it ?

Also, is there any area in string theory, that focuses on the aspect of the medium in which the strings vibrate ?

Originally posted by fockewulf190
To anybody who hasn´t got the hint yet:

Elvis (the OP) has left the building! Repeat....Elvis has left the building!

You can continue screaming, but the lights are on and he isn´t singing for you anymore!

But seriously, though... it's been twelve hours and 26 pages since he started this... judging by the timing, we might get the idea he's got stuff going on. Social obligations? Family?

I don't know if this has anything to do with string theory, but I was wondering if you think we'll have a fully functional quantum computer produced by the time that we push silicon computer chips to their limits? I ask because the last little tidbit of info I heard was that they've so far accomplished computing simple mathematical problems via quantum computing. (Thanks Michio Kaku!)

Thanks a lot, and welcome to ATS; home to some of the craziest people on the net!

Welcome to ATS, Moduli
I have no questions for you...And look forward to what you have to share.. Enjoy the site..Peace ,sugarcookie1

reply to post by CrikeyMagnet


Well in short the op is not a theoretical string theorist

reply to post by CrikeyMagnet


That's why I'm reluctant to think he's not coming back. He might have a life away from here.
He did say he has the flu, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have other stuff to do. And, when he left, he didn't say that he'd be leaving, but, then, no one does.

reply to post by CLPrime


In the words of Cadavra (or The Lost Skeleton thereof): "I sleep now!"

reply to post by Moduli

No problem, but I should say that knowing you don't know is a much better state than thinking you know and not knowing . Saying that you don't understand puts you way ahead of lots of people.

If you really want to prove your bonafides, tell us how the engine on the captured Roswell saucer works and why free energy technology is being suppressed.

Sheesh, I'll bet you even believe Muslim terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

To answer these questions: It doesn't exist, and I do.

how the government's technology is years/decades/centuries/millennia beyond normal technology (it's not).

Do you believe that astral travelling and out of body experiences are scientifically possible?

No, definitely not.

Is reincarnation possible?

No, there is no remotely plausible mechanism by which this could happen.

What is a soul made out of?

Nothing, they don't exist.

Are you god or something? What's the meaning of life?

You praise humility then go on to 'answer' questions no ones ever been able to...

As an armchair anthropologist, I found this thread fascinating and mystifying.
I don't understand the immediate venom spewing from certain members right off the bat.
Sure, the OP may have come across a bit professorial or condescending, but what's with accusations of "disinfo agent"? And that he is spreading lies and trying to only "get his point across"? I didn't think he was trying to get any point across--he was home sick with some free time and he offered to answer some questions as professional physicist.

Why is that so offensive? Why is that scary? Why is that grounds for suspicion?
He didn't want to talk about paranormal stuff or governmental conspiracies--which is exactly the kind of thing he would want to talk about if he was spreading disinformation.

How does offering to answer questions about the famous particle/wave experiment, or what black hole might look like smack of the evil Powers That Be and suspicion that he is their agent?
It just seemed an awful lot of out of proportion ballistics aimed at a boring old physics teacher.

I'm also at loss to explain why so many threads continuously argue and obsess about the definitions of theory and fact. Pages and pages are wasted over this never-ending argument.
There is such a thing as a dictionary: let's look into it.

(from Dictionary.com) THEORY: 1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
Notice that? Coherent propositions. Principles of explanation.

FACT: something that actually exists; reality; known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true.

See? You use FACTS to put together THEORIES.
The theory acts as a COHERENT way to explain observed FACTS.
Theory and facts aren't enemies---they are LOVERS!!!


That's all the cranky rant I have in me right now.
I'm going to go browse moon anomalies.

reply to post by Moduli


Hello Moduli,

Maybe you can explain a question I have: I recently read a book (A Disruptive Invention) which described in considerable detail, both hardware and software, how to buld a UFO. It was all hinged upon old theories that had been postulated about something called "The Fifth Force" which allows electric currents (or more exactly moving charges) to repel gravity. Aparently this force has never been found, and as far as science is concerned, it does not exist and the theories are unfounded. All the same it is pretty amazing that if you take something like the predicted Fifth Force effect, then if it did exist you could desigh a pretty good UFO with it. I chuckled at your description because one of the characters in the book is a tall theoretical physicist.

Can you comment about the "Fifth Force" and how certain science is that it really does not exist?


Ufofan

Welcome.

I can make fart noises with my hands.

This was an absolutely fascinating read. I don't quite understand the animosity between people as the previous poster noted. This hinders progress.

If nothing else, it has inspired me to continue on with math and physics. I appreciate everyone's time.

reply to post by Moduli


First I must say welcome to ATS as your opinions are respected as well as your advanced education. I myself have advanced education and know from my own experience you cant always trust your Rockefeller influenced paradigms. Those that dig deep on ATS work hard and read info from men and women of your stature that may disagree with some of your very beliefs. There are many physicists, such as Stanton Friedman, who would say yes Alien or off planet technology does exist. Even Dr. Kaku has eluded to our governments needing to ready for contact. So like many of us here on ATS open the mind and think outside the box you just might learn something.

Nameste