String Theory

[NeverMind]

Can somebody explain string theory to me?

I watched the Discovery Channel thingy on it and it intrigued me.

[pnklphnts]

it involves u sticking a string up your ass

[NeverMind]

Cam, I know I'm no scholar on the subject. But I have watched the discovery channel special. And I'm pretty sure you are incorrect. I think it was more about alternate dimensions and shit. HELP!!

[pnklphnts]

exactly.... the alternatives demensions of your ass

[NeverMind]

Oh cam,

Si il ya a un "hell," touz allez la bas.

If there is a hell, you are going there.

And I hope it's in my ass! (hell, that is)

[NeverMind]

and that should say vouz allez la bas not touz allez

[sonrisa]

if you kidz are done fooling around you may want to check out this link (http://www.superstringtheory.com)

[vicente]

In a sense I'd agree with Pinkelephants,..it involves u sticking a string up your ass

String theory suggests there is an underlying fundamental particle beneath atoms, quarks - strings. No one has ever saw "string",...they merely imagine there is one because they refuse to admit that there is 'no time' for strings to exist,...'no beginning' for a string to have been born.

Studying strings is like playing with your ass, at best you could have a prostrat ejaculation, but no real orgasm.

What gives rise to 'mass' is pressure on photons. If you're really interested on an overview on the subject, I'd suggest 'The Secret of Light' by walter Russell
http://www.philosophy.org/index2.html

:)

[pnklphnts]

i knew i was to smart for my own good...

[sonrisa]

I think string theory is a rip. All those extra dimensions balled up like paper wads.... :shakehead:

I'm partial to brane theory (http://www.theosophysandiego.org/featured/branethe.htm) myself. :)

[NeverMind]

well i dont really know much about it but what i know confuses and intrigues me.

[todd]

I see you did no get really serious answers on these.

String theory? Maybe I make a mistake here , but I studied in school/unversity the string theory, in Superior mathematics, and I can say that it was one of my favourites subjects.
The strings have a discreet nature, made of an infintite serie of values and are usually converging to a certain value.
Some people are saying that everything is a part of a string, time, life etc. we just do not have have the formula to describe it.
Of course, we are living in an infinite univers, infinite time and matter, posibilities are infinite also , so there probably is a mathematical ecuation for everything.
But are we interested in it? It will require, obviously an infinite time to find it, an infinite time to solve it and an infinite time to understand it.
So why bother?

[vicente]

I see you did no get really serious answers on these

On the contrary.

As for infinity,...infinity is a word that by accepted definitions points to a relationship with space/time, thus like space/time, infinity is not real. There is no "set" which is infinite outside our perceptions.

Eternity on the other hand, is without beginning or end,...it has always existed. The Eternal is Causeless, Changeless, Dimensionless,...that is, it is beyond space/time. Some say Eternity is infinite time, but that idea merely perverts Eternity into space/times deluded construct.

A wise Philosopher in my opinion would use the word infinite sparingly, if at all. Infinity suggests an immeasurability of the perceived measurable,...Eternity dismises any measurability at all.

Personally, I see infinity as a purely mathematical delusion. In physics, perceived life is a pulse between 3 Zeros. For example, if it were possible to separate male from female, the male would spiral-in, contract into a solid more dense than an aledged blackhole, whereas the female would spiral-out, expand beyond gamma radiation into oblivion,...and the world as we perceive it would be ripped apart in the blink of an eye.

An 8's flow is continuous, but that infinite appearing continuity is within a bounded space.


:)

[sonrisa]

and an 8 on its side is infinity

:)

[NeverMind]

how can anything be endless? where does it go?
how can the universe be expanding? where is it going? what's outside of it? how can there be an end? to anything? and everything? im so confused.

[a random hack]

nm,

that which is concieved of as 'infinite' is not a thing...
where doesn't it go? :lol:
only the bit of the 'universe we can see is expanding...
where isn't it going? :lol:
not being a thing, there is no outside...
not being a thing, there is no beginning or ending, tho may appear to be from a viewpoint :D

are you less confused now? :lol:

[todd]

I'm sorry but I have to disagree.


infinity is a word that by accepted definitions points to a relationship with space/time, thus like space/time, infinity is not real

Infinity doesn't point to space or time or anything. It is a pure abstract concept. Everything can be infinite, and I can even add that everything is infinite. Actually finite does not exist, it is just an illusion.
And this is not Philosophy, this is exact science.
The limits are just illusions, and can give a lot of examples like - surface theories, Big Bang theory, subcuantic theory etc.
All limits are singularities in an 8-dimensional space (so called),.
Every single day we discover new dimensions, new limits.
Of course, space, time are not real, are just concepts that help us to describe our perceptions.
What is eternity? You speak about one dimension only -time

A wise Philosopher...

There are no wise Philosophers.


Infinity suggests an immeasurability of the perceived measurable,...Eternity dismises any measurability at all

True and false. Measurability is a concept allowing us to analyze singularities.


Now back to strings. I will try do define better what I have in mind (something negligible of course).
A string is an infinite enumeration of singularities, with common properties.
Let' say, for example, all the elements (singularities) in an n-dimensional space that can be also defined as singularities of an m-dimensional space, with m>n, could be defined as a string, if we can find the mathematical law that connects them.

On the other hand, the elements of a string are necessarily singularities. I think this is why we got the dual nature of light/energy theories.
Of course, nobody knows the nature of light - but in order to fit this phenomenon in our comprehension we had to assign it a particle-wave nature.




(to be continued)

[a random hack]

nm,

that which is concieved of as 'infinite' is not a thing...
where doesn't it go?
only the bit of the 'universe we can see is expanding...
where isn't it going?
not being a thing, there is no outside...
not being a thing, there is no beginning or ending, tho may appear to be from a viewpoint

are you less confused now?

i just want to clarify that this is a poem, and in no way that i am aware of, resembles the truth... :D
B)

[NeverMind]

Thank you, guys. Your writings, after many re-reads, have taught me a lot on this subject. :o

[vicente]

Infinity doesn't point to space or time or anything

??? Sure it does. You (Todd) even say it does through the suggestion that "strings" are "necessarily singularities". There are no singularities without space-time.

As I said "infinity is a word that by accepted definitions points to a relationship with space/time, thus like space/time, infinity is not real"

What is eternity?

Eternity is "timeless". Eternity has no beginning, nor end. Eternity is somewhat described through Hawking's/Hartle 'No-Boundary Theory',....that is, there is no singularity, no BigBang, no creation, nor creator, because there is no time.

Of course, nobody knows the nature of light

Because you (and most Priests of Science) have obscured the nature of light from yourself does not mean that "nobody knows the nature of light".

[sahyo]

guessing/theories only guessing/theories

[todd]

Infinity doesn’t point to space or time or anything, because infinity is about size and continuity, it has no limits, origin or end. Everything is infinite, and I really believe it. If you accept continuity you have to accept infinity. You just need the right referential – singularity – to be able to perceive it.
Space and time, if we are following the general acceptance are just 2 dimensions we define to explain our perceptions. Are our perceptions real? Is time or space real? Can you bet they are, because I do not think you can ever demonstrate?
You know that if you say “infinity points to a relationship with time/space” you are simplifying thing. If you accept mathematics and logic you have to agree. Just divide peanut butter by 0 and you got infinity. Or is 0 the infinity itself? I wont argue here..

What is intriguing about time is that we cannot perceive it, but only its variation, and we will never be certain on a time measurement. How long did it takes for a blink? A second(by the way, is my second the same with yours?) An Eternity?
How long since I’ve been born? Should I ask the Moon, the ginkgo trees, a fly, or a fermion – (should I ask him at 0 or 1mil Kelvin degrees)?

Incertitude is the word here, an I can feel it flooding my mind.,.


“There are no singularities without space-time.”

Is your mind measurable in time- space, Vincent? Well, I will give your mind credit and consider it a singularity, a non finite one too.. Only our comprehension is limited, more or less..
How about the black holes?



“Because you (and most Priests of Science) have obscured the nature of light from yourself does not mean that "nobody knows the nature of light".

If I scratch something would I cause it to hide?

Are you talking about light or enlightenment?
As far as we now, the light, the photon, does not have mass, or take any space. I’m not sure about time either.


“Eternity on the other hand, is without beginning or end,...it has always existed. The Eternal is Causeless, Changeless, Dimensionless,...that is, it is beyond space/time. Some say Eternity is infinite time, but that idea merely perverts Eternity into space/times deluded construct.”

If you are right about eternity, and consider it like physically existent, I deduct that eternity is just absolute void, timeless, spaceless… in fact non-existence, absolute death, humanity’s nightmare

Something about the mass of light:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Rela...light_mass.html (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/light_mass.html)

[vicente]

Hey Todd
Infinity doesn’t point to space or time or anything, because infinity is about size and continuity

Are not "size and continuity" products of space-time? Take away space-time and "size and continuity" are no longer are perceived.

Philosophy arises, or should arise, from a familiarity with the accepted definitions of the words being philosophized about,...ie., many speak of god as 'being' 'unconditional', 'loving' and 'omnipotent', yet all dictionarary definitions describe god as a creator (thus conditional), a Ruler (thus non-loving) and omnipotent (which negates our idea of freewill).

infinity n. infinite space, time, or quality. infinitely great amount or number. The word eternity assists in defining infinitity. eternity n. timeless, without beginning or end. always existing.

Infinity only exists through "things", as you yourself stipulate over and over (ie., singularity, Everything is infinite,...in other words, everything perceived).

Object-ive reality is a relative reality perceived through the senses which themselves are illusory. Even René Descartes, through his axiom regarding the senses, must have considered the impasse of object-ivity when he said "all that I have tried to understand to the present time has been affected by my senses; now I know these senses are deceivers, and it is prudent to be distrustful after one has been deceived once".

An reasonable primer about light is 'The Secret of Light' by Walter Russell.
http://www.philosophy.org/cgi-bin/item.cfm...ht+(Hard+Cover) (http://www.philosophy.org/cgi-bin/item.cfm?selected=32&title=The+Secret+of+Light+(Hard+Cover))
When you have finished we can engage in a dialogue that goes beyond the conceptual and veiled.

:)

[todd]

Are not "size and continuity" products of space-time? Take away space-time and "size and continuity" are no longer are perceived

That may be true in 4 dimensions only, Vincent.

Philosophy arises, or should arise, from a familiarity with the accepted definitions of the words being philosophized about

Philosophy (phylos+sophos) does not arise from any accepted definitions. Love of wisdom does not mean acceptance. Everything is about the joy of thinking, and somehow about sharing.

I am just expressing my thoughts, my ideas, my dreams, my comprehension over the given sensations I get. I feel happy if someone shares my ideas, I’m trying to rethink what everyone denies.
I’m sorry I don’t fit your accepted definitions, but this is ME, and this is what I feel and think.
I don’t care what any philosopher previously postulated. If it fits me I will accept it, if not, I will deny it with all my heart. Who can say he loved sophos more than I or you do?


Infinity only exists through "things", as you yourself stipulate over and over (ie., singularity, Everything is infinite,...in other words, everything perceived).

I see infinity everywhere, inside our outside “things”. Infinity within infinity. I’m sinking my mind in the microscopical infinity and I discover a new universe, there is a proton right beside me, but I need an infinity to reach it, the void between particles is filled with galaxies, stars and planets, and somewhere I think I could even see the earth. And all these in only 4 dimensions – time/space as you said. Add another one and shape doesn’t mean anything anymore…


"all that I have tried to understand to the present time has been affected by my senses; now I know these senses are deceivers, and it is prudent to be distrustful after one has been deceived once". Rene Descartes (Renatus Cartesius)

Strange how we both can find these words to be true, even when we have absolutely opposite ideas.

[todd]

That may be true in 4 dimensions only, Vincent.
I'm sorry for misspelling your nickname, Vicente. I hate the fact we cannot edit these postings. I understand the reason, but in a way I hate it. It is presuming our lack of honesty.

[a random hack]

I understand the reason, but in a way I hate it. It is presuming our lack of honesty.

is it? i can't even understand the reason :lol:

[NeverMind]

Wait, wtf? No dimensions or 4 dimensions? Are time and space just elaborate illusions created by our minds to show what is happening? What about feelings? What about touch, taste, etc.? I can believe that there are 4 dimensions. That seems obvious. But i can't believe that nothing actually exists. It is here. I can see it. I can feel it. This is not The Matrix or something. There IS a spoon! I eat Ice Cream with it. Wait, just out of curiousity...who are you people? I'm guessing most of you went to college but what did you study? What degree do you have? Just curious

[sahyo]

Sweet raindrops upon my head splatter,
I hear squirrels quietly chatter.
The dark clouds are where the first star keeps his wishes,
The raindrops are gentle angel kisses.
Bright orange sun forcing through the sky,
Cool, moist mist spraying my eye.
Letting my coat out of my arms,
Splashing in puddles, my mother looking alarmed.
Lying in a pile of hysterical laughter,
Finding the joy I sought after.
The mud feels like clay between my toes,
The rain feels like puppies licking my nose.
Suddenly, silence falls over the sky,
Putting the last raindrop on my eye,
As if where going to cry.
Looking at the bright blue yonder,
I began to wonder.
"What Happened, where did it go?"
I finally knew that I would never know.


Jordan Karns
5th grade class

[vicente]

Wait, wtf? No dimensions or 4 dimensions? Are time and space just elaborate illusions created by our minds to show what is happening? What about feelings? What about touch, taste, etc.? I can believe that there are 4 dimensions. That seems obvious. But i can't believe that nothing actually exists. It is here. I can see it. I can feel it

Even René Descartes, without access to today's microscopy, through his axiom regarding the senses, must have considered the impasse of object-ivity when he said "all that I have tried to understand to the present time has been affected by my senses; now I know these senses are deceivers, and it is prudent to be distrustful after one has been deceived once".

Ping Wu said, "in the Valley of the Blind the one-eyed man is treated for his illness".

For a 15 year old (born when the anti-American theocrat, VooDoo Reagan left office) NeverMind, your capacity to feel, reason and discern suggests this Planet, or portion thereof, may indeed recognize someday that the way of Ascension is the reverse of the Descension.

If you wish to understand more, like the deeper meaning of the first two Matrix films, try checking out a copy of 'The Secret of Light' by Walter Russell.
http://www.philosophy.org/cgi-bin/item.cfm...ht+(Hard+Cover)

:)

[sahyo]

last line the poem:


I finally knew that I would never know.



people posting this thread

what u-desiring to know?, what desires to know?, imagining as though ''a-u-what"


NeverMind, your capacity to feel, reason and discern suggests this Planet, or portion thereof, may indeed recognize someday that the way of Ascension is the reverse of the Descension.



vicente imagines as-de-scenion?, imagines as though 'awhere'?

vicente imagining as though a-u-what which can "'recoginze" a-u-what?

can imagined u 'know?', can imagined u know through theories?

[sahyo]

reworded the post

[sahyo]

I began to wonder.
"What Happened, where did it go?"
I finally knew that I would never know.



why people posting, wondering this thread, clinging to thinking imagined scientific theories?

not saying right or wrong u-clinging science as though clinging religion, but u cannot know-gnow through science

r imagining 'wondering' needs an imagined scientific definition-answer?

[todd]

why people posting, wondering this thread, clinging to thinking imagined scientific theories?

I do not try to develop any theories here, just expressing my perceptions and understanding of things. Is this wondering? Of course it is … Everything is…. The whole science is just wondering, nothing certain…but what else? Contemplating? Too boring for me..
I just try to be consistent in my assumptions, and, eventually find something interesting..
It is just an innocent game . I may me a good player or not, I do not really care. Not anymore.

Why shouldn’t we “wondering”, why should we hide our “wonderings”? Why don’t you?

[todd]

http://www.sukidog.com/jpierre/strings/summary.htm

[sahyo]

I do not try to develop any theories here, just expressing my perceptions and understanding of things. Is this wondering? Of course it is … Everything is…. The whole science is just wondering, nothing certain…but what else? Contemplating? Too boring for me..
I just try to be consistent in my assumptions, and, eventually find something interesting..

can assume without contemplating?

Why shouldn’t we “wondering”, why should we hide our “wonderings”?

the post wasn't saying should or shouldn't wondering or that should hide wondering

[todd]

No assume without contemplation but no contemplation with assume.

wondering on assuming wondering contemplation

[sahyo]

I just try to be consistent in my assumptions



but what else? Contemplating? Too boring for me..



yet:

No assume without contemplation but no contemplation with assume.

[todd]

No contradiction here (assuming my contemplative English)

I see 2 different meanings in contemplation: :
First one implies absolute loss of perception, endless, ecstasy - no assuming, just contemplation.
Second one, just observation, consideration, lack of meaning. Assuming follows. No observation/consideration/contemplation, no assuming.

[sahyo]

No contradiction here (assuming my contemplative English)

hehe

I see 2 different meanings in contemplation: :
First one implies absolute loss of perception, endless, ecstasy - no assuming, just contemplation.
Second one, just observation, consideration, lack of meaning. Assuming follows. No observation/consideration/contemplation, no assuming.

how using word assuming? :)

[tangsky420]

Originally posted by NeverMind@Jul 3 2004, 08:32 AM
how can anything be endless? where does it go?
how can the universe be expanding? where is it going? what's outside of it? how can there be an end? to anything? and everything? im so confused.
i also wonder this but havent you ever wondered where every thing started because if you ask me we shouldnt be here under this principle you need something to make somethin so how did something come from nothing do you understand. and dont give me that theroy everything has and always will be.

[todd]

Vicente:
Are not "size and continuity" products of space-time? Take away space-time and "size and continuity" are no longer are perceived.

Our minds, do they have a continuous , discreet, dual or what kind of nature?
Obviously, mind is not limited by space or time (or is it?). Does it take time to be a genius? I don't think so.
Does mind go beyond space and reality? Maybe, if we agree on what reality is.
But I definitely cannot see mind to have a discreet nature in any way. And what is continuous, is necessarily non finite.

Try to find the limits of your mind, and you'll discover infinity

[CSwriter1]

Well, I am completely turned off by the disrespect expressed here.

[pnklphnts]

you can't know anything for sure, the spoon maybe in your brain, same with the ice cream, however delightful it maybe. But even if all those things werent real, they had to be created by someone- hence: I think, therefor I am.

[NeverMind]

but this could all be in MY mind. I dont know that you think, I cant be sure that YOU exist. I know that I think and I exist, but the rest of the universe could be invented by my mind.

[wacawacany]

the question is, why do we think? why would we invent something in our minds that doesnt exist??

[sahyo]

Posted by Charles on Apr.28.2005


There was this time that my nephew and I were outdoors playing. He was about 4 years old. That day he discovered the mysteries of spinning. He whirled himself around and around, laughing and giggling. He was having so much fun, and I enjoyed watching him. Then he finally overdid it, lost his balance and fell to the ground. He cried, "It's spinning! Make it stop spinning."

I said, "No, Mike, it isn't spinning. It just looks and feels that way because you have been spinning so much."

He squeezed his eyes shut with a scowl and shouted, "No! It's spinning. I can see it! I can see it! Make it stop!"

It took me a few seconds to realize there was no way I was going to be able to explain to him what was happening. Instead I just put my hand on his shoulder and told him to keep his eyes closed for a while. He said he could still feel it. I said, "I know. Just feel your breathing instead." He puckered his lips so that he could feel the air moving back and forth across them.

After a while, I asked, "Is it slowing down?" He nodded and kept breathing through his puckered lips. Finally he relaxed his lips and opened is eyes. "It's better," he said. "Why did it do that?"

I wasn't about to try giving a scientific explanation. "That's just what happens when you spin a lot. When you stop, it just makes everything else look and feel like it's spinning."

He pouted, "But I saw it. It was spinning and I wasn't doing it and I wanted it to stop but it wouldn't."

So I stood up and told him, "Watch this." Then I spun myself around and around and around, and fell on the ground. We giggled together. I said, "Now it looks like it's spinning to me. Does it to you?"

He said "No", gazing at my eyes. "It isn't spinning."

I said, "I know, but it looks and feels that way to me."

Anyway, he eventually tried it again and proved to himself that it was his own spinning that made everything else seem like it was spinning.

[venom mama]

Originally posted by pnklphnts@Jun 15 2004, 07:15 AM
it involves u sticking a string up your ass
really?


i bet you love string theory.