ZTrang Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 So, what do YOU think about the current quantum theories floating around today? Also, would any actual scientists (I take a passionate interest in these things, but I'm not a scientist... yet) care to give us their views on this matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mswarts Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 Is it just A. Einstein and me who realize it's total bullsht? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MxxCon Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 ZTrang, knowing neowin userbase(and confirming above by mswarts's stupid post), very few people here know about, and much less understand what you asked, so you shouldn't expect many intelligent answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mswarts Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 (edited) MxxCon, seriously, why are you harrassing me? It's been several threads and PMs now. That's enough-- Back off. I know both string theory and loop quantum gravity, and they are both nonsense. There is nothing left to chance. And having so many posts, MxxCon, you must be very wise, and with all that wisdom, you must have noticed the poll asked "What do YOU think?" not "What does MxxCon feel about mswarts' post and the probability of useful posts from Neowin users?" -- You'll notice, Ztrang capitalized (I can only assume to emphasize) "YOU" in both the thread description AND his initial post. He must have felt it was pretty important, but since you are more wise... Edited May 14, 2004 by mswarts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Veteran Posted May 14, 2004 Veteran Share Posted May 14, 2004 I know what string theory is, but I haven't heard of loop quantum gravity :unsure: String theory sure is interesting though :yes: A week or so ago, I was able to see Brian Greene speak about string theory, it was an awesome speech (Y) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZTrang Posted May 14, 2004 Author Share Posted May 14, 2004 MxxCon, seriously, why are you harrassing me? It's been several threads and PMs now. That's enough-- Back off. I know both string theory and loop quantum gravity, and they are both nonsense. There is nothing left to chance. You're obviously strongly opinionated on this. If you really don't believe in quantum theory, then do you believe that mathematics can truly completely specify the laws of the universe? Do you think there is such a set of laws, but quantum theory goes off in completely the wrong direction? Obviously, relativity has some flaws in it that cannot be smoothed out without another theory (the problem of singularities, for example). Personally, I have no problem with the whole "probability wave" hypothesis, since if you stop thinking of the universe in terms of particles and begin thinking of it in terms of wave functions, then things make perfect sense. Also, nothing is left up to chance in quantum theory if, at each possible "choice" that is made in the universe, a new universe branches off in "infinite-dimensional Hilbert space" (I'm not sure about the technical parts of this definition, but it is an interesting hypothesis). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mswarts Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 lol, Ztrang, you got me wrong. MxxCon keeps PMing me and ridiculing my threads/posts/polls. It's just getting childish. I'm not super-opinionated. Mathematics and logic can be used to solve every natural phenomena. Humans do not know everything-- but that does not mean all else is chance. Simply because there are so many physical equations and controlled circumstances needed to accurately predict the roll of a die does not mean it is chance, because it just isn't. It is just impossible to account for all the variables. As for string theory-- I think this one is a little silly. It doesn't explain anything in terms that can be tested or that even simplify phenomena. The theory of more dimensions is completely unfounded as well. There are physical rules, that string theory contests, that reasonably one can counter. Such as all actions have a probability (even walking through walls) but the probability is too low to record... Ok, and the boogie man runs too fast to be seen by the naked eye? :p But as I said before, natural phenomena can be explained by rational calculations. For instance, the "infinite" universe. People believe this conflicts somehow with the laws of mathematics, which it does not. I have devised (yes me, the philosopher ;) ) a theory explaining how a universe can be inifinite. I'll dig it out of my old documents and post it if you'd like to read it :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Veteran Posted May 14, 2004 Veteran Share Posted May 14, 2004 I have devised (yes me, the philosopher ;) ) a theory explaining how a universe can be inifinite. I'll dig it out of my old documents and post it if you'd like to read it :) I would like to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mswarts Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 Okay-- here it is (just the mathematical defense for the size of the universe... If anyone knows a good author or publisher for this kind of material, let me know. I believe math is infallible. I'll debate anybody that says otherwise :D But yea-- read this verbose piece of **** I wrote for trig a couple years ago and tell me what you think. Imponderabilis_solvere.doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MxxCon Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 MxxCon keeps PMing me and ridiculing my threads/posts/polls. It's just getting childish. I'm not super-opinionated. "keeps"?! bull****! i sent 3 PMs AND THAT'S IT! initial one, reply and final one saying i won't pm you anymore! get over it! :crazy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mswarts Posted May 16, 2004 Share Posted May 16, 2004 No feedback for my doc? It's damn wordy-- but it is a good read... I'll rewrite it someday maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DsnBehind Posted May 16, 2004 Share Posted May 16, 2004 MxxCon keeps PMing me and ridiculing my threads/posts/polls. It's okay. S/he does that sometimes. :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Med-X Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 Im reading your document, and it would apper to me that you are quite a thinker, either that or you have a LOT of spare time on your hands, or perhaps some of both :p I have to agree with your statement that "Infinity" does not, in fact, follow the rules of ordinary numbers. It does, in my opinion, follow the rule of its opposite, the 'number' 0... think about it, try to multiply it by anything, its still 0, divide? its still 0, HOWEVER my analogy is not entirely correct. Simply because you can, in fact, add and subtract to 0. Have you considered what you would get if you subtracted even, say 1, from infinity? would it stay "Infinite" or would it be less? Im going to have to start up a poll now, and appreciate it if you gave me some of your thoughts... Cheers Med-X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interize Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 surely if we are having there an 'intelligent answers' should (mathematically?) be a (least a) 6th option in the poll: between the options of 3)An amalgam of the two 4)They're both completely wrong To try and answer a such a question with only 6 options is quite erm ambitious!? my 2 pence. (a non/Learner Quantum Theorist/Mathematician) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonBlur Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 I think that String Theory is the most viable theory at this time. I'm not saying it is in fact 100% correct, but I think it is the most correct or believable "theory of everything". Plus, if you ever have the chance to hear Brian Greene speak in person (or unscripted TV appearances), definately take it/watch it. Man, you can't help but believe every word that comes out of that man's mouth. The way he explains String Theory is simply amazing. The Nova presentation of "The ELegant Universe" is a great series on String Theory, but even better is hearing this man explain it live in his own words and answering questions from people in the "audience". He can take the most complex question and break it down into a simple answer, and not only that, but you can't help but go "yeah... dude... that actually makes sense now!" (minus the "dude" part for people over 30). He can also take a simple yet hard question and flesh it out into a full answer using plain english, which he can do for any question. Which illustrates a major advantage towards String Theory: when you hear the proponents of String Theory answer questions, whether they are complex or simple, they can actually explain the answers in a way that normal people can understand. Not only that, but they just plain have more answers to more things, even if some are a little speculative. Too many of the other theories have specific, simple questions where you just have to go "uhhhh.... I have no clue how that fits in". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZTrang Posted May 20, 2004 Author Share Posted May 20, 2004 I think that String Theory is the most viable theory at this time. I'm not saying it is in fact 100% correct, but I think it is the most correct or believable "theory of everything". Plus, if you ever have the chance to hear Brian Greene speak in person (or unscripted TV appearances), definately take it/watch it. Man, you can't help but believe every word that comes out of that man's mouth. The way he explains String Theory is simply amazing. The Nova presentation of "The ELegant Universe" is a great series on String Theory, but even better is hearing this man explain it live in his own words and answering questions from people in the "audience". He can take the most complex question and break it down into a simple answer, and not only that, but you can't help but go "yeah... dude... that actually makes sense now!" (minus the "dude" part for people over 30). He can also take a simple yet hard question and flesh it out into a full answer using plain english, which he can do for any question. Which illustrates a major advantage towards String Theory: when you hear the proponents of String Theory answer questions, whether they are complex or simple, they can actually explain the answers in a way that normal people can understand. Not only that, but they just plain have more answers to more things, even if some are a little speculative. Too many of the other theories have specific, simple questions where you just have to go "uhhhh.... I have no clue how that fits in". I've read his book. I've also read books by those who don't work as exclusively with string theory, and, frankly, string theorists present a very optimistic view of things. From the evidence I've seen from people working with multiple theories, loop quantum gravity seems to have a stronger theoretical base right now, as it is a "background independent" theory, meaning that it doesn't need to assume that there is any static background of space to make predictions on. String theory doesn't satisfty this. However, loop quantum gravity isn't as good at making other predictions. They are both flawed, and they will probably both need to be blended to create a more complete theory. Surely these scientists can woo us with smooth speech. However, they are biased just as all others are, and you need to listen to some people from other sides of the fence as well to get a more complete picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Med-X Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Hear Hear! I voted that it'd be a merge of the loop gravity theory and the String theory Ztrang has the right idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mswarts Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 I don't understand how people buy into this nonsense. Mathematics is universally true. It is based on fact which has never proven false. String theory, and all other quantum concepts, have never been proven wrong simply because they are not based on fact-- only speculation. Mathematics has not solved every mystery yet. This fuels the ridiculous theories that people buy into so they can explain things, but they completely overlook the gaping holes and that the theory actually solves nothing. I've got a new theory. There are 37 dimensions. Some dimensions cannot be seen!! And you thought atoms were the smallest-- no way! My new theory suggests "figments" are even smaller! All that is not specifically accounted for in this theory is the result of probabilities. And there you have it! The meaning of the world! When you look at the pieces, you'll see theorists are dumb. Fact is fact; we don't need bull**** to make fact more easy to incorrectly understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaRSightxc2 Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 I believe some of the latest thinking (correct me if I am wrong - I am no expert) is an idea which evolved from String Theory. I am refering to 'M-Theory' which suggests the universe consists of combinations of tiny membranes which come in various dimensionalities. It combines quantum mechanics and general relativity into one equation (I believe) and therefore eliminates mathamatical problems the two may bring. Source 1 Source 2 Simplified Explanation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Med-X Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 I've got a new theory. There are 37 dimensions. Some dimensions cannot be seen!! SOME!? at the moment we can only see 3 for christ sake! i like the theory, >HOWEVER< ::some:: hardly counts as 34! how about "MOST dimensions cannot be seen"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mswarts Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 lol at Med-X I was making fun. You like my theory? None of the things I mentioned have any support. People believe dumb things because they gullible and seeking answers that are easy to understand regardless how stupid the theory is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Med-X Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Lol yeah, I knew you were making fun, thats not the point, I reckon it'd damn funny if your theory was correct! all the Philosophers and that would be like: :pinch: LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZTrang Posted May 22, 2004 Author Share Posted May 22, 2004 I don't understand how people buy into this nonsense. Mathematics is universally true. It is based on fact which has never proven false. String theory, and all other quantum concepts, have never been proven wrong simply because they are not based on fact-- only speculation. Well, this isn't really true. What string theory and other quantum theories are are mathematical models from which predictions can be drawn which are then tested against reality. Basic quantum theory has passed the "real world test" model with flying colors (the most impressive examples of this are the double-slit experiment and quantum tunneling). String theory is a bit more abstract, but the fact that it reformulates particles as strings is really irrelevant to real life. The important part of turning particles into strings is that, mathematically, gravity can be integrated into string theory, while it cannot be integrated into basic quantum mechanics. The "multiple universe" theories and the hypothesis of strings as fundamental building blocks are just the basic front-end which are presented to us, and it is hard to see how they are really relevant. However, string theory is thriving because, mathematically, strings allow us to make predictions in accordance with reality. We can never really see whether strings make up the universe. However, if a mathematical model of strings allows us to precisely model all aspects of our universe, then why not use it? String theory isn't perfect, however, not being background-independent, and so is probably not the ultimate "theory of everything." Do remember, though, that it is not the somewhat whimsical physical interpretation of the theory that is important, but rather whether the theory is in accordance with reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts