T Nation

Stephen Hawking and the Theory of Everything

Just watched this on the discovery channel. You want to blow your mind, check it out! Find out about the eleven dimensions of the universe. How they maybe able to prove his theory on the Black Hole. This is a true Sci-Fi reality program. I will never look at things the same again.

Yea… read my T-Page…
If you read any detailed Quantum Physics you will not sleep well for a while.

[quote]streamline wrote:
Just watched this on the discovery channel. You want to blow your mind, check it out! Find out about the eleven dimensions of the universe. How they maybe able to prove his theory on the Black Hole. This is a true Sci-Fi reality program. I will never look at things the same again.[/quote]
check these sites out
http://www.superstringtheory.com/
http://xxx.lanl.gov/

[quote]silverblood wrote:
streamline wrote:
Just watched this on the discovery channel. You want to blow your mind, check it out! Find out about the eleven dimensions of the universe. How they maybe able to prove his theory on the Black Hole. This is a true Sci-Fi reality program. I will never look at things the same again.
check these sites out
http://www.superstringtheory.com/
http://xxx.lanl.gov/[/quote]

They brought up the superstring theory on the program. Simply amazing stuff, I’ll have to watch it a couple more times in order to get a real grasp of what they were talking about.

[quote]streamline wrote:
silverblood wrote:
streamline wrote:
Just watched this on the discovery channel. You want to blow your mind, check it out! Find out about the eleven dimensions of the universe. How they maybe able to prove his theory on the Black Hole. This is a true Sci-Fi reality program. I will never look at things the same again.
check these sites out
http://www.superstringtheory.com/
http://xxx.lanl.gov/

They brought up the superstring theory on the program. Simply amazing stuff, I’ll have to watch it a couple more times in order to get a real grasp of what they were talking about.[/quote]

I saw a thing online a few years back that explained the 11 dimensions and it was done with animations to help you get the idea, it is definately hard to just read it and understand exactly how it is possible or what it entails.

Vibration seems to be very important, as is the white noise you hear or can sometimes feel at night while your lying in bed just about to fall asleep.

V

I recommend reading “The Elegant Universe” by Brian Greene. It was quite an enlightening read and explains things somewhat clearly.

Brian Greene also did a PBS program about it:

[quote]pzehtoeur wrote:
I recommend reading “The Elegant Universe” by Brian Greene. It was quite an enlightening read and explains things somewhat clearly.

Brian Greene also did a PBS program about it:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html [/quote]

Thank you very much for the awesome link. I love how it’s in chapters. Makes it easier for me to digest it all in small amounts. This shit really turns me on, it’s far more exiting than sex, well sometimes.

[quote]inthego wrote:
Yea… read my T-Page…
If you read any detailed Quantum Physics you will not sleep well for a while.[/quote]

That is the nice thing about an average IQ. I sleep like a baby.

[quote]Christine wrote:
inthego wrote:
Yea… read my T-Page…
If you read any detailed Quantum Physics you will not sleep well for a while.

That is the nice thing about an average IQ. I sleep like a baby.[/quote]

Sometimes ignorance IS bliss.

[quote]streamline wrote:
pzehtoeur wrote:
I recommend reading “The Elegant Universe” by Brian Greene. It was quite an enlightening read and explains things somewhat clearly.

Brian Greene also did a PBS program about it:

Thank you very much for the awesome link. I love how it’s in chapters. Makes it easier for me to digest it all in small amounts. This shit really turns me on, it’s far more exiting than sex, well sometimes.[/quote]

Yes, I too get a tingly feeling in my balls when I read about quantum physics.

[quote]DickBag wrote:
i used to think the same way, all amazed and shit, but after a while of not studying it, you will go back to your normal life and not really care.

or maybe not[/quote]

This is exactly true, with the exception that you can snap back into that mode almost instantly. You essentially gain the ability to be that wide wonderer, that thinker, that mezmorized child. Many people never gain this ability and I believe much of lifes beuty passes them by. Most people who delve into scientific phenomena, generally retain at least some of that appreciation for things even if it’s only in fleeting moments.

V

[quote]pzehtoeur wrote:
I recommend reading “The Elegant Universe” by Brian Greene. It was quite an enlightening read and explains things somewhat clearly.

Brian Greene also did a PBS program about it:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html[/quote]

The book is a great read, but was written at a time of high optimism for String Theory. Ed Witten had just proved that the five competing versions of String Theory at that time could actually be reconciled into a single theory (called M-Theory, for “mother”, “matrix”, “multiple”, etc. depending on who you asked).

That was around 1995; the book was written during '96 and '97 and published in 1998, if memory serves.

Since then, String Theory has been floundering; not really delivering on its initial promise. For one thing, it appears that the theory might have around 1x10^500 solutions (ie, universes it can accurately describe) and no way of identifying which of those corresponds to our universe (search for “string theory landscape” for more info); there are also very few testable predictions from the theory, and none that have successfully been tested.

In the past few years, more and more critics of ST have been suggesting that less resources be devoted to it, in case it turns out to just be “beautiful math” but useless in explaining the universe. The main problem these critics face is that they don’t really have anything better to propose. LQG (Loop Quantum Gravity), which might be the best alternative theory, is based on the current Standard Model and has yet to resolve many of it’s problems. The critic’s reply is that we shouldn’t work on a wrong theory simply because we haven’t found the right one yet.

So, by all means read the book, it’s very well written and quite accessible; but keep in mind that the high optimism it portrays has since deflated and that ST is still very far away from “a done deal”.

To this thread I would have to add any book by the British physicist Paul Davies: God & the New Physics, About Time (what physics has to say about this “4th dimension”), Other Worlds (the subatomic realm and quantum phenomena), etc

He really does have an amazing gift for translating theoretical physics into accessible language for the layperson.

I hate those movies and books who try to explain the implication of a theory. If you don’t really know then shut up. I don’t give a shit if someone finds that there is maybe 13 dimensions until I understand and really know it.

[quote]DickBag wrote:
Vegita wrote:
DickBag wrote:
i used to think the same way, all amazed and shit, but after a while of not studying it, you will go back to your normal life and not really care.

or maybe not

This is exactly true, with the exception that you can snap back into that mode almost instantly. You essentially gain the ability to be that wide wonderer, that thinker, that mezmorized child. Many people never gain this ability and I believe much of lifes beuty passes them by. Most people who delve into scientific phenomena, generally retain at least some of that appreciation for things even if it’s only in fleeting moments.

V

I can totally understand that!
you snap back into the mode when your interested, well thats how it is with me. i retain most of the stuff i learned, only i don’t let it bother me.

Percieving all this stuff sometimes disrupts my view on life, and reality. i dont like letting it shake that too much, but its still there at the back of my mind. I don’t know who said it, but to percieve is to suffer, and reading all this stuff is great, and disturbing to.

thats just how i see it.[/quote]

If I start thinking about all this science, I get really out of it. So much information that could explain why something happens but there is no way to interpret it correctly.

I just have one question. How is the simple movement of electrons along various metals produce data that can be interpreted on a screen and make it so simple? And if atoms never touch, why do we get hurt if we get hit by something, and why can we feel anything?

science. it works, bitches.

[quote]novocaine wrote:
science. it works, bitches.[/quote]

[quote]DickBag wrote:
ukrainian wrote:
If I start thinking about all this science, I get really out of it. So much information that could explain why something happens but there is no way to interpret it correctly.

I just have one question. How is the simple movement of electrons along various metals produce data that can be interpreted on a screen and make it so simple? And if atoms never touch, why do we get hurt if we get hit by something, and why can we feel anything?

thats true, i heard aswell whenever your sitting on a chair your not actually sitting, your levitating. Because the electric fields of the atom’s nucleus in your ass are being repulsed by the electric field of the atoms in the chair. so theres a space between your ass and the chair, maybe by a rediculously small amount, but your still levitating none the less.

i think we get hurt from the sudden transfer of energy from that ball that hits you, a quick change in momentum in your face is obviously not going to feel nice, regardless if on an atomic scale it doesnt meet your electrons or atoms or whatever.

The energry transfer still takes place because the electric fields of the atoms in the ball and the atoms in your face repell each other, the more energy the worse it is for your face.

As long as a serious quick transfer of momentum happens , the impact part of your body is going to move and this is going to hurt.

the atoms never touche but the electric fields definaty overlap, and repel each other, this causes us to feel stuff.

[/quote]

Electrostatic fields are involved but also the fact that the bonding electron orbitals in these atoms and molecules are completely filled and so they cannot react unless given enough energy in the form of heat, light, etc.

[quote]DickBag wrote:
pzehtoeur wrote:
DickBag wrote:
ukrainian wrote:
If I start thinking about all this science, I get really out of it. So much information that could explain why something happens but there is no way to interpret it correctly.

I just have one question. How is the simple movement of electrons along various metals produce data that can be interpreted on a screen and make it so simple? And if atoms never touch, why do we get hurt if we get hit by something, and why can we feel anything?

thats true, i heard aswell whenever your sitting on a chair your not actually sitting, your levitating.

Because the electric fields of the atom’s nucleus in your ass are being repulsed by the electric field of the atoms in the chair. so theres a space between your ass and the chair, maybe by a rediculously small amount, but your still levitating none the less.

i think we get hurt from the sudden transfer of energy from that ball that hits you, a quick change in momentum in your face is obviously not going to feel nice, regardless if on an atomic scale it doesnt meet your electrons or atoms or whatever.

The energry transfer still takes place because the electric fields of the atoms in the ball and the atoms in your face repell each other, the more energy the worse it is for your face.

As long as a serious quick transfer of momentum happens , the impact part of your body is going to move and this is going to hurt.

the atoms never touche but the electric fields definaty overlap, and repel each other, this causes us to feel stuff.

Electrostatic fields are involved but also the fact that the bonding electron orbitals in these atoms and molecules are completely filled and so they cannot react unless given enough energy in the form of heat, light, etc.

just because electrons are filled in the orbitales doesnt mean these is no electrostaic field.

all it means is that the atom is stable. but there is still an eletric field.

listen chump, ive had it, lets take this to msn

il kick your ass
[/quote]

Makes sense.