Blog about most general theory of Universe.
Zephir,The sites you mentioned, are meant for arguing about formal physics or pseudoscientific theories which has been accepted by the mainstream physics community, like string theory. These people will never allow theories like AWT, because they are not interested in your alternative views of the Nature. Their minds are too narrow for that task. Never mind, if they don't accept you, because you don't need them. You've got your own blog.By the way, What do you think about Quantum Aether Dynamics? I've never read a post, about this theory. I'm very interested. Has this theory something to do with AWT, how?
/*... has this theory something to do with AWT ..*/AWT uses an Aether concept in its pure form: just a particles, nothing more. With compare of it, APM uses a number of constants, the origin of them appears unknown, for me - for example GForce. Many ideas presented by APM appears correct from AWT perspective, but their explanations appear fuzzy, for example explanation of gravity waves:"The gravity waves exist in space-resonance, which has three dimensions of length and two dimensions of frequency."What we are supposed to imagine for "dimensions of frequency"?
What is GForce? vwry well question Hmmmm, I am hesitant EUREKA!!! the GForce is this ;-). Not more not less, I'm smart, right?Dimensions of frequency, well, I have to admit that it's sound a bit strange. I have no idea about what they mean with this concept (wtf? ...).I'd like to know it, but I don't know. Sorry, Zephir, but I'm a true ignorant about how Nature works at its most fundamental level. I can only see three spatial dimensions and I can only feel one temporal dimension. I only understand the classical mechanics of point particles, topics like inclined throw and so. Due to my failure of understanding Nature I'm very angry and I hope live enough to see how string theories will someday die. Because if they fail I will be a little more happy. Sorry but these are my feelings I can't avoid them.
/*..I can only see three spatial dimensions and I can only feel one temporal dimension..*/Many other scientists do...;-) But for example, where the charge of electrons remains hidden in atoms? How is it possible, we cannot feel it at distance? One answer can be, it spreads in hidden dimensions, formed by atom orbitals...
I don't believe in the hidden dimensions. But there is some models, like the model cooked up by Arkani-Hamed and others (ADD model), that falls into the reach of the FALSIFIABILITY. Therefore, ADD model is a scientific model. If the ADD model is right, I think it's possible (but I'm not sure) to obtain the number of hidden dimensions from the experimental data. If the number of hidden dimensions were six or seven, then, string theory could be reckoned as the true paradigm to build models and to try luck with the TOE to finish the theory of high energy physics. The string theorists would be heroes (Lubos would be a supervillain), and they will be regarded with Nobel Prizes and all that ... . But when someone talks about models with hidden dimensions so small that can't be detected in the experiments, then he or she is talking about science fiction.
If you don't believe in something, it just means, you're believing in negation from reciprocal perspective...;-)In AWT every refraction and dispersion of light is manifestation of hidden dimensions, for example gravitational lensing at large scale. This is because Lorentz symmetry doesn't enable some refraction and lensing at all, until light is spreading through vacuum in trully invariant speed. You're not required to believe in such concept - just to understand it.On the other hand, you can put your reference frame to some hyperspace and after then all these nested density fluctuations and vortices of Aether will remain embedded in such hyperspace - it means, the concept of extradimensions is quite arbitrary and it can be replaced by nested fractal concept in dual way - it just depends on formalism used.
I'm going to be honest.I don't believe in hidden dimensions, because I think they won't be discovered, so I think the ADD model will be eventually ruled out by the LHC.What you've written is not science. You are speculating about something called aether that is necessary to explain all the physical phenomenon. But the problem is that nobody knows how to measure the aether in an experiment or how to observe it. What is for you 'the true knowledge of nature'? For me, it's the important question here. For example, a particle physicist could say that a deeper understanding of nature would be a model that did new predictions at very high energy (although within the scope of the experiments) and these predictions were verified experimentally. Predictions mean a set of numbers of physical quantities, they need facts, not stories of the supernatural. As nobody knows a model based on the aether concept to make new predictions, that aren't already made by the current theories, aether is not necessary for physics. Maybe, the aether concept could be studied by metaphysics. If you achieved a set of ideas based on the aether concept, and no one gets a contradiction by deductive reasoning, from these ideas, then, you would be doing metaphysics. I think, AWT is the way to express the feelings that you have about how Nature works. When you show your feelings using AWT, you're making art but not science.
My private feeling is, you're just trying to find some ally to common fight against string theory, which personally I'm not very impressed from consistency reasons, too - but I can still see a great potential in many ideas, developed in context of string theory, the concept of extra/intra dimensions in particular.Despite of this I can understand even motivation of LQG theory, which describes the same situation from dual perspective by using of concept of nested foam formed by causal dynamical triangulation in 4D space-time. Just quite limited people cannot understand, these concepts are equivalent mutually, because spin loops of nested foam are undulating in mutually independent directions / dimensions in similar way, like strings of string theory. While you don't like Lubos Motl apparently, your negativistic stance toward string theory is of the very same naive and religious nature, like his negativism toward loop gravity. You should think about it. AWT is about conceptual plurality, common explanation and reconciliation of seemingly different theories on condition, they're remain logical at least a bit.
/*..predictions mean a set of numbers of physical quantities...*/For example geocentric model of epicycles was refused because of its wrong prediction of Venus phases order - this is not physical quantity. You're basically saying, geocentric model of solar system is acceptable, because it leads into same numbers and physical quantities, like geocentric one - while ignoring fundamental inconsistencies in its logic. This is what the positivistic approach in science is called.So if you care just about numbers, then the AWT concept isn't for you yet.
/*..to make new predictions, that aren't already made by the current theories..*/Here are dozen of theories to all possible solutions already (atemporal Universe, multiverse, parallel Universe, whatever else). String theory predicts 10 E+500 solutions already, so it's not probable, some new theory will add new one, which isn't contained somewhere in this set already.. With your stance I would recommend you to stay with string theory, which turned out to be the most effective generator of new predictions, known so far.
Well, I think otherwise. By the way, I thought Lubos had let you to write two comments per day at his blog. What happened?
I presume, I wrote a post about fundamental inconsistency of string theory, which Lumo is quite sensitive about.
HAHAHA!!!!I love when he gets angry by your comments ... As you can see, Lubos also thinks AWT is not a scientific theory.
El Cid + Zephir = one Troll, only
By the way, I've been reading your post about the consistency of string theory. It doesn't change my opinion that the hidden dimensions don't exist. What do you mean with the water's surface (of 2 dimensions) is spreading in a three dimension space? As the water surface has got two dimensions then the third dimension of space is the hidden dimension in your toy model, isn't it? Sorry Zephir, but it's not science, what are the laws of the dynamic for the aether's surface that is spreading in a space of bigger dimension? what are the predictions that you make with this model? What you wrote is a tautology, something that is moving in a space of bigger dimension doesn't explain the hidden dimensions, at least that you make testable predictions.
Anonymous,Anyway, the important thing here is enjoying the circus. The Best in the World!!!.
/*..as the water surface has got two dimensions then the third dimension of space is the hidden dimension in your toy model, isn't it? Sorry Zephir, but it's not science...*/But it's still true, isn't it? Suppose you're two-dimensional creature, which is able to observe world by surface waves only - after then the underwater becomes completelly invisible for you...One prediction of this model can be Brownian motion, which corresponds quantum noise of vacuum, which keeps atoms of liquid hellium in fluid state. Or the observation of "dark matter" around massive bodies, which was explained in the previous post. Or the existence of gravitational waves in analogy to sound waves, spreading through underwater, which complements the light waves, corresponding water surface waves in our 2D toy model.
/*...Lubos also thinks AWT is not a scientific theory...*/ Contemporary science is sectarian community similar to black hole, and Motl is even sectarian on his own. Therefore his way of thinking is closed in hidden dimensions separated by at least double event horizon from the rest of society in certain directions. For Lubos AWT is black hole in the same way, like for me BH is the way of Motl's thinking. From AWT follows, when we would travel into black hole, the space-time behind our back will change into black hole(s) similar to these, which we can observe inside of our Universe - and vice-versa.I don't care whether some idea or theory is scientific or not, but whether it is real - this is a difference.
Post a Comment