The Importance of Tipping Light Cones
(98 previous messages)Sol
- Feb 18, 2004 2:57 pm (#99 of 157)
How Could the Information be used for travel?
On the one hand we have this vision of space travel, and on the other, the mind quickly grasps the significance of the interaction needed to help in this propulsion system.
Using the brane scenrios helps to enlighten the relevance of how and what is held to the brane. If the significance is not understood, the dimenisonal relevance in not undertsood of the hyperspace journey. Again this needs a geoemtrical consistent model and this can only be done froma brane perspective?
See: Imagery in Mathematics
Sol
- Feb 18, 2004 3:23 pm (#100 of 157)
Space Travel
From: cshan64@hotmail.com (sol)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.research
Subject: Methods for Space Travel
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.188.209.112
http://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@@.1dde934e/98
I am trying to gain perspective on how a theoretical model might be
used to push forward our undertanding of space travel. I have given
the link to help orientate the discussion from a brane consideration.
I would like to see how better educated minds are using these models
for consideration, in issues of substance of validation.
Regards
Sol
- Feb 18, 2004 7:51 pm (#101 of 157)
Hyperspace:A Scientific Odyssey
Paul Hoiland - Feb 18, 2004 10:34 pm (#102 of 157)
How Could the Information be used for travel?
The uncertainty relations from quantum mechanics, when interpreted as a physical axiom, prohibit any local and realistic interpretation, because their immediate consequence is a spreading of wave packets that rather runs against the whole construction of a conventional approach based upon relativity. But from a 5D perspective if we have action/reactions that can transpire in manifolds we are restricted in our ability to directly observe then it is possible to maintain a local and realistic interpretation simply because our definition of local becomes relative itself.
Since the relations are a cornerstone of quantum theory it seems that we have in the most modern theories a natural progression of quantum theory towards unification with the more conventional approaches. Whither or not such unification will ultimately expose new and unique methods of travel remains for theory and experimental evidence to show us. But the geometry of spacetime has its own secrets that it is waiting to show us.
Richard Feynman
There was a time when the newspapers said that only twelve men understood the theory of relativity. I do not believe that there ever was such a time. ... On the other hand, I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics. ... Do not keep saying to yourself, if you can possibly avoid it, `But how can it be like that?', because you will get `down the drain' into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped. Nobody knows how it can be like that.
Perhaps in modern times we are beginning to see how it can be like that. But the trip towards this time has taken us down some very strange twists and turns into a land of some of the most exotic geometry ever conceived by the mind of man.
Sol
- Feb 19, 2004 1:54 am (#103 of 157)
Defining the Pathway
Paul
But the geometry of spacetime has its own secrets that it is waiting to show us.
In Klein's Ordering of Geometries, I saw it important to reveal this direct link at the basis of our approach into hyperspace. Is this a unrealistic notion?
Perhaps in modern times we are beginning to see how it can be like that. But the trip towards this time has taken us down some very strange twists and turns into a land of some of the most exotic geometry ever conceived by the mind of man.
It's one that has to take place I think, as this is what I have distilled from all the history that have been through in my time with the issues of strings and looking at Smolin's work and Rovelli's.
It is the logic, that lies at the basis of consistancy, in leading to experimental validity. I watched how Einstein, with the help of Grossman, learnt to use the new geometry in how we are lead to the elements of the fifth postulate. The authors of, like Saccheri, Gausss, Rienmann, were instrumental in moving perception, into this dynamical universe, and away from the flat brane universe:)
The uncertainty relations from quantum mechanics, when interpreted as a physical axiom, prohibit any local and realistic interpretation, because their immediate consequence is a spreading of wave packets that rather runs against the whole construction of a conventional approach based upon relativity.
You know I have tackled this, in how we percieve probabiltiy diagrams as alleviating this uncertainty. Looking at ways to describe the geometry of the orbitals, seem to relate to the values in the cosmos as isometrical relationships. The small, connects the pattern, in the very large. This to me is a energy relationship. Is this thinking wrong?
It is from this basis that I saw Euclidean deifnition now in the realm of non euclidean definitions. The string basis, described from the idea of energy in distance, follows the line, to the brane.
Do you see what I am saying?
Your thoughts here.
Sol
- Feb 19, 2004 10:33 pm (#104 of 157)
The Standard Model
Sol said: "Hmmm...the trouble is that in the colliders having reached planck length, reductionism runs into trouble. It requires a certain amount of energy to enlist the help at these levels, and currently we cannot do this. So the other option is to move the "idea" into the cosmos.
Part of this idea, is how we would define these particles and where we would be able to identify them in relation to the beginning of the cosmos. We also look for a playing field in which we could use this idea, and in the issue of blackholes, it seems to be the focus.
That idea is strings. Supersymetry comes up to ones attention, as this is the place where all the issues of the standard model come into play. Where gravity is united. This is Pierre Ramonds big question mark.
http://wc6.worldcrossing.com/webx?14@@.1dde2c0f/66
Sol
- Feb 19, 2004 10:47 pm (#105 of 157)
The Standard Model and Superstringtheory
Through a combination of theory and experiment, a mathematical model that describes or explains all particle physics observed so far by physicists has been worked out. This model is called the Standard Model. From the experimental point of view, the Standard Model is studied and confirmed so well that things are, well, almost boring.
The Standard Model consists of elementary particles grouped into two classes: bosons (particles that transmit forces) and fermions (particles that make up matter). The bosons have particle spin that is either 0, 1 or 2. The fermions have spin 1/2.
The table above lists the elementary particles in the Standard Model that transmit the four forces observed in Nature. Note that the graviton isn't technically part of the Standard Model but we'll include it anyway. The Standard Model is from a technical standpoint incompatible with gravity, and that's why string theory became an active field of theoretical physics.
When we say that quarks and gluons are observed "indirectly", we mean that evidence of their existence inside hadrons exists but these particles have not been observed singly. In the theory of quarks and gluons, they are believed to be confined inside hadrons and unobservable as single particles, except possibly at extremely high temperatures such as could be found very early in the Big Bang
http://superstringtheory.com/experm/exper2.html
klaatu - Feb 19, 2004 10:52 pm (#106 of 157)
You have a Search function. It works. What's the problem?
Sol
- Feb 19, 2004 11:03 pm (#107 of 157)
The Standard Model of Particle Physics by Ben Best
A number of superstring theories have been proposed to unify relativistic quantum field theory with general relativity theory. At Planck-length (10-35 meter) dimensions Einstein's equations of general relativity result in such intense fluctuations with energy that "spacetime goes haywire". Instead of boson & fermion particles, the universe is proposed to be made of Planck-length boson & fermion strings. Strings might be closed loops or open -- and they must be stretched under tension to vibrate (excite). Unlike particle interactions which occur at a single point in space-time, strings collide over a small but finite distance. Strings vibrate in ten dimensions, six of which are tightly coiled in on an unmeasurably small scale and four of which are in conventional space-time. A variant known as membrane theory (M-theory, "branes" -- multi-dimensional membranes) puts gravity in an eleventh dimension and points to an infinite number of solutions -- implying (for some) an infinite number of universes.
http://www.benbest.com/science/standard.html
Sol
- Feb 19, 2004 11:09 pm (#108 of 157)
(49 following messages)
The Importance of Tipping Light Cones