Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
^
heheh...I think we may pick up a few equations on a blackboard in the film 'A Serious Man' which has a physics professor teaching quantum mechanics. The look good.Another language, another language. As they say math is the language of the cosmos.
I took a look at the Lorentz equation which show how time stretches and space shrinks ean object is going at high velocities.....equations hows the faster an object moves the slower time passes by. Really not so complicated and intimidating when you parse each of the variables! I'm starting ...-s-l-o-w...;-)...
I think part of the problem you are having here is with string theory itself. You are assuming that it is real and proven, when it is not. Sure, it's very interesting, and the math seems to support it, but it is more of a hypothesis than a theory. I don't think at this time that it is falsifiable. It is just one model of many.
I'm sure if I am wrong about this someone more knowledgeable will come along and correct me.
If you listen to what Hawking has to say without trying to see how it relates to string theory it might be easier to comprehend.
String Theory can not be tested and experimentally observed -- with current technology. That doesnt mean it's not right. Calling it a hypothesis would be a far stretch. String Theory is not just one model of many. It's the model. There used to be varying degrees of String Theory until we realized that they are all part of the same model just different parts being developed independently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA
Correct. String theory like Dark matter is not proven. But there is a lot of supportive evidence for it. That was the case with the Higgs -Boson and that IS now proven.
Hawking has certainly got a lot of credit for being right, but even he is up for question. There is no need to take his word for it until it is debated, researched and proven, and Hawking cad had a rethink about Black Holes already. Do they such in energy or chuck it out?
There is nothing wrong in following the work with interest - including claims about whether science can disprove God or not (I don't see how it can, but it can seriously undermine the evidential case FOR God) without having to declare some sort of faith -belief stance.
Actually, Dark Matter *is* proven. We can observe its effects on matter. We know it exists. If it didnt exist, there would be no galaxies or stars. We dont know what it *is*, but that doesnt mean we dont know something isnt there.
Hawking's re-think on Black Holes is a very misleading statement that implies that he was wrong. He wasnt wrong. His model of a black hole was simply updated and amended, not replaced. His latest paper (of which I peer reviewed) was simply discussing the apparent horizon of a Black Hole and how it can change dynamically as a result of quantum entanglements of virtual particles. It showed that the horizon of a Black Hole isnt definite and more of an apparent horizon. It didnt change any basic characteristic of the black holes themselves, everything else is fully there still.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann
Oh I dont know. Hawking talks about negative energy and quantum theory as parts of his argument.
Hawking states that at the particle level with an atom, that particles can appear and disappear from and to nothing. From what little I know about it, Hawking is being somewhat misleading Under the Heisenburg principal, the more one knows about the velocity of a particle, the less one knows about its position, which in some form may provide an explanations as to why particles "appear" and "disappear: out of and into nothingness.
I agree that at this point string theory is highly speculative, but then so is quantum theory and so is negative electricity. I would be more convinced if Hawking had at least recognized that there is an alternative explanation to his "something from nothing" conclusion. That's what I would expect a good scientist would do when engaged in the kind of speculation presented in the aforementioned documentary.
And I still say that Hawking's ultimate conclusion and the reason for it is one giant mindbender.
Dont confuse virtual particles with uncertainty principle. Space isnt "empty". It's a foaming sea of virtual particles. A particle will pop into existence, and then annihilate in an instant. These virtual particles are what causes Hawking Radiation and proven in part by quantum entanglement. The Uncertainty Principle is completely different and unrelated. That refers to the fact that you cant measure the velocity or position with certainty simultaneously. Think of a picture of a race car -- You can see the blurry image of a race car moving, and you know when it was and where its going, but not exactly where it is at that exact second. Whereas if you take a picture incredibly fast, you can see the car with no blur, and you can see where it is, but not its velocity or where its going. It looks like its sitting still. Same thing for particles.
If there is an alternative of Something from Nothing as my friend Lawrence Krauss so lovingly speaks about, nobody has proposed one that fits the model of the Universe as we know it.
-----------
My profession is reviewing papers on physics (aka peer review pre-publishing). Specifically, particle physics and quantum mechanics. I've worked at CERN in the past and continue to review the work that comes out of that amazing collaboration of thousands of scientists as well as other physicists from around the globe. It is my specialty. It's what I do all day long every day.
What happens when we die? Nothing. Your just turned off like an old computer. How do we know this? It's rather simple actually. We've detected every useful particle possible. We know of everything inside of us. We know we dont weigh less when we die than when we were alive so there's nothing that "leaves" us when we die. Any particle that we havent seen yet would either be too light to interact with anything on Earth, or too heavy that it decays in such a short period of time you cant even see it. If there was a mechanism to transport us to Heaven or Hell, it isnt in our bodies. There's no mechanism that exists or particle that could do it according to our current understanding of physics. Before someone says "What about dark energy or dark matter, that could do it" -- No, it couldnt. Dark matter passes right through us, and dark energy is the vacuum of space. Could I be wrong? Sure. If I am, I will update my beliefs accordingly. But until then, there's zero evidence to support any religious claim other than a group of people a thousand years apart wrote a book on human morals and said if you dont follow it you go to hell.
I am sad that there is no afterlife, but the Universe doesnt care how I feel. It is the way it is whether I like it or not. Ask yourself this question -- Did you fear the year 1600? Of course you didnt. You didnt exist! So why would I fear dying, I wont know the difference.
The many worlds theory which goes along with the quantum measurement problem (back to the Uncertainty principle, it's amazing how that does come back to play again!) would indicate that I will always exist. So perhaps there's hope.
There's a reason over 90% of physicists such as myself are atheists. Once you understand the realm of physics you realize that it's all just plain impossible. There isnt a single argument to point against religion -- there's thousands of arguments against it that as a sum make it so far fetched that it isnt even a consideration of reality. Probably preaching to the choir here, anyhow.
String Theory can not be tested and experimentally observed -- with current technology. That doesnt mean it's not right. Calling it a hypothesis would be a far stretch. String Theory is not just one model of many. It's the model. There used to be varying degrees of String Theory until we realized that they are all part of the same model just different parts being developed independently.
Actually, Dark Matter *is* proven. We can observe its effects on matter. We know it exists. If it didnt exist, there would be no galaxies or stars. We dont know what it *is*, but that doesnt mean we dont know something isnt there.
Hawking's re-think on Black Holes is a very misleading statement that implies that he was wrong. He wasnt wrong. His model of a black hole was simply updated and amended, not replaced. His latest paper (of which I peer reviewed) was simply discussing the apparent horizon of a Black Hole and how it can change dynamically as a result of quantum entanglements of virtual particles. It showed that the horizon of a Black Hole isnt definite and more of an apparent horizon. It didnt change any basic characteristic of the black holes themselves, everything else is fully there still.
Dont confuse virtual particles with uncertainty principle. Space isnt "empty". It's a foaming sea of virtual particles. A particle will pop into existence, and then annihilate in an instant. These virtual particles are what causes Hawking Radiation and proven in part by quantum entanglement. The Uncertainty Principle is completely different and unrelated. That refers to the fact that you cant measure the velocity or position with certainty simultaneously. Think of a picture of a race car -- You can see the blurry image of a race car moving, and you know when it was and where its going, but not exactly where it is at that exact second. Whereas if you take a picture incredibly fast, you can see the car with no blur, and you can see where it is, but not its velocity or where its going. It looks like its sitting still. Same thing for particles.
If there is an alternative of Something from Nothing as my friend Lawrence Krauss so lovingly speaks about, nobody has proposed one that fits the model of the Universe as we know it.
-----------
My profession is reviewing papers on physics (aka peer review pre-publishing). Specifically, particle physics and quantum mechanics. I've worked at CERN in the past and continue to review the work that comes out of that amazing collaboration of thousands of scientists as well as other physicists from around the globe. It is my specialty. It's what I do all day long every day.
What happens when we die? Nothing. Your just turned off like an old computer. How do we know this? It's rather simple actually. We've detected every useful particle possible. We know of everything inside of us. We know we dont weigh less when we die than when we were alive so there's nothing that "leaves" us when we die. Any particle that we havent seen yet would either be too light to interact with anything on Earth, or too heavy that it decays in such a short period of time you cant even see it. If there was a mechanism to transport us to Heaven or Hell, it isnt in our bodies. There's no mechanism that exists or particle that could do it according to our current understanding of physics. Before someone says "What about dark energy or dark matter, that could do it" -- No, it couldnt. Dark matter passes right through us, and dark energy is the vacuum of space. Could I be wrong? Sure. If I am, I will update my beliefs accordingly. But until then, there's zero evidence to support any religious claim other than a group of people a thousand years apart wrote a book on human morals and said if you dont follow it you go to hell.
I am sad that there is no afterlife, but the Universe doesnt care how I feel. It is the way it is whether I like it or not. Ask yourself this question -- Did you fear the year 1600? Of course you didnt. You didnt exist! So why would I fear dying, I wont know the difference.
The many worlds theory which goes along with the quantum measurement problem (back to the Uncertainty principle, it's amazing how that does come back to play again!) would indicate that I will always exist. So perhaps there's hope.
There's a reason over 90% of physicists such as myself are atheists. Once you understand the realm of physics you realize that it's all just plain impossible. There isnt a single argument to point against religion -- there's thousands of arguments against it that as a sum make it so far fetched that it isnt even a consideration of reality. Probably preaching to the choir here, anyhow.
String Theory can not be tested and experimentally observed -- with current technology. That doesnt mean it's not right. Calling it a hypothesis would be a far stretch. String Theory is not just one model of many. It's the model. There used to be varying degrees of String Theory until we realized that they are all part of the same model just different parts being developed independently.
Actually, Dark Matter *is* proven. We can observe its effects on matter. We know it exists. If it didnt exist, there would be no galaxies or stars. We dont know what it *is*, but that doesnt mean we dont know something isnt there.
Hawking's re-think on Black Holes is a very misleading statement that implies that he was wrong. He wasnt wrong. His model of a black hole was simply updated and amended, not replaced. His latest paper (of which I peer reviewed) was simply discussing the apparent horizon of a Black Hole and how it can change dynamically as a result of quantum entanglements of virtual particles. It showed that the horizon of a Black Hole isnt definite and more of an apparent horizon. It didnt change any basic characteristic of the black holes themselves, everything else is fully there still.
Dont confuse virtual particles with uncertainty principle. Space isnt "empty". It's a foaming sea of virtual particles. A particle will pop into existence, and then annihilate in an instant. These virtual particles are what causes Hawking Radiation and proven in part by quantum entanglement. The Uncertainty Principle is completely different and unrelated. That refers to the fact that you cant measure the velocity or position with certainty simultaneously. Think of a picture of a race car -- You can see the blurry image of a race car moving, and you know when it was and where its going, but not exactly where it is at that exact second. Whereas if you take a picture incredibly fast, you can see the car with no blur, and you can see where it is, but not its velocity or where its going. It looks like its sitting still. Same thing for particles.
If there is an alternative of Something from Nothing as my friend Lawrence Krauss so lovingly speaks about, nobody has proposed one that fits the model of the Universe as we know it.
-----------
My profession is reviewing papers on physics (aka peer review pre-publishing). Specifically, particle physics and quantum mechanics. I've worked at CERN in the past and continue to review the work that comes out of that amazing collaboration of thousands of scientists as well as other physicists from around the globe. It is my specialty. It's what I do all day long every day.
What happens when we die? Nothing. Your just turned off like an old computer. How do we know this? It's rather simple actually. We've detected every useful particle possible. We know of everything inside of us. We know we dont weigh less when we die than when we were alive so there's nothing that "leaves" us when we die. Any particle that we havent seen yet would either be too light to interact with anything on Earth, or too heavy that it decays in such a short period of time you cant even see it. If there was a mechanism to transport us to Heaven or Hell, it isnt in our bodies. There's no mechanism that exists or particle that could do it according to our current understanding of physics. Before someone says "What about dark energy or dark matter, that could do it" -- No, it couldnt. Dark matter passes right through us, and dark energy is the vacuum of space. Could I be wrong? Sure. If I am, I will update my beliefs accordingly. But until then, there's zero evidence to support any religious claim other than a group of people a thousand years apart wrote a book on human morals and said if you dont follow it you go to hell.
I am sad that there is no afterlife, but the Universe doesnt care how I feel. It is the way it is whether I like it or not. Ask yourself this question -- Did you fear the year 1600? Of course you didnt. You didnt exist! So why would I fear dying, I wont know the difference.
The many worlds theory which goes along with the quantum measurement problem (back to the Uncertainty principle, it's amazing how that does come back to play again!) would indicate that I will always exist. So perhaps there's hope.
There's a reason over 90% of physicists such as myself are atheists. Once you understand the realm of physics you realize that it's all just plain impossible. There isnt a single argument to point against religion -- there's thousands of arguments against it that as a sum make it so far fetched that it isnt even a consideration of reality. Probably preaching to the choir here, anyhow.
Ben
Great post. Thanks for sharing your expertise and opinions.
No, I was referring to the bit of your post where you mentioned postmortem weight. We can't weight electricity can we?
Sorry for the confusion: of course, we are electric beings.
Electromagnetism does have a weight. That's the common foundation of e=mc2. Energy = Mass * speed of light squared. That means mass = energy and energy = mass. When you drop it down to quantum field theory, Electromagnetism comes in discreet packets, and as such, interacts with our bodies. If Electromagnetism was the force that carries us to the heavens, it can only travel at the speed of light, and can also be observed and interact with detectors.
When you die, the electricity is just shut off.
Ever notice a dead AA battery weighs a lot less than a fully charged AA battery? Give it a try next time you change your TV remote batteries.
Of side note, "Electricity" such as AA batteries is really electric current. It's just a flow of electrons. Static electricity isnt electricity either, that's too many or too few electrons building up a static charge. Body electricity is just electrons jumping from one atom to another as a signal. That's the "firing" of the synapses in your brain. Your entire body produces about 10 millivolts. Pretty tiny.
Most importantly, though, how does the electricity in our body get produced? Biochemical processes. From regular atoms. Electricity doesnt just magically appear in us, we create the electric pulses. That's chemistry!
No electricity leaves us or is further generated from our bodies when we are dead, and it has no way to take us to a heaven.
(I hate typing "Electricity", it should be referred to as Electromagnetism to be accurate)
Ever notice a dead AA battery weighs a lot less than a fully charged AA battery? Give it a try next time you change your TV remote batteries.
I'd have to see some real research on this point. What was the weight of the battery when inserted? What was the weight when taken out? Was there any acid corrosion that might have effected the weight out?
Too bad all the research money is going to the AGW crowd, and not to those working on this kind of stuff
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
