Superstrings - Science Forum

Novice Joined: Jan 01, 2005 Posts: 5

I can't actually see that this has been discussed in this forum so far so it has to be brought up, who here conceives String Theory to be the way forward the Grand Unification Theory.

I myself beleive that in 2007 in CERN Strings will be proved (well at least I hope). I beleive because Strings seem to make everything so much more simplistic that what it is at the moment. For example Brane Theory, the Ekpyrotic universe seems to make The Big Bang Theory seem so complex. Strings makes everything so simple.

Your Thoughts? Smile

I'm a newbie here so hello too! Laughing

Expert Joined: Nov 17, 2004 Posts: 158 Location: Egypt

Hello Jordan.
Welcome to the forum.
Let us zap the future.

I am afraid that the current trends of the scientific mainstream shall hijack super-strings to present yet another new fantasy rather than any intelligible theory.

Somewhere in the medium future, we have to abandon particles and strings, readopt Aether and study waves in a much closer way.

Waves have three major characteristics namely, divergence, convergence and curl.
The first two allow wave-wave interference in constructive and destructive styles.
The third characteristic is responsible for materialising waves into the existing states of matter.
The topology of wave-dynamics is very similar to the string theory but without the fantasy ingredient.

Sooner or later the industrial sponsors of the dreaming scientists shall give up on them and send them to the garbage bins where they belong.
This could take quite a long time because a network of ignorant frauds could convince ignorant sponsors to continue sponsoring fantasy by showing them some tricky results that can make money.
All they have to do is to inject the fantasy into working systems as if they depended on them while they do not.
The revolution has to begin from within the mainstream to overthrow the frauds and educate the sponsors.

Who needs black-holes to cut down taxes or reduce bread prices!
Who needs to mine Pluto before mining earth!
Deep space or Deep Ocean would be a better challenge to explore?
Who needs relativity when its effects are insignificant at automobile and even jet speeds?
A true celebrity may not be a scientist and a true scientist may not be a celebrity.
War is a powerful motivation for research and we need to evolve to see how peace can motivate in a stronger measure. I am not saying that we do not research mass production of biochemical products by genetic engineering. I do not say that we stopped researching into natural disasters early alarms and counter methods for engineering better houses and shelters. I do not say that we stopped any peaceful research but I say that we must redirect the resources dedicated for war and fantasy to that of peace and realism.

Kindest regards.
_________________
Hemetis

Moderator Joined: Jun 21, 2005 Posts: 274

Sometimes war is necessary Hemetis.
The reason we will have to fight is because half of
america prefers to placate the enemy.
Try to please the enemy and what do you get
as a reward?

WAR!

Such is the result of Clinton's presidency. He emboldened
all the rotten people in the world.

No matter what we have to convert the enemy to our good;
and if we don't they will surely convert us with their evil
pressures.

With the boldness of a president like Reagan war can
be ended without firing a shot!

Newbie Joined: Jun 23, 2005 Posts: 4

String theory is complete and utter bunk. The future of physics lies in the reassumption of the aether. They'll also have to kill all those mathematicians who think they can do physics. *cough* Brian Greene & co. *cough*

Moderator Joined: Jun 21, 2005 Posts: 274

The Aether?

Right on!

I like to ask if space-time is really emptiness
then how does emptiness curve?

You gotta give it substance! Razz

Novice Joined: Sep 15, 2005 Posts: 9

The real problem is that quantum mechanics and general relativity don't meet in the middle. The theory of the biggest and the the theory of the smallest are incompatible.

String theory solves the problem, so while it still needs major work (and could be completely wrong - we have no proof either way) it's the best we have so far.

· Encyclopaedia · Wikipedia

· Encyclopaedia
· Wikipedia