Hi Roger,
Compact manifolds are not unique per se
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_manifold) but can be categorized
to some extent. The trick is figuring out the transformations between
them (the diffeomorphism of GR is a version of this). I suspect that
canonical projections
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_projection> are a way of
relating their geometrical aspects.
On 8/23/2012 8:23 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Richard Ruquist
I don't know if compact manifolds are unique, that's your forte.
But monads are definitely not unique-- they are infinitely varied and
keep varying.
Roger Clough, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
8/23/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so
everything could function."
----- Receiving the following content -----
*From:* Richard Ruquist <mailto:[email protected]>
*Receiver:* everything-list <mailto:[email protected]>
*Time:* 2012-08-22, 12:34:59
*Subject:* Re: Leibniz's theodicy: a nonlocal and hopefully best
mereology
Stephan,
According to Shing-Tung Yau
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shing-Tung_Yau
current Head of the Harvard Math Dept. who verified Calabi's
Conjecture,
the compact manifolds are 1000 Planck lengths across
and are constraaned by higher-order EM flux that winds thru its
500 holes
(see "The Shape of Inner Space" by Yau).
It is considered that each flux winding has 10 quantum states
so that the total number of distinct windings is 10^500.
I suggest that the number of quantum states rather
may equal the dimensionality of the compact manifolds,
so that the number of possibilities is 6^500 or 10^389,
which is just enough to fill a good sized universe like ours
with every Compact Manifold being unique.
Thanks for your interest.
Richard
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Stephen P. King
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
What exactly determines the 10^500 number?
On 8/22/2012 9:19 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
That there are 10^500 possible configurations of the monads.
Scientist believe that each possible universe
contains but one kind of monad..
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Roger Clough
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Richard Ruquist
What is the landscape problem ?
Roger Clough, [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
8/22/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to
invent him so everything could function."
----- Receiving the following content -----
*From:* Richard Ruquist <mailto:[email protected]>
*Receiver:* everything-list
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Time:* 2012-08-21, 21:26:58
*Subject:* Re: Leibniz's theodicy: a nonlocal and
hopefully best mereology
Stephan,
I solved the landscape problem by assuming that each
monad was distinct
consistent with the astronomical observations that
the hyperfine constant
varied monotonically across the universe.
Richard
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Stephen P. King
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 8/21/2012 3:58 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
燬teinberg P. Soft Physics from RHIC to the LHC.
燼rXiv:nucl-ex/09031471, 2009.
燢ovtum PK, Son DT & Starinets AO. Viscosity in
Strongly Interacting Quantum
Field Theories from Black Hole Physics.
arXiv:hep-th/0405231.
牋 Good! Now to see if there any any other
possible explanations that do not have the
landscape problem...
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Stephen P. King
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 8/21/2012 3:39 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
String theory predicts the viscosity of the
quark-gluon plasma
already found at the LHC and several other
sites.
Hi Richard,
牋 Could you link some sources on this?
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Stephen P.
King <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 8/21/2012 12:19 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/21/2012 4:10 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi guys,
Neither CYM's nor strings physically
exist--爄nstead, they represent
things that exist.
Anything in equation form is itself
nonphysical, although the equations
might describe something physical.
The equations of string theory
describe strings. So how does it
follow that strings aren't real.
That's like saying a sentence that
describes my house shows that my house
isn't real.
I agree that string theory (or any
other theory) is a model of reality
and not reality itself. But, if it's
correct, it refers to reality or at
least some part of reality - like, "My
house is green." refers to a part of
reality, but "My house is blue." does not.
Brent
牋 When and if string theory makes a
prediction that is then found to have a
physical demonstration we might be more
confident that it is useful as a
physics theory and not just an exercise
in beautiful advanced mathematics. The
LHC is looking for such evidence...
For example, if I live at 23 Main
street, 23 Main Street is not my house,
it is my address.
Roger Clough, [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
8/21/2012
--
--
Onward!
Stephen
"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
~ Francis Bacon
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
