The requested excerpt from
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Calabi-Yau_manifold#Calabi-Yau_manifolds_in_string_theory:

"Calabi-Yau manifolds in string theory
Superstring theory is a unified theory for all the forces of nature
including quantum gravity. In superstring theory, the fundamental
building block is an extended object, namely a string, whose
vibrations would give rise to the particles encountered in nature. The
constraints for the consistency of such a theory are extremely
stringent. They require in particular that the theory takes place in a
10-dimensional space-time. To make contact with our 4-dimensional
world, it is expected that the 10-dimensional space-time of string
theory is locally the product M4×X of a 4-dimensional Minkowski space
M3,1 with a 6-dimensional space X . The 6-dimensional space X would be
tiny, which would explain why it has not been detected so far at the
existing experimental energy levels. Each choice of the internal space
X leads to a different effective theory on the 4-dimensional Minkowski
space M3,1 , which should be the theory describing our world."

The 6d space is tiny indeed, said by Yau in his book "The Shape of
Inner Space" to be 1000 Planck lengths in diameter. The rest of that
reference apparently describes a number of possible realizatons of the
6d space that is way beyond my comprehension. So now I am reading
http://universe-review.ca/R15-26-CalabiYau.htm, a math review of Yau's
book,
to get a more definitive answer to our questions.
Richard.

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net> wrote:
> On 10/26/2012 4:31 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
>>
>> Yes
>>
>> http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Calabi-Yau_manifold#Calabi-Yau_manifolds_in_string_theory
>
> Hi Richard,
>
>     Could you cut and paste the specific description that answers Brent's
> question?
>
>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 3:01 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/26/2012 5:08 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No Roger,
>>>>
>>>> In string theory dimensions are conserved but can undergo extreme
>>>> modification such as in compactification where formerly orthogonal
>>>> dimensions become embedded in 3D space in spite of what Brent thinks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you have a reference that describes this 'embedding'?
>>>
>>> Brent
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Everything List" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>>
>
>
> --
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to