On 7/1/2013 7:20 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 12:40 AM, meekerdb <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 6/30/2013 8:09 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 2:00 AM, meekerdb <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 6/29/2013 6:34 AM, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
wrote:
With regard to your's and Brents' coments, how would we demonstarte
string
theory? A super-giant CERN hadron collider?
No. You don't demonstrate physics models, you makes some predictions
and if
they are turn out to be true the you give some credence to the theory.
String
theory has the same problem as Bruno's theory, it apparently predicts
far too much.
Too much according to which standard? In my opinion, present "monouniverse"
theories predict far too little in my as we are founded by mysteries like
the
cosmological constant having to be tuned to 120 decimal places.
Yes, such "everything" theories provide cheap explanation, but no
prediction.
But what is the basis for the assumption that it's possible to derive a unique set of
physical laws mathematics alone?
It's not an assumption, it's a working assumption by those who want to work on the problem
instead of resting on the anthropic principle. So far they've been vindicated.
"The Anthropic Principle is essential, if one is to pick out a solution to represent the
universe, from the whole zoo of solutions allowed by M theory." -- Stephen Hawking
That makes no sense to me. If you assume all the solutions are realized you don't need to
"pick out one". If you assume only this one has been realized then saying it was picked
out by the anthropic principle implies a mystic teology.
In fact the holographic principle indicates the CC need not be "fine tuned"
at all.
Interesting. Can you point me toward papers on this subject?
Here's one http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.3918v1.pdf But it's an idea that's been floating
around for a while. The prediction of the CC that is off by 120 orders of magnitude is
based on quantum field theory and the zero-point energy of the vacuum. It's assumed that
each small (Planck) volume has one degree of freedom for each field mode. If you change
that to one degree of freedom for each small (Planck) *area* on the Hubble sphere you get
a number that is on the order of that observed, 10^-5Gev/cm3.
Brent
Jason
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything
List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
[email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3204/6452 - Release Date: 06/30/13
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
