In general a central charge of am abelian YM gauge field has a field rule ~ 
1/r^{n-1} in n spatial dimensions. This is important with AdS_5 with 10 dim 
SUGRA if one has YM gauge monopoles in the spacetime. The 11-dim SUGRA with 
AdS_4xS^7 is likely more directly associated with the observable universe. 
The dS_4 spacetime may have emerged from an AdS_4 as the inflationary 
spacetime. The AdS_5 might play a role where a wedge in that spacetime is a 
moduli space for quantum gravity. For 10-d SUGRA with AdS_5xS^5, the S^5 is 
some internal space for a YM gauge field on the AdS_5.

LC

On Saturday, December 2, 2017 at 8:20:36 PM UTC-6, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:21 AM, <[email protected] <javascript:>> 
> wrote:
>
> JC> No,
> ​ 
> MMI alleges that everything that can happen does happen, in a universe 
> with 4 spacial dimension Coulombs law would have a function of 1/ r^3
> ​, If string theory is right about such a universe not violating the laws 
> of logic then that universe can happen. and if that universe can happen 
> then 
> MWI 
> ​says it does happen. 
>  And such a universe would exist in the Eternal Inflation 
> ​multiverse​
>  too.​>
>
>  
>
> > *But that's NOT what MMI alleges.*
>
>  
> *​Bullshit.​ *
>  
>
> *​> ​That's essentially what Tegmark claims,*
>
>
> ​I*'ve read every one ​*
> *​of Max Tegmark's books. Have you? Tegmark is a well known many​ worlds 
> advocate and thinks it is true;  he thinks that everything that does not 
> violate the laws of physics actually happens and I think he's probably 
> right about that.  But Tegmark goes further than that, he thinks everything 
> that does not violate the laws of logic or mathematics does happen, and I'm 
> much more skeptical about that.*
>
>
> *FOR Coulombs law to have a function of 1/ r^3​ all you'd need is a 
> universe with 4 spacial dimensions, and If the string theorists are right 
> (a big if) then a universe with 4 spacial dimensions is physically 
> possible, in fact ​a​cording to them 10 physical ​spacial ​dimension ​is 
> ​logically NECESSARY.*
>
> *​String theory multiverse and ​ ​many world multiverse having nothing to 
> do with each other my ass! Is it really your contention that string theory 
> is OK with a universe with 10 spacial dimensions and one time dimension but 
> not OK with a universe like this one except that my coin came out heads 
> instead of tails??  ​    *
>
> * ​> ​but the Many Worlds of MWI have the SAME defining parameters as our 
> universe*
>
>
> *​There ​must be some physical principles that are true in every world in 
> the Everett multiverse, but what are they? Does the gravitational constant 
> have to have the same value in every universe that it has here, is the Fine 
> Structure Constant a pure number very close to 1/137 everywhere?  I don't 
> know. I'm very confident the second law of thermodynamics is true 
> everywhere, I'm reasonably confident the conservation of electrical charge 
> is true everywhere, but I'm less sure of the conservation of mass energy or 
> angular momentum. From a multiverse point of view some of the things that 
> seem absolutely fundamental to us may be be more like the number planets in 
> our solar system and have nothing to do with anything fundamental.      *
>
> *​> ​since OUR universe is claimed to be reproduced EXACTLY,*
>
>
> *​If you put a gun to my head I couldn't say​ what you were trying to say 
> by that.*
>
>  
> *​> ​except for the measurements realized in​ [...]*
>
> ​*Forget measurement! Measurement has nothing to do with the MWI, in fact 
> that is the one and only reason I am a Many Worlds fan, unlike the other 
> quantum interpretations it doesn't have to explain ​what a measurement is, 
> or a observation, or get mired in pointless consciousness debates.  *
>
> > Of course, if you set up a situation in which a quantum event is 
> amplified to give a difference in macroscopic outcomes, such as in 
> Schrödinger's cat, then you can say that the macroscopic uncertainty has a 
> quantum origin. But the majority of quantum events are not amplified in 
> this way.
>
>
> *So you really do think reality can be neatly divided  between quantum and 
> non-quantum events, I have *
> ...

-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to