Re: Space-time is a liquid!
John Mikes skrev: JM: Then what makes them into a continuous 'string'? OR: do those individual points arrange in unassigned directions they just wish? If they only fluctuate by themselves, what reference do they (individually) follow to be callable 'string' -'fluctuate' - or just vibrate on their own? (below you said it: there the strings consist of discrete points.) JM: so THOSE (discrete) points are SPACE and also VACUUM. Now what keeps them 'discrete' if there is NO space between them? They mold together into an 'undivided' continuum - without any divider in between. Two discrete points have got to be discretized by something interstitial separational - in the geometrical view: their spatial image (what they do not have, because they ARE space). In this same image vacuum is also a bunch of discontinuous points that move. Vibrate. Fluctuate. Undulate into waves. But without anything interstitial they melt into a continuum? If you look at a meter, then there is a finite number of space points in that meter (it is about 10^35 space points in this meter). There is no space between two space points, because the space is the space points. The best way to imagine this discrete space and discrete time, is to look at the Game of Life. There you have discrete space points, that can have two states, on/off (or black/white or spin up/spin down). In this discrete space-time, you can see the gliders move. It is the same thing with the vibrating strings in the string-net liquid. There you have string-like structures, waving back and forth. These string-like structure is the wacuum. And the elementary particles are macroscopic vawes in this string-net liquid, just like sound waves in water. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Space-time is a liquid!
John Mikes skrev: 1.- Q: What are light and fermions? A: Light is a fluctuation of closed strings of arbitrary sizes. Fermions are ends of open strings. 2.- Q: Where do light and fermions come from? A: Light and fermions come from the collective motions of string-like objects that form nets and fill our vacuum. 3.- Q: Why do light and fermions exist? A: Light and fermions exist because our vacuum is a quantum liquid of string-nets. This is from the introduction of the URL so kindly provided by Torgny. It looks very interesting, a gteat idea indeed. I like better a 'liquid' of spacetime than a 'fabric'. Xiao-Gang Wen looks like a very open-minded wise man. I wonder if he made the circularity of his Q#1 and Q#3 deliberately? (if, of course, we include Q#2). Originally - before reading Q#3 I wanted to ask 'what is OUR vacuum? but here it is: a QUANTUM liqud and it has the substance of "string-nets". He also postulates closed strings and open ones. (What-s?) the closed ones fluctuate in waves (=photons) and the open ones have endings we consider electrically charged (also callable: particles). In my original (uneducted) question I wanted to ask what kind of a vacuum is "filled"? is it still a (full) vacuum? Do the 'strings' have a 'filling' quale? or is a 'string-filled' plenum still empty (as in vacuum)? If the strings fluctuate into waves, what fluctuates? I am afraid that ANY answer will start another string of questions. The vocabulary is not so clear, then again it is the nth consequence of the mth consequential result of an old assumption: the assumption of the physical world. Please, do not reply! I just realizes that this entire topic is way above my preparedness and just have "let it out". Some clarifications: The vacuum IS a string-net liquid. But the strings are not continous. As you can see in the picture in Figure 1.8 at page 9 (page 14 in the pdf file) in Xiao-Gang Wen: "Introduction to Quantum Many-boson Theory (-: a theory of almost everything :-)", that can be found at http://dao.mit.edu/~wen/pub/intr-frmb.pdf , and in the 10th slide of his talk "An unification of light and electron" at http://dao.mit.edu/~wen/talks/06TDLee.pdf , there the strings consist of discrete points. And it is these discrete points that ARE the space. There is no space between the points. The vacuum IS these points. This might be hard to understand. But this is the same thing that there were no time "before" the Big Bang. The time started with Big Bang. And there is the same thing with the space points in the strings in the discrete space. There is no space "between" the space points. This is hard to understand mentally, but it can be understood mathematically. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Space-time is a liquid!
Torgny, thanks for your explanations...Let me interject John On 9/17/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Mikes skrev: - 1.- Q: *What are light and fermions?* - A: Light is a fluctuation of closed strings of arbitrary sizes. Fermions are ends of open strings. - 2.- Q: *Where do light and fermions come from?* - A: Light and fermions come from the collective motions of string-like objects that form nets and fill our vacuum. - 3.- Q: *Why do light and fermions exist?* - A: Light and fermions exist because our vacuum is a quantum liquid of string-nets http://dao.mit.edu/%7Ewen/stringnet.html. This is from the introduction of the URL so kindly provided by Torgny. It looks very interesting, a gteat idea indeed. I like better a 'liquid' of spacetime than a 'fabric'. Xiao-Gang Wen looks like a very open-minded wise man. I wonder if he made the circularity of his Q#1 and Q#3 deliberately? (if, of course, we include Q#2). Originally - before reading Q#3 I wanted to ask 'what is OUR vacuum? but here it is: a QUANTUM liqud and it has the substance of string-nets. He also postulates closed strings and open ones. (What-s?) the closed ones fluctuate in waves (=photons) and the open ones have endings we consider electrically charged (also callable: particles). In my original (uneducted) question I wanted to ask what kind of a vacuum is filled? is it still a (full) vacuum? Do the 'strings' have a 'filling' quale? or is a 'string-filled' plenum still empty (as in vacuum)? If the strings fluctuate into waves, what fluctuates? I am afraid that ANY answer will start another string of questions. The vocabulary is not so clear, then again it is the nth consequence of the mth consequential result of an old assumption: the assumption of the physical world. Please, do not reply! I just realizes that this entire topic is way above my preparedness and just have let it out. T-Th: Some clarifications: The vacuum IS a string-net liquid. JM: Ex cathedra. If I am a faithful, I have to believe it. - I am not. But the strings are not continous. JM: Then what makes them into a continuous 'string'? OR: do those individual points arrange in unassigned directions they just wish? If they only fluctuate by themselves, what reference do they (individually) follow to be callable 'string' -'fluctuate' - or just vibrate on their own? (below you said it: there the strings consist of discrete points.) T-Th: As you can see in the picture in Figure 1.8 at page 9 (page 14 in the pdf file) in Xiao-Gang Wen: Introduction to Quantum Many-boson Theory (-: a theory of almost everything :-), that can be found at http://dao.mit.edu/~wen/pub/intr-frmb.pdfhttp://dao.mit.edu/%7Ewen/pub/intr-frmb.pdf, and in the 10th slide of his talk An unification of light and electron at http://dao.mit.edu/~wen/talks/06TDLee.pdfhttp://dao.mit.edu/%7Ewen/talks/06TDLee.pdf, there the strings consist of discrete points. And it is these discrete points that ARE the space. There is no space between the points. The vacuum IS these points. JM: so THOSE (discrete) points are SPACE and also VACUUM. Now what keeps them 'discrete' if there is NO space between them? They mold together into an 'undivided' continuum - without any divider in between. Two discrete points have got to be discretized by something interstitial separational - in the geometrical view: their spatial image (what they do not have, because they ARE space). In this same image vacuum is also a bunch of discontinuous points that move. Vibrate. Fluctuate. Undulate into waves. But without anything interstitial they melt into a continuum? Your next sentence is TRUE: This might be hard to understand. But this is the same thing that there were no time before the Big Bang. The time started with Big Bang. JM: I overcame this contradictory duality of yours about time, which - of course could not exist before it was started, - by including into my narrative about (my) Bigbang that the occurring Universe (ours at least) organized its complexity into space and time from the aspatial - atemporal plenitude it popped out from. The wrong expression you applied is BEFORE, a time-reference referring to qualify a state where time is not identified. (It mixes the within-universe view with the view OF the universe from outside of it). T-TH: And there is the same thing with the space points in the strings in the discrete space. There is no space between the space points. This is hard to understand mentally, but it can be understood mathematically. JM: I would say: 'it can be described mathematically'. Realizing the formal match in the math expressions is no understanding. Not in the 'applied' math at least, where the truth of 2+2=4 depends on what the 2s and the 4 are applied for. Change the referents and understading may be gone. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are
Space-time is a liquid!
(From the swedish Allting List:) The discrete space-time is a liquid. This explains why the space is isomorph in all directions. The one that discovered that the space-time is a liquid, was Xiao-Gang Wen (Home Page: http://dao.mit.edu/~wen ). He has found that elementary particles are not the fundamental building blocks of matter. Instead, they emerge as defects or whirlpools in the deeper organized structure of space-time. The space-time is a string-net liquid, and the photons, the light, are waves in this liquid. And the charged electrons are the the ends of open-ended strings. Xiao-Gang Wen has written a lot of articles about this, and they can all be found from his home page. But most of the articles are *very* mathematical. But there is an easy-to-read article at https://dao.mit.edu/~wen/NSart-wen.html . And there is a rather-easy-to-read article in 12 pages at https://dao.mit.edu/~wen/pub/intr-frmb.pdf , that explains more about these very interesting theories. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
