/sci/ - Science & Math

Well for one, you are confusing the terms Universe and Dimension.

String theory suggests that there are 12 dimensions (2 of them being time related)

Also, we already know there is tons of "shit" out there existing all around us that we cannot interact with in any way other than gravity. Dark matter makes up something like 80% of the mass in the universe.

So it is highly likely that we humans are unable to perceive other "dimensions" in existence.

>>5067600
So, the scientists were just observing the filament under the affect of one of the minuscule other dimensions under string theory?

I thought the other dimensions were unobservible because they were so damn small.

Do they even have names or properties?

>>5067593

Can I have a source please OP, I'm quite interested by this.

>>5067606

Yes and no.. I'm by no means an expert on string theory, and that is only one theory after all. Thing is, when you start dealing with other dimensions, things like size become extremely relative.

If you took a flat piece of paper, and looked at it only on its horizontal axis, it would appear very small... because you would only be seeing the edge of the paper. As soon as you change your perspective and can now see the depth and height of the paper, it appears much larger than you were capable of seeing before.

I personally dont buy into string theory as law.. thats why its called theory. I also dont believe that quantum theory is properly understood at all.. everyones observations suggest quantum particles that pop in and out of existence... when in reality it is much more likely that we are seeing those particles moving in and out of our perceivable dimensions.

Take an ultra thin coin and spin it on its side.. once again, if you are looking at it from limited dimensions, the spinning coin will seemingly pop in and out of existence.. when really its just that only at certain times are you able to get a clear view of the object properly.

>>5067611
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/05/freaky-physics-proves-parallel-universes/

Horrifically, this is the only thing that I can find that sounds like OP's discription...

And that's how you grossly misinterpret scientific data.

OP, ignore everything anyone in this thread has said. They are all retarded. This has nothing to do with string theory.
I'd need to see your source, but I can only assume scientists managed to get a rather large object (the filament) to enter a sate of quantum superposition that it would normally be too large to show. If that's true, then this has nothing to do with other universes or whatever. It's just matter being wavey as usual, only they managed to keep a large structure (the filament) from being forced into decoherence by its own internal interactions.

>>5067706
As an aside, you could never "look at" something that was in two states at once. As soon as they let any light or any other particles at all interact with the object, the interference would force the wave function to "collapse", as they say, into one state or another.

I'm gonna guess that what they actually observed was discrete energy levels of the vibrating filament. Or something along those lines.

Now
>it was both vibrating and not vibrating;
would then be correct in the "it's a superposition" reading.

Assuming what OP is saying isn't misinterpreted.
>vibrating in universe 2 not in universe 1

>201X
>being able to observe universe 2

>>5067604
Dark energy, DARK ENERGY

>>5067714
This is wrong. Every state can be rewritten as a linear combination of other states in countless different ways. So everything is always in a superposition of some sort. Want to look at a superposition of position states? Measure the momentum.

>>5067827
>Dark energy

Don't be pedantic, /sci/ cancer. It only reveals ignorance

>>5067836
Blah blah blah, I know there's no such thing as actually collapsing the wave function. But seriously, if the uncertainty is small enough it's essentially not a wave any more from any reasonable vantage point.

>>5067593
You heard fucking wrong.

\THREAD

I think it was something like a single electron fired in a way where there was a 50/50 chance it would interact with the filament. Then when unobserved it both reacted and didn't react with it so it created a vibrating effect of about 9 billion times a second.

>>5067640
>fox news

What the fuck is wrong with you? Do you think "the onion" is a news source are well? What abour "SNL"?

You need the learn the fucking difference between news and fiction.

>>5067827
Whats the difference? Energy and mass are convertable. They are effectively the same thing when measuring the universe.

>>5067640
>Fox News

You are the reason america is falling. You mistake bullshit for actual news.

>>5067593
[citation fucking needed]

Probably some undergrad's speculative paper that has no real worth to it.

>>5067640
>gets science info from people reject science

LMFAO

>>5067640
>fox news

>>5067640
Are you fucking retarded?

>>5067640
Am I the only person that didn't completely misinterpret this guy?

>>5067640

Am I the only person that didn't completely misinterpret this guy?

>>5067875
>provides answer to op
>everyone too busy crying about fox news link
>news provider doesn't need to be credible if work cited is credible.
>I'm surrounded by pseudo intellectuals.

>>5067903
>implying anyone is actually going to the "fox news" link for science information

These are literally the same people that denounce most of modern science, in favor of fucking magic. Then you expect us to go to their "info-tainment" site for science info? wtf?

>>5067904
>news provider doesn't need to be credible

How does it feel to be responsible for the collapse of your country?

>>5067914
Taking a phrase out of context and then providing a link to show what you've just done...

My ribs! They hurt from laughing. This is the same thing fox does don't get me wrong, they just aren't stupid enough to provide a link showing their idiocy.

>>5067908

I don't think the guy that posted the link intended it to be used as a serious source.

>"Horrifically"

You guys are all dumb as fuck. The guy clearly posted the fox link to say he could NOT find a credible source, not that fox was one.

WTF? Spend less time on science, more on lit. thx.