[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 1018 KB, 250x251, birds.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6476059 No.6476059[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

ITT: People over 21, studying theoretical physics and advanced math.

Interest in some discussion?

>> No.6476062

>>6476059
if you are over 21 and still studying you have already lost.

>> No.6476066

>>6476062
do you always post the firs thing that comes to your mind?

>> No.6476068

>>6476066
gud 1 m8. u shur #rekt him!!!1!1!

>> No.6476071

>>6476066
if you are so mentally handicapped that your first thought isn't correct then you should not be studying math or physics in the first place.

>> No.6476072

>>6476071
Okay, at least you have some humor.

Any other people here today?

>> No.6476075

>>6476072
no, its Sunday, everyone at church.

>> No.6476102 [DELETED] 

>>6476075
This.
I just got back from church. Science comes second to my strong faith in God. Science is usually wrong anyways like with global warming and most of physics which creates make believe about invisible nonsense. Oh how convenient, I need a magical microscope that was probably tampered with by God deniers to see what you want me to see? Ahahahaha ridiculous. Trusting in God is the only way to find real truth.

>> No.6476112

>>6476075
I haven't gone to church since I became an atheist. Science has become a crutch mostly. I

know it's mostly theories, but I practice it to vent my anger with God. It's like I need science so

that I can lie to myself and tell myself that God is wrong.

>> No.6476120

Heyyo, just came back from church.

So what is this thread about?
Quantum fields? Graph theory? What is the newest progress on turbulence?

>> No.6476122

>>6476102
>>6476112
Are you guys serious? I mean, sure, a strong faith is God is a pre-requisite to practicing science, but science has more credibility than you give it credit. Like I heard that string theory might help us to understand the underworld one day, because that's an entirely different dimension. So basically string theory is our best bet to defeating the devil. That's why I'm going into theoretical physics.

>> No.6476124

I see I've walked straight into a troll feeding ground

>> No.6476129

>>6476120
OP here. Let's talk about how an understanding of quantum mechanics has strengthened our belief in God. In my experience Hilbert spaces can only exist because of a benevolent God.

>> No.6476137

This is quite amusing.

>> No.6476138

>>6476124
GTFO moron. Even Einstein said that science without religion is blind. Einstein also said that God doesn't roll dice. That proves that science is pre-determined according to His will. It doesn't matter how much you experiment. If He doesn't like your science then he won't give you a positive result. That's why I force our research group to pray every morning. And it shows that if you don't believe in God, then you're not a real scientist. Go practice your atheist pseudoscience.

>> No.6476142

>>6476137
Lol I know right. These fedora tipping autists need to get back to r/atheism.

>> No.6476145

>>6476138
Hey friend, I'm a member of the Landover Babtist Church (come meet us at http://www.landoverbaptist.net/?)), so don't go around lecturing me about God!

Every. Single. Scientific paper. is just derivative of the Holy Bible OR is a ticket to hell.

>> No.6476153

>>6476138
I'm only a layperson, but if a brilliant man like Einstein was convinced there's a God, then that's good enough for me. You see all of these modern second-tier physics like Feynman or Hawking who want to be just like Einstein. But they lack faith I think. That's why they create theories about all of these invisible things which can't possibly be confirmed by science. Wormholes? QED? Aliens? I mean seriously?

>> No.6476157

>>6476122
And that is very much to your credit. Science is indeed the fight of God against the devil, I wish more people would realize that. There is the underworld but there are also the multiverses, who know what demons might light ahead

>> No.6476163

>>6476157
>light
lie

>> No.6476173

>>6476145
Thats seriusly retarded. I'm in highschool and even I know that big scientific things like astral projection and multiple universes weren't in the Bible. If people like Brian Greene can prove things like reincarnation, which is pretty close to quantum teleporation, are true; then that basically disproves the Bible. You don't know anything about science retard.

>> No.6476174

>>6476129
I wouldn't be so quick to judge about the benevolence of God, because if God is benevolent and omnipotent then whence cometh evil? It seems more logical and reasonable to say that Hilbert spaces can only exist because of God, just like the rest of our universe really.

>> No.6476186

>>6476157
I'm only a sophomore at my university, but I know more about spiritual planes than anyone else in my physics class. It's ridiculous. I tried bringing this up with my QM professor, but he blew me off. Like what if demons can travel at the speed of light or even faster with reverse tachyons or something? Would we need to build a fusion reactor to do something about that?

>> No.6476196

>>6476174
>if God is benevolent and omnipotent then whence cometh evil?
It basically boils down to neutrinos and anti-neutrinos. Anti basically means "not good" in Greek, so anti-neutrinos are the reason there's a devil probably.

>> No.6476201

>>6476174
>It seems more logical and reasonable to say that Hilbert spaces can only exist because of God
I agree with this.
Hilbert spaces (or at least, those used in QM) are infinite-dimensional, so their Creator must be infinite too.
To claim that man, who is finite and limited in comparison to God, can create something infinite can only be an act of hubris.

>> No.6476205

>>6476196
I should mention that I learned about anti-neutrinos from a History channel documentary. I'd have to re-watch it to get the theory down exactly, but what I said is most of it.

>> No.6476216

>>6476122
There exists no empirical evidence to support string theory.

>> No.6476224

>>6476201
That's idiotic at best. Imagine that there was this infinite thing that wasn't created by God. Then if we assume that it has a subset of man-made objects then all of those objects are infinite and man-made. That proves that man can create infinite things. Christfags need to learn basic logic and science before coming on /sci/. This thread really pissed me off.

>> No.6476227

>>6476216
Hahaha wow, you need to learn what THEORY means. Have you ever heard of the THEORY of gravity or the THEORY of evolution. Reality check, they're facts and String THEORY is a fact.

>> No.6476230

>>6476216
The standard model, quantum electrodynamics, quantum mechanics and general relativity are all a subset of string theory, so there is as much empirical evidence to support string theory than all these other theories combined. Besides I'm sure God will eventually allow us to perceive additional empirical evidence in order to conclude in the complete validity of string theory as opposed to the other ones, i.e. in the existence of other dimensions, i.e. in the underworld.

>> No.6476247

>>6476224
>Imagine that there was this infinite thing that wasn't created by God. Then...
Stop right there blasphemer. You start from a false assumption, hence in this case your conclusion is false as well. Review your logic son.

>> No.6476253

God has been alerted of this thread by the angels monitoring this particular area of His Creation.

Judgement beckons.

>> No.6476255

>>6476216
This. Dear God what is happening in this thread.
>>6476230
That's cute, but it's inherently wrong. You cite quantum electrodynamics, quantum mechanics, and general relativity as evidence for string theory. Well there's no evidence to support any of that other stuff until we can prove that wormholes exist. I would suggest reading A Brief History of Time or the Elegant Universe if you want to get caught up in the latest physics discoveries. Maybe one day we will prove string theory, but I doubt it, because that would mean there's a God. And sorry if it offends you, but God doesn't belong in scientific matters.

>> No.6476265

>>6476247
I studied philosophy in college years ago, so I basically majored in logic. You don't understand anything. You wan't a more concrete example? How about a feedback loop. I play a song into my microphone, it comes out my speaker (but louder), and enters my microphone again. When it comes out my speaker the next time, it's even louder. If we could create the perfect speaker and microphone, we would create infinite energy. Is that good enough for you? Were you really incapable of coming up with your own example?

>> No.6476271

>>6476265
Oh also what about an escalator? If you walked at a certain pace down an upwards escalator, you'd never reach the bottom. You'd be traveling for an infinite amount of time. If you could somehow harness the energy from the escalator, then that would also create infinite energy, but it would probably take a lot of quantum engineering to work out. Just another thought.

>> No.6476274

>>6476186
>what if demons can travel at the speed of light or even faster with reverse tachyons or something?
The evangelist James Clerk Maxwell wrote about a demon that could do just that, actually.

On Maxwell and his religious experiences:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1119%2F1.14636

On the "Maxwell's demon":
http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/ExorcistXIV/Exorcist1.pdf

>> No.6476276

>>6476255
> I would suggest reading A Brief History of Time or the Elegant Universe if you want to get caught up in the latest physics discoveries
Haha get a load of this guy, you really don't know what you are talking about do you? If you knew so much about science and physics you would have at least mentioned The Future of the Mind by Michio Kaku.

>Maybe one day we will prove string theory, but I doubt it, because that would mean there's a God
This is precisely why we will prove string theory. One day Edward Witten will wake up from a dream in which God told him what he was missing in order to complete the proof. This day will become the Second Coming of Christ, inside the body of Witten.

>> No.6476283

>>6476265
>I studied philosophy in college years ago, so I basically majored in logic
I concede.

>If we could create the perfect speaker and microphone, we would create infinite energy
There is no such thing as infinite energy besides God itself. Only God could create the perfect speaker and microphone.

>> No.6476300

>>6476274
I haven't heard of the guy, but maybe I'll look into those papers later. Frankly, I'm not that interested in the opinions of a clergyman who dabbled in metaphysics at best. There's a difference between your guy who you probably learned about on Youtube creepypastas, and the people you read about in books. So (to put it lightly) screw off.

>> No.6476303

this thread instantly went to shit really fast. sorry OP

>> No.6476309

>>6476283
>only God could create the perfect speaker and microphone
That's not true at all. Speakers are relatively low tech. And a quantum speaker wouldn't have any defects, because all atoms are the same. Like if you created speaker that utilized the dual slit experiment, then that would be a quantum speaker. Some sound waves would go through one slit and other sound waves would go through the other. It's the same thing with a microphone, but in reverse.

>> No.6476314

>>6476303
>instantly went to shit really fast

>> No.6476321

>>6476276
>If you knew so much about science and physics you would have at least mentioned The Future of the Mind by Michio Kaku.
Wow, I'm soo sorry I don't have a PhD in theoretical physics. Get off your high horse asshole. You think you're better than me because you've read more books, but knowledge != intelligence. Why the hell would you even expect a layperson to read and understand works by Michio Kaku? He's a freaking string theorist for God's sake. He spends his whole life researching this stuff and I'm just beginning my undergrad degree.

>> No.6476332

>>6476309
But according to string theory some sound waves go into other dimensions including the underworld, so some energy is inevitably lost. Your argument would have passed as coherent in the 1920s but now in 2014 it just doesn't cut it anymore. It's been a long time since quantum mechanics was superseded by the quantum theory of strings, which even though it is not yet proven it will be soon by God's will.

>> No.6476338

>>6476321
>He's a freaking string theorist for God's sake
To be fair, I watched a documentary with him once. It was pretty complex and I didn't understand most of it, but there were a lot of things that made sense. Like if multiple universes travel parallel to our universe at the speed of light, then are they actually made of light? Are we in a multiple universe? If we were, then that would mean that we're made of light.

It took me a while to come to that conclusion, but I was proud when I finally did. It just goes to show that hard core physics isn't completely inaccessible.

>> No.6476351

>>6476321
You need faith in order to understand his works, have faith and God will show you the way. It is a prerequisite to earn a Nobel prize by the way, one does not come up with groundbreaking theories without faith.

>> No.6476363

>>6476276
>Michio Kaku
>Michio
>Fucking
>Kaku

>> No.6476366

>>6476059
Question: do I absolutely have to learn QFT before starting String Theory? I'd really like to just start learning String Theory, QFT be damned.

>> No.6476369

>>6476332
Damn, that actually makes sense. Maybe I should read up on string theory lol. I probably sounded like an idiot. Are you a researcher in the field? How would I learn more about sound waves for example? I know that sound and quantum strings are the same thing, because a quantum string is like a vibrating violin string or something. So I guess my question is which violin is best for testing the theories of strings. I've been taking violin lessons ever since I watched Brian Green's special, and I've been saving my money for a really nice one. You probably have had this discussion a thousand times, but it would really help to know.

>> No.6476374

>>6476366
We're not really the ones you should be asking. If you haven't asked God yet, then you're making a mistake.

>> No.6476378

>>6476363
Lol yep, he's the man. There's a reason he's on all of the main news channels as a science authority.

>> No.6476382
File: 916 KB, 500x236, a.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6476382

>>6476378
I realise the antagonism didn't really come through it that post, but I don't like him.

>> No.6476385

>>6476374
Knock it off.
>>6476366
He's right, God's important. But you'll never get anywhere without good old fashioned human knowledge. I'd say that you can disregard QFT, though personally I don't know that much about it. The most important thing is classical mechanics because then you learn about vibrations, which are important to strings. Tape a string across your room and pluck it if you want to experiment with different wave patterns.

>> No.6476386

>>6476062
If you stop studying at any age you have stopped being a scientist.

>> No.6476396

>>6476374
>>6476385
Ok, thank you for your jokes/trolls.

Would anyone else like to respond? Should I learn QFT before String Theory, or can I just go ahead and start String Theory?

>> No.6476400

>>6476382
Why exactly? Also have you even watched Doctor Who? It has everything to do with wormholes and time machines. Michio Kaku is like the world expert on that stuff. He's proving everything that Einstein always wanted to do. Go watch his documentaries if you want to be educated. They mention Einstein like 50 times an episode so you know it's state of the art science. And if you're not going to do that, then let the men talk, and go back to middle school little boy.

>> No.6476403

>>6476255
>I would suggest reading A Brief History of Time or the Elegant Universe if you want to get caught up in the latest physics discoveries.
How exactly is popsci going to deliver info on the latest physical discoveries?

>> No.6476411

>>6476396
I say go for it, learn string theory right away. You'll almost immediately realize that you're doing some QFT at the same time. :)

A (weak) analogy: start learning about differential equations without knowing much calculus. You become very good at calculus while doing so.

>> No.6476409

>>6476369
Yep lol you did. I'm a researcher in my free time and also during my dreams, God gives me insights about strings while I'm asleep. You are definitely right about the connection between sound strings and quantum strings, they are both equivalent descriptions. It is generally accepted that your best bet for testing empirically string theory would be the Stradivarius. Recently there has been some research and development into quantum violins but this is still a highly speculative area. So I would suggest to start with the Stradivarius for now if you have the money, then once you master the vibration of its strings move on to quantum violins. Otherwise you can go with a piano, it's a poor man's Stradivarius but it's what most string theorists have started with actually, including Michio Kaku. See how far that can get you!

>> No.6476410

>>6476396
The hell? The one who brought up God was trolling. I gave you practical advice. If you don't want to listen to people who know more than you then GTFO. You obviously know nothing about standing waves.

>> No.6476413 [DELETED] 

>>6476400
8(gr+b+m+\frac{\sqrt{-1}}{8}+r+\frac{1}{8})

You nearly had me

>> No.6476415

>>6476400
<span class="math"> 8(gr+b+m+\frac{\sqrt{-1}}{8}+r+\frac{1}{8}) [/spoiler]

You nearly had me

>> No.6476418

>>6476363
He's a respected scientist.
But /sci/ is obviously only familiar with his popsci...

>> No.6476420

>>6476396
QFT is not one theory, QFT means Quantum Field Theories. The standard model of particle physics is a quantum field theory for instance. You can start with string theory right away but it will be hardcore if you have never studied its mathematical concepts, some of which are used in QFT. Whatever you do, do not lose faith.

>> No.6476427

>>6476411
>>6476418
So how many semesters of QFT courses would be just enough, bare minimum, to prepare me for whatever will appear in String Theory?

>> No.6476426

>>6476415
Yep, you proved my point exactly retard. They never say "Unknown control sequence '\fra'" in Doctor Who. Are you trying to mimic some general countdown protocol or something? You've obviously never seen the show, so don't talk about thing that you don't understand.

>> No.6476433

>>6476418
Yes he pioneered string field theory. Although string theory is mathematically impressive, it's useless in terms of describing nature, which is the main objective of most sciences.

Plus his popsci is fucking awful, spreading nonsense and getting people into science for all the wrong reasons.

>> No.6476435

>>6476418
Popsci doesn't mean wrong or not scientific. It only means that the science in question is popular. Einstein is really popular. Does that mean he isn't a scientist? Check this out if you're able and interested:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__zgAY4o1ho
It's pretty difficult to understand especially if you have ADD like me, but that doesn't mean it isn't scientific.

>> No.6476437

>>6476433
>it's useless in terms of describing nature
It's not, it's at least as useful as all the other theories. You clearly have never listened to the music of strings.

>> No.6476440

>>6476427
1-2. To be honest, your question seems a little silly, because if you're so reluctant to learn QFT, I don't think you'll enjoy string theory either.

Learn them simultaneously, if you wish. At first you'll see that you're advaning more faster on the QFT-front and then, after a certain point, if you're more interested in string theory, you'll advance more in string theory and omit some details in QFT when possible.

>> No.6476441

>>6476426
Well it worked for me.

(gr+b+m+ \frac{\sqrt{-1}}{8}+r+ \frac{1}{8})

In case you're serious, I have watched Doctor Who and it's filled with hand-wavey bullshit to give the impression of real science.

For example the regeneration or the bigger on the inside. Explain to me how they make any kind of sense in modern physics and biology.

>> No.6476442

What the fuck am I reading

>> No.6476444

OP here.

(sidenote: >>6476129 is not me, don't know if that's supposed to be funny.)

Nice to see the thread had some traffic - sadly it went complete shit, wow.
Probably my fault, since I didn't really specify a topic. I wanted to make it a Q&A thread, but felt douchy to offer answering questions.

>> No.6476445

>>6476075 here

I think i might have derailed your thread OP.

no need to thank me.

>> No.6476446

>>6476435
Here's another thing that might blow your mind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hOGfwt0ERk
He not only references Genesis to make things relevent, but he asks what if we're on a bubble connected by wormholes? Would that prove God? What if the universe is actually a pretzel maybe? Would that be the engine that drives the entire universe?

>> No.6476448

PS: the only point for me to set the age limit above 20 and invite discussions amongst actual students was to avoid discussions like the ones going on here...

>> No.6476449

>>6476437
But it is. There are so many assumed symmetries and the numbers are made a little nicer to make them possible to work with, so in its current state it almost definitely is not a description of nature.

It's analogous to Newton originally describing the motions of planets as circular. It was wrong, but it mean the calculations were possible.

>> No.6476452 [DELETED] 

>>6476441
Oh dear

<span class="math"> (gr+b+m+ \frac{\sqrt{-1}}{8}+r+ \frac{1}{8}) [/spoiler]

>> No.6476453

>>6476441
<span class="math"> 8(gr+b+m+ \frac{\sqrt{-1}}{8}+r+ \frac{1}{8}) [/spoiler]

>> No.6476454

>>6476441
>the regeneration or the bigger on the inside
Are you playing stupid or are you serious? Regeneration could be explained because he's a time lord and when you travel through time and black holes who really knows what happens to you. As for things being bigger on the inside, that is string theory in a nutshell. The universe has 11 dimensions, and some are bigger than others.

>> No.6476455

>>6476452
You forgot to multiply it by 8

>> No.6476456

>>6476449
In the standard model there are 18 or so assumed values, derived from experiments. There are many less assumptions in string theory, and it is at least as accurate as the standard model and general relativity since both these theories are a subset of string theory. You really need to learn more about string theory and about God.

>> No.6476459

>>6476454
No.

An extra spatial dimension is just another direction, and besides in String Theory the extra dimensions are compactified. They are essentially swept under the rug.

I really think I'm being trolled here.

>> No.6476461

>>6476444
>sidenote: >>6476129 (You) is not me
Don't try to backtrack. You were proven wrong so own up to it. Hilbert spaces are infinite because of God, but also maybe because of the Devil.

>> No.6476471

>>6476459
Look up "AdS/CFT correspondence."

Basically, some string theorists have found that some string theories in 10 spacetime dimensions, reduce to QFT with quantum gravity in 4 spacetime dimensions.
The extra dimensions aren't "swept under the rug"; they actually have an impact on the observed physical laws of the 4-dimensional spacetime we normally experience.

>> No.6476477

>>6476459
>the extra dimensions are compactified
Wow ... that's kind of the point. They created technology to expand those dimensions. Think of it like a vibrating string on an instrument. When it's vibrating it might contract outwards, but if you pull it taut then it gets longer. Got it? So they use some quantum computer to pull the strings taut and they get larger.

>> No.6476479

>>6476440
>if you're so reluctant to learn QFT, I don't think you'll enjoy string theory either.
I'm not reluctant to do QFT, I'm just really eager to start String Theory. I don't want to have to deal with QFT's endless "renormalization" nonsense before I can finally start learning about String Theories.

>Learn them simultaneously, if you wish. At first you'll see that you're advaning more faster on the QFT-front and then, after a certain point, if you're more interested in string theory, you'll advance more in string theory and omit some details in QFT when possible.
Sounds good, I'll take this option.

>> No.6476483

>>6476453

hmmmmm

>> No.6476486

>>6476471
Thanks man. I don't understand most of what you said, but you proved him wrong and shut him up. One slight correction though. There are actually 11 dimensions in string theory. I probably know more about this stuff, but I doubt you've seen this before.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI50HN0Kshg
Cheers and keep up with the physics man.

>> No.6476490

>>6476471
AdS/CFT correspondence is conjecture and has very little evidence, like most of String Theory.

Ok, granted there is a fair amount of mathematical evidence for the extra dimensions, but there is also mathematical evidence for 26 dimensions in Bosonic String Theory, and the framework of String theory allows for something like <span class="math"> 10^500 [/spoiler] different models

It just seems like a lot of unprovable mathematical wankery which, while it may be true, is near on impossible the confirm and I don't like that one bit.

>> No.6476492

>>6476486
>One slight correction though. There are actually 11 dimensions in string theory.
Well...

Before 1995, there were 5 separate "types" of string theories, each with 10 spacetime dimensions.
Then, it was shown in 1995 (or around that time) that all of those string theories were different limits of one theory with 11 spacetime dimensions, M-theory.

>> No.6476493

>>6476490
I keep on fucking up jsMath
<span class="math"> 10^(500) [/spoiler]

>> No.6476499

>>6476477
I'm going to need some sort of proof that they've un-compactified an extra dimension, because if they had that would be huge news.

As I understand the main way they're testing for them is seeing if any energy is unexplainably lost during particle collisions, and that so far it has been fruitless.

>> No.6476500

>>6476490
That's why people are working on String Theory to try to make Non-perturbative theories to produce results that can be tested by experiment. It's an active area of speculative research.

It's like Boltzmann's theories; he talked about the concept of "microstates" before people had even fully accepted the concept of atoms. And later he turned out to be correct.

It could be the same for String Theory (in fact, it probably is), but we'll just have to wait. But just know that String Theory is backed by extensive mathematical research, if not hard experimental evidence.

>> No.6476504

>>6476490
With string theory you have to find one among 10^500 models that match our reality. With the standard model and general relativity you have to measure several constants experimentally, each of which can have a priori an infinite number of values since they are continuous. The assumptions needed to be made are much weaker with string theory.

>> No.6476503

>>6476493
It's funny that you actually think this stuff will help you find salvation. You think your all smart but you cant even find God. Your a retard.

>> No.6476505

>>6476499
A quick correction: the energy loss that they're looking for is to test whether the energy can pass to different "braneworlds." They're not looking for the compactified dimensions.

>> No.6476508

>>6476503
this

>> No.6476512

>>6476500
Of course it may be testable in the future, but I have heard at least one renowned pioneer of string theory describe it as not likely to be a description of nature, and to be untestable.

>> No.6476511

>>6476493
Here's how you do it: 10^{500}
<span class="math">10^{500}[/spoiler]
And I agree that there isn't much experimental evidence for string theory yet, but it certainly doesn't contradict any of our experiments.

>> No.6476516

>>6476499
Look, I'll try to explain it again, because you obviously didn't listen the first time. Quantum strings are like playing a musical instrument. Just like you can make 11 dimensions with quantum strings you can make three dimensions which a violin by stacking them in an upright pile. Now let's pretend that our violin has a string with about three feet of slack; it's really loose. Let's also pretend that our violin is two dimensional now. Then we can stretch the string upwards and create three dimensions. In other words, this proves what I've been saying, because we just created another dimension. Go watch "The Elegant Universe" if you want to learn more. They explain it a lot better in there, and it's been a while.

>> No.6476520

>>6476511
Forgive my vagueness, but I remember something from one of Susskind's lectures where the interactions between Branes and Strings would have sort sort of effect on the observed radiation from distant stars and galaxies, but this effect is not noticed, and he then said this was one of the reasons String Theory is not regarded as a description of nature.

>> No.6476522

>>6476520
It doesn't matter whether your brain interacts with strings or not because quantum mechanics operates independently of human observation. Also humans don't emit radiation lol so I don't know how our brains could do that even if strings and extra dimensions were involved. It's good that you're here speculating because that's science, but you obviously have a lot to learn.

>> No.6476531

>>6476505
Ah.

>> No.6476529

>>6476503
Agreed. Some people lack perspective on the important things.

I was getting pretty pissed off reading this thread, but your reply was like a breath of fresh air.

>> No.6476542

>>6476516
>American documentary
No thanks, there are better ways of researching this kind of thing

>> No.6476551

>>6476504
At least the assumptions made in the Standard Model are testable

>> No.6476553

>>6476522
Branes are different to brains.
I didn't once mention quantum mechanics.

>> No.6476552

>>6476542
>there are better ways of researching this kind of thing
Right ... such as? Do you even know how much money they spent on production values on that documentary alone? It would be more money than your house. People 100 years ago didn't have the advantage of watching documentaries and had to learn less efficiently. You can actually see what a string looks like in the documentary, and you can see what colors it is, which is something you can't get out of a book. Based on the number of documentaries I've watched, I probably understand string theory as well as anyone, and I definitely understand it better than you. I'm even formulating possible theories in which there might be 12 strings in my spare time. It would depend on the polarity of tachyons hint hint. So shut up. You don't know what you're talking about.

>> No.6476558

>>6476552
Watching lectures. Everything I have learnt or misunderstood about String Theory has been taken from Leonard Susskind's lecture series on String Theory and M-Theory. I highly recommend it.

>Colours
>12 strings
>Tachyons
I should just stop posting.

>> No.6476585

>>6476558
Well I don't know who Leanard Susskind is but he sure isn't Michio Kaku. Also where do you think he got all of his knowledge from huh? He watched the same documentaries that I did. The only difference is this guy isn't backed by Sony or Fox. That says something right there. Why would they spend money on a hack. I bet you don't even know what the inside of a wormhole looks like. You would if you watched Through The Wormhole.

Also what was wrong about my theories? Or are you just jealous that I might make a contribution to the field some day, while you're stuck watching outdated lectures. Did you even know that the universe could be like a pretzel? I can relate that knowledge to real life by baking pretzels and experimenting with shapes. You probably don't understand the first thing about experimentation. God you're really starting to piss me off.

>> No.6476594

>>6476585
>Well I don't know who Leanard Susskind is but he sure isn't Michio Kaku. Also where do you think he got all of his knowledge from huh? He watched the same documentaries that I did. The only difference is this guy isn't backed by Sony or Fox.
this is brilliant.

>> No.6476616

>>6476522
Holy fucking shit you're retarded.

"Branes" in string theory are short for "membranes."
They have nothing to do with our brains. Learn the goddamn subject before you post in a thread about it.

>humans don't emit radiation lol
Double retarded. Humans DO emit radiation, blackbody radiation. Most humans emit infrared light. (Of course, this has nothing to do with string theory, though.)

>> No.6476619

>>6476551
They're "testable," but the parameters in the Standard Model need to be tweaked in order to fit the experiment.
In string theory, there is no "tweaking." The parameters in string theory are completely determined by the theory.

>> No.6476631
File: 916 KB, 490x367, 1380142006082.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6476631

>>6476585

>> No.6476641

>>6476173

>Being this socially inept

>> No.6476639

>>6476616
Why the hell should I have assumed he was using a shortcut word? He could have just said membranes. So it would be like if a violin string was interacting with a saran wrap covering right? That still wouldn't emit radiation. Neither of those things would. Anyway, there's no need to be a condescending douchebag.

>Humans DO emit radiation, blackbody radiation.
Hahaha holy crap, did you actually think that would be funny? Points down for not only being a douchebag, but also a racist douchebag.

>> No.6476653

>>6476641
>Mocking someone for being socially inept on 4chan

>> No.6476657

>>6476639
A membrane is a 2-Brane, a 2 dimensional brane, not an abbreviation

>> No.6476662

>>6476657
>>6476639
I hadn't read the rest of your post which I know realise is a troll post.

Disregard my comment.

>> No.6476668

>>6476662
So because I'm on 4chan, I'm trolling if I don't tolerate racism huh? Newsflash, I'm black and this stuff hits home for me. This isn't the right board for that stuff.

>> No.6476671
File: 203 KB, 1000x1000, 1394542432112.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6476671

>>6476668

>> No.6476675

>>6476671
Whatever then, I'm leaving. Good luck trying to understand this stuff without me.

>> No.6476680
File: 55 KB, 741x486, 1392152900430.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6476680

>>6476675

>> No.6476701

>>6476668
I bet they don't worship God too. I'm laughing at them, as if they could understand string theory without God.

>> No.6476705
File: 16 KB, 369x305, lol.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6476705

Hey guise, what's going on in this thread?

>> No.6476743

>>6476705
god, that dogs face.

could this be the birth of a new doge maymay?

>> No.6477679

>>6476227
>>6476230
That's not how science works. Just because something is consistent with earlier ideas doesn't make it demonstrated empirically. It just makes it consistent. Quantum mechanics has been demonstrated properly, in that it was formulated, empirical studies were performed and they supported the theory. No such compelling empirical evidence exists for string theory, there exists no empirical argument for choosing string theory over any other non-standard model theory.

>> No.6477685

>>6476415
you're welcome
8(gr+b+m+\frac{\sqrt{-1}}{8}+r+\frac{1}{8})

>> No.6477686

>>6476743
What? That pic is as old as the Internet

>> No.6477726

lol why the fuck do people still troll like this
been a while since hitting that level of boredom.
it isn't edgy, and only infuriates those who deserve it, until they realize the level of degeneracy possible in order to fabricate these idiotic statements actually exist

>> No.6477773

>>6477686
That's advice dog right?

>> No.6477810

>>6476668
Here's what "blackbody" radiation is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackbody_radiation

You're making black people look bad, you fucking moron. Don't pretend to know physics when you obviously don't.

>> No.6478100

>>6477686
then why have I never seen it?

>> No.6478142

>>6477810
Ahaha really? I'm the moron? If people gave off radiation then everyone would have cancer you idiot.

>> No.6478162

>Over 21

There are 15 year olds who are very competent physicists and mathematicians. Such broad generalizations are ridiculous.

>> No.6478173
File: 39 KB, 500x337, you are already dead.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6478173

>>6476062
By erdos definition of the term, to die is to stop studying mathematics.

>> No.6478267

>>6478162
Go to bed, Jacob.

>> No.6478329

Theoretical Physics student reporting in.

Anyone else choose the wrong subject? Didn't realise you had to major in mathematics or mathematical physics at the least to become a theoretical physicist. 17 year old me wasn't that interested in pure maths, he was interested in physics and applied maths, so he thought physics was the right degree.

Oh well. Gotta make the most of it and catch up on the pure mathematics I missed out on. Fuckin one-forms, I still don't really understand you

>> No.6478339

>>6478329
>Theoretical Physics student
>Fuckin one-forms, I still don't really understand you

Is this a joke? As a first semester physics undergrad you are certainly not yet in the position to call yourself a "theoretical physics student".

>> No.6478357

>>6478339
Obligatory "Not everywhere in the world has the same university education system as the United States post"

I can assure you, I am at a well respected school studying Physics with around 250 others, and 248 of them don't even know what a one-form or vector field is (Only one other guy I know is taking this mathematics class).

Of course the mathematical physicists know, I'm talking about actual physics students here.

FAQ for ignorant Americans:
- No, the UK does not work on the major minor system like the US
- No we don't all take the same courses country wide, there is no ElectroMag 101
- No we don't pick our own classes. We have "optional modules" where we pick from a prescribed set of available physics classes but on the whole your degree is set out in stone and chosen for you by the university
- No I can't take maths classes. I managed to convince them to let me take one this year, and I may be able to squeeze one in next year, but generally you take only physics classes. I can only follow the prescribed degree as set out by my physics department. All other mathematics is taught to me by physicists from the physics department (eg. Fourier analysis was taught to us in a class on Wave Phenomena by a working physics researcher, NOT a mathematician)
- For the last time, the entire world is NOT LIKE THE US

>> No.6478372

>>6478357
What makes you think I was amerifat? If anyone here sounds like a dumb americlap, then it's you. I'm surprised to see that the UK is even more ass backwards in terms of physics education than the US. In any civilized country one-forms are first semester math, for mathematics students as well as physics students.

>No I can't take maths classes.
That's just sad. Your university must be below shit tier if it doesn't allow you to choose what courses you want to take.

>> No.6478391

>>6478372
>That's just sad. Your university must be below shit tier if it doesn't allow you to choose what courses you want to take.

This.

Americunt here btw

>> No.6478538

>>6476479
>> I don't want to have to deal with QFT's endless "renormalization" nonsense before I can finally start learning about String Theories.

Please be trolling. This is hilarious if you are.

>> No.6478561

I'm having trouble with my Highschool Physics, I need higher than a C in order to get accepted into Officers college. Would anyone be so inclined to help?

I'd be willing to pay USD cash?

>> No.6478568 [DELETED] 

>>6476668
reported

>> No.6478572 [DELETED] 

>>6476668
reported..

>> No.6478589

>>6477679
>there exists no empirical argument for choosing string theory over any other non-standard model theory.
No but since it makes the same predictions it is at least as valid, is it that hard to understand? Besides there is less tweaking of parameters involved in string theory than in the other ones, that is you don't need a bunch of parameters to explain what we observe

>> No.6478592

>>6478142
this