Liar
now with 17% more class
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2003
- Posts
- 43,715
Anybody want a headache?
- Thread starter Liar
- Start date
G
Guest
Guest
.....
Last edited by a moderator:
Liar
now with 17% more class
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2003
- Posts
- 43,715
Have to strain my brain a little from the 6th and up, because I thought that one encompassed everything that the 7th to 10th apparently deal with. But once I started buying their distinctions, between an infinity of everything and infinite infinities of everythings then sure, no problem.
impressive
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2003
- Posts
- 27,372
I loved the ant.
And the whole thing made me think of Heinlein's Number of the Beast.
And the whole thing made me think of Heinlein's Number of the Beast.
Lauren Hynde
Hitched
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2002
- Posts
- 21,061
Now go find us one that explains that there could also be 26 dimensions.Liar said:
Oblimo
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2006
- Posts
- 4,273
Georg Cantor proved that there are different infinities, that is, there are some infinite sets that contain more members than others (there are more real numbers than integers, for example) in 1860-something.
It's interesting that this cool presentation presumes Multiple Worlds theory, which not every string theorist accepts (IIUC), and makes the presumption that the multiple worlds are infinite, which, as far as I understand it, is a rather unorthodox interpretation of M-W theory. In M-W theory, there is a world for every possible quantum mechanical state, from the Big Bang to the Eskaton, but that's not an infinite number of worlds; that's just a mindbogglingly hugeola shitload of worlds, but still a finite amount. M-W theory has to posit a finite number of worlds, at least traditionally, because M-W theory was meant to show the universe could still be deterministic like General Relativity insisted it was but orthodox Q-M theory insisted it wasn't.
In that sense, I much prefer Hawking's imaginary time explaination of the fifth dimension/multiple worlds weirdness, where the fifth dimension is graphed along the axis of the square root of -1. Let's here it for x,y,z,t,i coordinate geometry!
Also, I think string theorists are still arguing over the 11/26 dimensions brouhaha.
And then there's brane theory, which I really can't quite understand even on the metaphorical level, but is apparently a rival to the many flavors of string theory, and says that our universe is a membrane adrift in "bulk space" (sounds like something from Doctor Who) and the Big Bang was two 'branes bumping uglies in bulk space or something.
Basically, until they can find some empirical evidence of any of this stuff -- or if they figure out how to make porn out of it -- I ain't worried.
It's interesting that this cool presentation presumes Multiple Worlds theory, which not every string theorist accepts (IIUC), and makes the presumption that the multiple worlds are infinite, which, as far as I understand it, is a rather unorthodox interpretation of M-W theory. In M-W theory, there is a world for every possible quantum mechanical state, from the Big Bang to the Eskaton, but that's not an infinite number of worlds; that's just a mindbogglingly hugeola shitload of worlds, but still a finite amount. M-W theory has to posit a finite number of worlds, at least traditionally, because M-W theory was meant to show the universe could still be deterministic like General Relativity insisted it was but orthodox Q-M theory insisted it wasn't.
In that sense, I much prefer Hawking's imaginary time explaination of the fifth dimension/multiple worlds weirdness, where the fifth dimension is graphed along the axis of the square root of -1. Let's here it for x,y,z,t,i coordinate geometry!
Also, I think string theorists are still arguing over the 11/26 dimensions brouhaha.
And then there's brane theory, which I really can't quite understand even on the metaphorical level, but is apparently a rival to the many flavors of string theory, and says that our universe is a membrane adrift in "bulk space" (sounds like something from Doctor Who) and the Big Bang was two 'branes bumping uglies in bulk space or something.
Basically, until they can find some empirical evidence of any of this stuff -- or if they figure out how to make porn out of it -- I ain't worried.
