Laymen Question: [Archive]

sol

May8-04, 06:33 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>sol2 <sol2@physicsforums.com> wrote in message news:<sol2.15wlbg-100000@physicsforums.com>...\n\n> I have been trying to distill a framework that is consistent\n> geometrically from different perspectives, and in looking at\n> stringtheory/M Theory.The Monte Carlo effect and the idea of quantum\n> gravity from this geometrical consideration.\n>\n> Is there geometrizational aspect in stringtheory right from the string\n> as a point to brane world? Is such a method availiable?\n>\n> [Moderator\'s note: I am afraid that it will be difficult for most of us to\n> understand this question. LM]\n\nThe Klein bottle and the mobius strip are images that are caught in\nmind when thinking of chirality and parity in symmetry. What way is\nthere to remain geometrical consistent in a action that reveals planck\nlength as something other then what we had been concerned with in\nmatter considerations in reductionism, has now found its way to energy\ndeterminations?\n\nKlein`s Ordering of the Geometries\n\n"A theorem which is valid for a geometry in this sequence is\nautomatically valid for the ones that follow. The theorems of\nprojective geometry are automatically valid theorems of Euclidean\ngeometry. We say that topological geometry is more abstract than\nprojective geometry which is turn is more abstract than Euclidean\ngeometry."\n\nhttp://www.ensc.sfu.ca/people/grad/brassard/personal/THESIS/node21.html\n\n"Brane World models only carry this unique topology solution a bit\nfurther returning in part, though often modified in present format, to\nKlien\'s solution to the unification of gravity to electromagnetism\nthrough an additional dimensional set. The beauty of this path as we\nshould rightly call it is that it is a natural progression of\nEinstein\'s dream of a pure geometric explanation for everything we see\naround us in nature."\n\nhttp://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@205.1RfhbYxXZbz.1@.1dde934e/117\n\nhttp://physicsweb.org/objects/world/13/11/9/pw1311091.gif\n\n\n"a) Compactifying a 3-D universe with two space dimensions and one\ntime dimension. This is a simplification of the 5-D space*time\nconsidered by Theodor Kaluza and Oskar Klein. (b) The Lorentz symmetry\nof the large dimension is broken by the compactification and all that\nremains is 2-D space plus the U(1) symmetry represented by the arrow.\n(c) On large scales we see only a 2-D universe (one space plus one\ntime dimension) with the "internal" U(1) symmetry of\nelectromagnetism."\n\nhttp://physicsweb.org/box/world/13/11/9/pw1311091\n\n\nhttp://cerncourier.com/objects/2000/cernnews5_3-00.gif\n\n\n"Of course, if this third dimension were infinite in size, as it is in\nour world, then the flatlanders would see a 1/r2 force law between the\ncharges rather than the 1/r law that they would predict for\nelectromagnetism confined to a plane. If, on the other hand, the extra\nthird spatial dimension is of finite size, say a circle of radius R,\nthen for distances greater than R the flux lines are unable to spread\nout any more in the third dimension and the force law tends\nasymptotically to what a flatlander physicist would expect: 1/r.\nHowever, the initial spreading of the flux lines into the third\ndimension does have a significant effect: the force appears weaker to\na flatlander than is fundamentally the case, just as gravity appears\nweak to us.\nTurning back to gravity, the extra-dimensions model stems from\ntheoretical research into (mem)brane theories, the multidimensional\nsuccessors to string theories (April 1999 p13). One remarkable\nproperty of these models is that they show that it is quite natural\nand consistent for electromagnetism, the weak force and the\ninter-quark force to be confined to a brane while gravity acts in a\nlarger number of spatial dimensions."\n\nhttp://cerncourier.com/main/article/40/2/6/1\n\nThe ole view of the quark to quark measure revealled a metric field\nfor consideration? Had dimensional significance?\n\nWhat geometrial consideration would arise from U(1)*SU(2)*SU(3) and it\nseemed to me that this rise would have been revealing in the standard\nmodel? Not only the quark to quark measure of that energy in distance,\nbut revealling a spherical consideration, when viewing Greg Egan\'s\nanimations. Rotations?\n\nSorry if it seems I am all over the map, I have never known one\nsubject that could be so diverse and it is only a theory? Nima\'s\nillucidation of a photon of spin 2 quality, as a undertsanding if this\nextra dimension seemed a bit strange to me, as it signalled "a law,"\nwhether he wanted to show this kind of thinking or not, as a\nconsequence of what the future might reveal in string/M theory.\n\nHOPE THIS HELPS CLARIFY THE QUESTION?:)\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>sol2 <sol2@physicsforums.com> wrote in message news:<sol2.15wlbg-100000@physicsforums.com>...

> I have been trying to distill a framework that is consistent
> geometrically from different perspectives, and in looking at
> stringtheory/M Theory.The Monte Carlo effect and the idea of quantum
> gravity from this geometrical consideration.
>
> Is there geometrizational aspect in stringtheory right from the string
> as a point to brane world? Is such a method availiable?
>
> [Moderator's note: I am afraid that it will be difficult for most of us to
> understand this question. LM]

The Klein bottle and the mobius strip are images that are caught in
mind when thinking of chirality and parity in symmetry. What way is
there to remain geometrical consistent in a action that reveals planck
length as something other then what we had been concerned with in
matter considerations in reductionism, has now found its way to energy
determinations?

Klein`s Ordering of the Geometries

"A theorem which is valid for a geometry in this sequence is
automatically valid for the ones that follow. The theorems of
projective geometry are automatically valid theorems of Euclidean
geometry. We say that topological geometry is more abstract than
projective geometry which is turn is more abstract than Euclidean
geometry."

http://www.ensc.sfu.ca/people/grad/brassard/personal/THESIS/node21.html

"Brane World models only carry this unique topology solution a bit
further returning in part, though often modified in present format, to
Klien's solution to the unification of gravity to electromagnetism
through an additional dimensional set. The beauty of this path as we
should rightly call it is that it is a natural progression of
Einstein's dream of a pure geometric explanation for everything we see
around us in nature."

http://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@205.1RfhbYxXZbz.1@.1dde934e/117

http://physicsweb.org/objects/world/13/11/9/pw1311091.gif

"a) Compactifying a 3-D universe with two space dimensions and one
time dimension. This is a simplification of the 5-D space*time
considered by Theodor Kaluza and Oskar Klein. (b) The Lorentz symmetry
of the large dimension is broken by the compactification and all that
remains is 2-D space plus the U(1) symmetry represented by the arrow.
(c) On large scales we see only a 2-D universe (one space plus one
time dimension) with the "internal" U(1) symmetry of
electromagnetism."

http://physicsweb.org/box/world/13/11/9/pw1311091

http://cerncourier.com/objects/2000/cernnews5_3-00.gif

"Of course, if this third dimension were infinite in size, as it is in
our world, then the flatlanders would see a 1/r2 force law between the
charges rather than the 1/r law that they would predict for
electromagnetism confined to a plane. If, on the other hand, the extra
third spatial dimension is of finite size, say a circle of radius R,
then for distances greater than R the flux lines are unable to spread
out any more in the third dimension and the force law tends
asymptotically to what a flatlander physicist would expect: 1/r.
However, the initial spreading of the flux lines into the third
dimension does have a significant effect: the force appears weaker to
a flatlander than is fundamentally the case, just as gravity appears
weak to us.
Turning back to gravity, the extra-dimensions model stems from
theoretical research into (mem)brane theories, the multidimensional
successors to string theories (April 1999 p13). One remarkable
property of these models is that they show that it is quite natural
and consistent for electromagnetism, the weak force and the
inter-quark force to be confined to a brane while gravity acts in a
larger number of spatial dimensions."

http://cerncourier.com/main/article/40/2/6/1

The ole view of the quark to quark measure revealled a metric field
for consideration? Had dimensional significance?

What geometrial consideration would arise from U(1)*SU(2)*SU(3) and it
seemed to me that this rise would have been revealing in the standard
model? Not only the quark to quark measure of that energy in distance,
but revealling a spherical consideration, when viewing Greg Egan's
animations. Rotations?

Sorry if it seems I am all over the map, I have never known one
subject that could be so diverse and it is only a theory? Nima's
illucidation of a photon of spin 2 quality, as a undertsanding if this
extra dimension seemed a bit strange to me, as it signalled "a law,"
whether he wanted to show this kind of thinking or not, as a
consequence of what the future might reveal in string/M theory.

HOPE THIS HELPS CLARIFY THE QUESTION?:)