Gene Partlow
May16-04, 04:03 PM
<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>The related posts "String theory and quark families" reminds me of a old con-\njecture of mine...\n\nIt seems possible, at least at first glance, that the different Calabi-Yau spaces\nwith uniquely different hole numbers (topologies) each represent a physically\nrealized class of universe. There are possibly an infinite number of such\ndifferent and distinct CY spaces, each mediating a distinct number of families\nof fermions, with distinct properties.\n\nOurs would probably match some CY space with three-hole topology, and yet\nthere would probably be (infinitely?) many CY spaces having 3-hole topology.\n\n[Query: Would any one of these having 3-hole topology, say, be able to naturally\nphase into another in the same set? If so, that might suggest continual CY tran-\nsitions as any given universe expands and develops.]\n\nIf, as many have conjectured, our universe were able to generate baby uni-\nverses, these offspring might arguably share the same distinct 3-hole topology\nas their parent. This suggests the dizzying possibility that there might be an\ninfinity of universe lineages, each lineage having an infinite set of universe\nbranes, characterized by a distinct, unique topology (eg: 3-hole). Ie: No special\nCY space would be the only correct one for forming a universe. They all are,\nalthough it might turn out that each lineage would be physically completely dis-\njoint from all the others, and thus to that extent would be nondetectable from\nwithin any other lineage.\n\nWe then would simply be one universe (brane) in one of those lineages. Our\nlineage would have three basic fermion families. Others would have more or\nless than three, whose properties at this point would be anybody\'s guess.\n\nI have a hunch that there can be many permutations of this kind of conjecture,\nnot necessarily all of them compatible. ;-)\n\nCheers,\nGene\n\n\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>The related posts "String theory and quark families" reminds me of a old con-
jecture of mine...
It seems possible, at least at first glance, that the different Calabi-Yau spaces
with uniquely different hole numbers (topologies) each represent a physically
realized class of universe. There are possibly an infinite number of such
different and distinct CY spaces, each mediating a distinct number of families
of fermions, with distinct properties.
Ours would probably match some CY space with three-hole topology, and yet
there would probably be (infinitely?) many CY spaces having 3-hole topology.
[Query: Would any one of these having 3-hole topology, say, be able to naturally
phase into another in the same set? If so, that might suggest continual CY tran-
sitions as any given universe expands and develops.]
If, as many have conjectured, our universe were able to generate baby uni-
verses, these offspring might arguably share the same distinct 3-hole topology
as their parent. This suggests the dizzying possibility that there might be an
infinity of universe lineages, each lineage having an infinite set of universe
branes, characterized by a distinct, unique topology (eg: 3-hole). Ie: No special
CY space would be the only correct one for forming a universe. They all are,
although it might turn out that each lineage would be physically completely dis-
joint from all the others, and thus to that extent would be nondetectable from
within any other lineage.
We then would simply be one universe (brane) in one of those lineages. Our
lineage would have three basic fermion families. Others would have more or
less than three, whose properties at this point would be anybody's guess.
I have a hunch that there can be many permutations of this kind of conjecture,
not necessarily all of them compatible. ;-)
Cheers,
Gene
jecture of mine...
It seems possible, at least at first glance, that the different Calabi-Yau spaces
with uniquely different hole numbers (topologies) each represent a physically
realized class of universe. There are possibly an infinite number of such
different and distinct CY spaces, each mediating a distinct number of families
of fermions, with distinct properties.
Ours would probably match some CY space with three-hole topology, and yet
there would probably be (infinitely?) many CY spaces having 3-hole topology.
[Query: Would any one of these having 3-hole topology, say, be able to naturally
phase into another in the same set? If so, that might suggest continual CY tran-
sitions as any given universe expands and develops.]
If, as many have conjectured, our universe were able to generate baby uni-
verses, these offspring might arguably share the same distinct 3-hole topology
as their parent. This suggests the dizzying possibility that there might be an
infinity of universe lineages, each lineage having an infinite set of universe
branes, characterized by a distinct, unique topology (eg: 3-hole). Ie: No special
CY space would be the only correct one for forming a universe. They all are,
although it might turn out that each lineage would be physically completely dis-
joint from all the others, and thus to that extent would be nondetectable from
within any other lineage.
We then would simply be one universe (brane) in one of those lineages. Our
lineage would have three basic fermion families. Others would have more or
less than three, whose properties at this point would be anybody's guess.
I have a hunch that there can be many permutations of this kind of conjecture,
not necessarily all of them compatible. ;-)
Cheers,
Gene