Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Inspired questions from a Kaku interview.

  1. May 8, 2004 #1
    Hi there everybody. I heard an interview recently, that was done with Michio Kaku (www.mkaku.org) and InfidelGuy (www.InfidelGuy.com) - you can listen to the interview on the frontpage in case you need a reference for my question.

    The interview was basically about String Theory! Kaku made the following statement:

    "SST is a physics beyond physics" and described how the possible variations of SST compile into one "set" of physics, depending on the strings values. And thus we have one "set" of physics, ours, from which this is the basis of physics.

    And in part as you will hear, he mentioned multiverse, and related this to how the other universes "set of physics" would be the other derivatives of compiled sets of physics from SST.

    So, my question is, how many - and what kind - of properties are their that need chosen values in SST that determin a "set of physics" ?

    And in general, i was hoping some people here would know more about this so i can learn more. If you listen to the interview - it's 100% free on the frontpage, perhaps you can teach me more!

    Thanks!
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2004
  2. jcsd
  3. May 8, 2004 #2
    By The Way, I got here because of that interview but I have read Kaku before this.

    And my name is the two names of my cats "Boz" and "Eon"...!

    If you want you can call me Boz.
     
  4. May 9, 2004 #3
    Anyone know if this is a published claim as well or did he just explain it differently than usual? Or maybe people don't really know about this? It's a rather specific subject I guess!
     
  5. May 9, 2004 #4

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Kaku may have been describing the many vacua situation with M-theory. At least some of the vacua are inequavalent, which means there would be different physics between them. There has been some discussion about this, as Susskind and others have claimed this makes string/M physics unfalsifiable. See "Not Even Wrong".
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Inspired questions from a Kaku interview.
Loading...