M-Theory : listing the 11 dimensions

[lillie olson]

another comment on the 2n+1 equation of topology theory: any n-dimension has 2n+1 0-dimensional points. in my opinion, this equation is more powerful than E=mc^2. why? without 2n+1, E=mc^2 would not exist!

 

[lillie olson]

another concept on the topology theory equation of 2n+1: in any n-dimension there is 2n+1 0-dimensional points. in my opinion, this equation is more powerful than E=mc^2. why? without the equation of 2n+1, E=mc^2 would not exist. it gives the existence of something in the presence of nothing. there is no such thing as nothing. in 0 dimension, there is the existence of 1 0-dimensional point. the past, present and future exist in an absolute singularity. i don't believe in the big bang as the creation of the universe, only a perception of a partial reality of existence. a singularity causing infinite mass to collapse into a singularity? what is this mass? it is pure consciousness. a singularity collapsing into a singularity-a black hole? doesn't black hole theory analyzed as a membrane paradigm say that anything past the event horizon, radius 1, of 1.1 is distorted? using the natural logarithm between 1 and 2 concept and its musical implications of wave lengths through 180 degrees being 1 to 2 with the k=1.0595 difference between wavelengths of the 12 semitones. the difference between 1.1 and 2 is 0.9. the 90% of the missing mass of the universe-dark matter?

 

[tangent21]

there are not 11 dimentions.

There are 11 "sets" or "groups" of 11s.

HOWEVER, some are Trigonametry based, and some are Calculus based.

Some are also certain combinations of Trig and Calculus "11"s, unified with algebra "11"s.,

The resulting unified math fields, as well as the physically existing structure itself, MUST then "balance" in a "3-D frame of reference" in order for "String Theory" to become "String Fact".

I STRESS: AND I MEAN STRESS, everything as I have "explained" so far are nouns. Verbs come later.

Summing up: there are only three "measures" to consider so far; Algebra, Calculus, Trig. I STRESS: AND I MEAN STRESS those are also just nouns so far.

All string theories, like all advanced mathematics, have a 3-D "heart", or "frame of reference": where the theories begin, and where they are "propossed" to return for unification. "Unification" is ALWAYS a noun, and should never be considered a verb.

For this thread, let's state "unification" as "Big U"; the ultimate "goal" or "solution", and stop to recognize a major "brain buster" people get "confused" with.

As I read every possible theory I come across, the term: "unify", or the phrase "seeks to unify it all together" create errors in elemetary logic. Both "unifys" are verbs there.

When ANY verb is "referenced" or "defined", most people "start it up" too soon.

We are just gathering "materials" so far. We'll "start" it later.

The statement 11 set of 11 dimensions interests me and I have not seen direct reply to that comment. Does anyone have any more thoughts or is this statement simply wrong?
Thank you

 

[lillie olson]

i have no clue what this guy is talking about. it makes no sense to me.

anyway, if you really want to understand something about the concept of what i was talking about, read a physics book on gravitation, black holes as a membrane paradigm, phi, pi, topology theory and music theory. put the fundamentals all together. sit at a piano or guitar, pluck a string and watch it vibrate through all its oscillations.

 

[zewpals]

Nothing like a good video with absolutely no math :D.

To be honest I kind of think this 11-th dimension shenanigans is rubbish. I don't know why every time they come up with a new theory about space and time they've got to put on another dimension. I feel as if these "dimensions" aren't really anything like the dimensions we experience. Guess we could just throw them in with the whole quantam mechanics mess and just say "anything can happen ". There's my novice opinion.

 

[Fredrik]

The statement 11 set of 11 dimensions interests me and I have not seen direct reply to that comment. Does anyone have any more thoughts or is this statement simply wrong?
Thank you

At least 10-15 posts in this thread are nonsense. I'm going to ask the moderators to do something about it.

 

[George Jones]

This thread has provoked too many speculative, pseudo-scientific, and non-scientific responses, so I have closed it.