The Elegant Universe questions

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Skhandelwal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around questions and concepts presented in "The Elegant Universe," focusing on topics such as quantum mechanics, string theory, fundamental forces, and the nature of particles and waves. Participants explore theoretical implications, interpretations, and the relationship between mathematics and physical reality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether quantum mechanics necessitates belief in parallel universes, with one suggesting that such ideas are more popular in informal discussions than in mainstream physics.
  • There is a suggestion that additional dimensions in string theory are predominantly spatial.
  • Participants express openness to the possibility of undiscovered fundamental forces, noting a lack of theorems that restrict interactions to known forces.
  • One participant argues that string theory makes significant attempts to connect with reality, despite challenges in deriving measurable predictions.
  • Questions are raised about the nature of negative energy, the distinction between particles and waves, and the concept of radiation.
  • There is curiosity about the mechanism behind space ripping to create wormholes and the unification of forces at the temperature of the Big Bang as described by Greene.
  • A participant expresses a preference for the book over the TV show, suggesting it offers deeper insights.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion features multiple competing views and remains unresolved on several points, particularly regarding the interpretations of quantum mechanics and the implications of string theory.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific interpretations of theories, and there are unresolved questions regarding the definitions and implications of concepts like negative energy and the nature of forces at high temperatures.

Skhandelwal
Messages
400
Reaction score
3
"The Elegant Universe" questions

Does quantum mechanics really believe in parallel universe? Do all the physicist have to accept this as the mainstream theory?

Are the other dimensions in the String Theory spatial?

Is it possible for the universe to have more undiscovered fundamental forces?

What causes strings to vibrate in the M theory? And how do we know about their shape? Also, how can something be circular like rubber band if it is only 1 dimensional?

Even though, string theory is very consistent due to mathematics...would it still be considered a philosophy since it makes to attempts to connect to reality?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Skhandelwal said:
Does quantum mechanics really believe in parallel universe?
No. Rumors claim that some interpretations of it did, though.
Do all the physicist have to accept this as the mainstream theory?
QM? Yes. Parallel universes as necessary for qm? I've never heard a physicist claiming that. Parallel universes are mostly popular in boards like this one.

Are the other dimensions in the String Theory spatial?
Most if not all additional dimensions postulated in whatever bsm theories, including string approaches, are spatial.

Is it possible for the universe to have more undiscovered fundamental forces?
Yes. At least I wouldn't know of any theorem restricting the fundamental interactions to those we already know.

Even though, string theory is very consistent due to mathematics...would it still be considered a philosophy since it makes to attempts to connect to reality?
Assuming you meant "no attempts": I would say that string theory does a lot of attempts to connect to reality and experimental results. It is a bit naive to think the stringers wouldn't know themselves that measurable predictions are important.
I think the problem is more with the complication of doing so and the triviality of the results. If a result is either an electron with a mass of 1 kg or realistic particle masses with no further distinctions from some simpler theory for realistically feasible experiments, then the former result is obviously wrong and the latter result cannot lead to an experimental evidence for string theory.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the answer, here are a few more questions inspired by watching "the elegant universe".

What is negative energy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_particle

What is a particle? What is a wave? What is the diff.btw them? What is a radiation? What is the diff. btw wave and radiation?

In the Elegant Universe, Greene talks about how space fabric rips creating a wormhole. How can the space rip?

Greene also claims that at the temperature when big bang occurred, electromagnetism, strong and weak nuclear forces were united. How?

Thanx a lot.
 
Skhandelwal said:
Thanks for the answer, here are a few more questions inspired by watching "the elegant universe".
Oh - you watched it.

After being so excited to tape it, I didn't even sit through the TV show once I saw how perfunctory it was.

You should read the book. It is 100x more illuminating than the TV show - like the diff between a trailer for a movie - and the movie itself. I found it one of the most mind-stretching books I've read.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K