Edward Witten wins Newton medal
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum Gravity 399.96: SGNCHG and 1ERASE, 1ADD Operators Relate to Boundedness Change
Next: missing mass with its solid-body-rotation conundrum solved Chapt 4 #214; ATOM TOTALITY
From: bert on 6 Jul 2010 18:24 On Jul 6, 11:49 am, Raymond Yohros <b...(a)birdband.net> wrote: > On Jul 5, 11:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On 7/5/10 7:25 PM, Raymond Yohros wrote: > > > > On Jul 5, 9:28 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On 7/5/10 8:39 AM, bert wrote: > > > >>> On Jul 4, 7:17 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> On 7/4/10 5:06 PM, bert wrote: > > > >>>>> On Jul 2, 12:48 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>> Edward Witten wins Newton medal > > >>>>>> String theorist honoured for transforming physicshttp://physicsworld.com/cws/m/1780/17632/article/news/43054 > > > >>>>> Sam When Witten talks people come from all over the world and listen. > > >>>>> He has made string theory closer to reality TreBert > > > >>>> Has he proposed a testable prediction? > > > >>> Well Witten has a wife that's good company(Chiarra Nappi) She is also > > >>> a physist at the instatute.I would say at this point Witten proposes > > >>> that M-theory with the physics it embodies will pave a road that will > > >>> map a better understanding of the universe. Kind of a unification of > > >>> SR GR QM supersymmetry and even extra dimensions. Only Witten& > > >>> wife can do all that.I would like to help. Ooops my ego is showing > > >>> TreBert > > > >> You seemed to have forgotten the question, Herb--Has Witten > > >> proposed a testable prediction with M-theory? > > > > M-theory was a moshroom trip > > > is he closer to the true nature of the string ? > > > i have not read he's latest work > > > > regards > > > r.y > > > Is there a testable prediction? > > i did not read he's last work? > does he still believe in 10 dimentions!!!??? > or is it 11?? > > r.y- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I think he has said some of the demensions are just repeats,and he now has 6 or 7 TreBert
From: spudnik on 6 Jul 2010 21:36 of course, there are testabilities, but I've forgotten what they were (not my main interest, or I should say, at the *level* of my main interest, which is "high school geometry a la Hypsicles"). as for 11 dimensions, there is nothing wrong with that, even if you don't consider them as merely "configuration spaces" in variational mechanics e.g. (incuding infinite-d. hilbert space); look, no-one ever bothered to say "boo" about the original stringtheory, Kaluza's 5d representation of Maxwell's equations. and it is perfectly ligitimate (although perhaps Klein's addition, of a "compacted dimension to go with the four of 'spacetime,' was totally unnecessary .-) thus&so: the other one -- which he apparently also removed from his next rewrite of the book -- was that they were inadequately trained to fly a 757 into a building (but, most accidents occur at take-off & landing, so....) anyway, the pancake theory was not even wrong, so it is effectively a strawman -- that the Truthers believe in, categorically, because it seems to mean that free-fall is unattainable, except by "controlled demo." thus&so: it ain't the unions; it is the British cap&trade condominiums (ICE, CCX etc. ad vomitorium), and their slogan from the Kyoto Protocol, Beyondish Petroleumish (tm); hey, you can't get blood from a porous rock, but, apparently, you can get "fossilized fuel (tm)" from one. call your broker *before* Waxman's bill is passed by the Senate -- they are under *huge* pressure, with the silly/fake anti-cap&tax editorials from the WSUrinal and the teaparty (they believe, taxation without representation was the biggest issue of the Revolution .-) thus&so: yes; like, Shackleton et al's study, although I don't think that they really noticed or noted that. also, see G. Woillard's "Abrupt Collapse of the Eemian Interglacial, *sensu strictu*," via palynology, showing retrogressive vegetational succession (or desertification) in Grand Pile, France. > hot spells and cold spells presage the onset of glaciation. thus&so: a-hem, "note" the number of scientists explaining why, antarctica has cooled -- cooled? just as with the Arctic ice, all of it floating, maybe you are referring ot the Larsen Ice Shelf, sticking out on the peninsula, into the weather differentials. > explanations of why Antarctica has actually cooled. > http://www.scar.org/publications/occasionals/ACCE_25_Nov_2009.pdf > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8387137.stm thus&so: the models are very sparse grids, with heuristical connections between the hydrosphere, atmosphere & lithosphere e.g., if at all. then, the floating-point spec (IEEE-754, -854, I think) is inherently chaotic -- and variously implimented. OK, seriously; who is working for BP and my broker, here, on the cap&trade portfolio? thus&so: lies, polls & statistics. like the "skeptical statistician" said, in *The [Holy] Economist* newsmagazine (a.k.a. the voice of the British Foreign Office), cold kills far oftener than heat in this world ... although there could be some cool physiological reason for that. so, why do you believe that BP and other oilcos are against cap&trade -- they hate money? --BP's Next (or Last) Bailout of Wall St. and the City (of London, the gated community & financial district), CAP and TRADE (circa '91, Waxman's Acid Rain bill) --http://wlym.com
From: Raymond Yohros on 8 Jul 2010 11:58
On Jul 6, 4:32 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 1, 11:48 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Edward Witten wins Newton medal > > String theorist honoured for transforming physicshttp://physicsworld.com/cws/m/1780/17632/article/news/43054 > > It's probably fairer to say that he's honored for trying to get string > theory to be a theory, and has got a bunch of people moving in that > direction. > but when will it get real! will they get back to reality with simple 3d strings? by making up all those dimensions they are really missing the true nature of the string with obscure math i mean you see theorists making up particles that may be wet dreams to explain spacetimes flow but making up dimensions? r.y |