The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Could particle spin and mass be momentum in higher dimensions?  (Read 3170 times)

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
I've been reading about Ed Witten at the Strings '95 conference. Oooh, that man's brainy. In fact, he's so smart I reckon he must be part beaver!  :D

He gobsmacked the audience at Strings '95 by showing that, at low-energies, 10-dimensional superstring theory is equivalent to 11-dimensional supergravity. He equated momentum in the 11th dimension of supergravity as charge in the 10-dimensional superstring theory - and that got me thinking.

Could other properties of particles, such as spin and mass, also be the result of momentum in higher dimensions?


 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
It's an interesting and plausible idea.  There are a lot of possible ways to map stuff in different numbers of dimensions to other different numbers of dimensions.  Working them all out and coming up with a consistent overview is tricky though.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
You mean it's not a completely numpty idea?  [:o)]

What the book I'm reading doesn't explain is why he equated momentum with charge; why not some other property of the particle? That's what made me start wondering.

Quote
Working them all out and coming up with a consistent overview is tricky though.

Well what are you waiting for?  :P
« Last Edit: 19/06/2008 07:18:33 by DoctorBeaver »
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
The explanation is the tricky part ;D

Well, I only got as far as looking at what movement meant and required, which in turn started to imply a lot of things...

There's a thread I started here but I'm not going to link to it...  Anyone interested enough can search for it.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
What a cop out!
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Yup ;D

The problem, I think, is that you end up having to deal with lowest order phenomena that can't be explained in even lower order phenomena because by definition, they don't exist.  The only way around this is to introduce new arbitrary fundimental laws that appear to fit and work but cannot be further resolved.  Sort of: it's that way because that's the way it is and it won't work any other way.

The trouble is, in science, that we want to reduce the number of fundimental laws as much as possible - adding new ones is going in the wrong direction.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
we want to reduce the number of fundimental laws as much as possible - adding new ones is going in the wrong direction.


Tell that to our government!
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Heh - you mean our elected representatives, who strangly seem to represent no one but themselves?
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
The very same
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums