0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
so I presume string theorists refrain from addressing anything that might be smaller [than the Planck length].
I thought the whole idea of string theory was to address sub-Planck level physics.
Quote from: DoctorBeaver on 04/12/2008 15:21:00I thought the whole idea of string theory was to address sub-Planck level physics.more commonly known as "under-the-floor" physics
Don't expect any answers from string theory. 20 years on and still nothing testable has been described.
Clearly, I've seriously misunderstood string theory, then. I've had the idea that it's intended to unify gravity with the other forces and that it approaches the problem by treating gravity, the other forces, matter, energy, and spacetime as quantum phenomena.
Hadronic string theory was discarded years ago, wasn't it? I thought modern string theory is an attempt to reconcile QT with GR. That must involve gravity.
Quoteie the detailed macro and microscopic processes involved in the collapse of a rotating black hole inside it's event horizon
ie the detailed macro and microscopic processes involved in the collapse of a rotating black hole inside it's event horizon
QuoteSo you can use computational fluid dynamics, relativistic orbit theory, quantum and high energy particle interaction theory to describe the process of collapse in some detail until conditions get too extreme
So you can use computational fluid dynamics, relativistic orbit theory, quantum and high energy particle interaction theory to describe the process of collapse in some detail until conditions get too extreme
My argument is that this process of collapse will take some time and show some interesting and enlightening things before we reach the stage we cannot model using well understood processes. Also that if you then look at the structures you get from the point if view of the particles in them (not from outside) the results will be very revealing.Basically you will get particles orbiting together with very high energies unaware of any gravitational field or gravitational gradient because they are in free fall but the energies of the particles are all very similar so the particles are essentially cold with respect to each other. Because of relativistic and gravitational distortion space has contracted and become one dimensional and time like while "time" has expanded to become multidimensional and space like. As far as the particles are concerned this would look very much like a big bang with space expanding very uniformly and evenly without the need for mystic inflation.
I'm having trouble understanding what it means when the expansion of the universe is explained in terms of expanding spacetime.One way to cure my confusion might be to approach the problem in terms of string theory which, as I understand it, supposes spacetime is quantized. In this framework, then, does the expansion of space result from:a. The quanta are moving further apart. But, if so, what's in between them?b. The quanta are packed together perfectly and nothing is between them -- they're getting bigger. But, if so, what's inside them, and how is it getting bigger? Seems to me this answer leads to a nested-dolls problem.c. The quanta are packed perfectly, nothing is between them, and they aren't getting bigger. (Perhaps their size is dictated by a fundamental constant.) Instead, new quanta are "bubbling" into existence from nowhere, shouldering the existing quanta apart and thereby creating more space. This isn't forbidden because no matter or energy is being created. But, if this is happening, the reverse process should work too, so what's causing the asymmetry?d. Something else I haven't thought of.
Listen, when you're surrounded by German humour all day, you take it where you can...