"String theory is a model of fundamental physics whose building blocks are one-dimensional extended objects (strings) rather than the zero-dimensional points (particles) that are the basis of the Standard Model of particle physics."

I tried to explain it to someone myself and no matter how hard I tried he wouldn't understand anything over the 4th dimension saying it was bullshit (perhaps it is...). So well this flash is a great explanation to the String Theory, I recommand watching it if you have time on your hand.

http://tenthdimension.com/flash2.php

thedeadhaji

39489 Posts

December 07 2006 08:50 GMT

the leading string theorists are now starting to think that string theory wont hold up though.

Smurg

Australia3818 Posts

December 07 2006 08:51 GMT

On December 07 2006 17:50 thedeadhaji wrote:
the leading string theorists are now starting to think that string theory wont hold up though.

Ahh, scissor theory.

Mindcrime

United States6899 Posts

December 07 2006 08:51 GMT

String Theory is all but dead. M Theory is where it's at.

Kennigit

Canada19447 Posts

December 07 2006 08:52 GMT

If you are interested in this and have time, you should watch Elegant Universe here

pr0n

United States277 Posts

December 07 2006 08:53 GMT

On December 07 2006 17:48 oddeye wrote:
"String theory is a model of fundamental physics whose building blocks are one-dimensional extended objects (strings) rather than the zero-dimensional points (particles) that are the basis of the Standard Model of particle physics."

I tried to explain it to someone myself and no matter how hard I tried he wouldn't understand anything over the 4th dimension saying it was bullshit (perhaps it is...). So well this flash is a great explanation to the String Theory, I recommand watching it if you have time on your hand.

http://tenthdimension.com/flash2.php

Since it is physically impossible for the human mind to visually comprehend anything beyond the 3rd spacial dimension, that would be the likely response by most people.

Also, welcome to the 1990s.

dancefayedance!~

396 Posts

December 07 2006 09:00 GMT

pretty neat.. going to buy the book tomorrow

Haemonculus

United States6980 Posts

December 07 2006 09:01 GMT

My skull hurts.

sith

United States2474 Posts

December 07 2006 09:02 GMT

Yeah...been there done that.

Go read Brian Greene's books. Elegant Universe + The Fabric of the Cosmos. Very informative.

useLess

United States4781 Posts

December 07 2006 09:03 GMT

#10

String theory... I saw the program for it like three and a half years ago. My interest in it has waned since.

ieatkids5

United States4628 Posts

December 07 2006 09:10 GMT

#11

On December 07 2006 17:51 Smurg wrote:

Show nested quote +

Ahh, scissor theory.

Rofl

Just curious - why don't they think the string theory will hold up?

HeadBangaa

United States6512 Posts

December 07 2006 09:22 GMT

#12

Interesting stuff. I watched the presentation up until the explanation of the 7th dimension, where I rcognized the pattern forming...

So... invoking "string theory" is when you explain physical phenomenon in the context of n-dimensions, where 1<n<10 ?

Just sounds like a formal definition of reference points. I thought string theory was, well, highly theoretical. If I'm right (which I'm probably not, this is my first exposure to details on the topic), it simply looks like a method to reduce verbose explanations of conditional branches with respect to time.

skyglow1

New Zealand3962 Posts

December 07 2006 09:23 GMT

#13

I understood the explanantion for 4th dimension, but beyond that its too hard to really visualize or understand. Cool stuff anyway

EAGER-beaver

Canada2799 Posts

December 07 2006 09:29 GMT

#14

It's important to note that this is all theoretical, Brian Greene himself has written that string theory/m theory whatever the latest version is called, is nothing more than a complicated game of dungeons and dragons until it's proven with physical experimentation. Probing stuff at the plank length where the hidden 7 spatial dimensions that the theory proposes are hidden isn't feasible. I forget the exact amount of energy required to do so, but it's somewhere along the lines of all the energy in our entire galaxy would be required. The first indications of wether or not string theory is on the right track will most likely come from the new CERN atom smasher that should come on line in 2007. It'll be able to reach energy levels capable of producing super symmetric particles that are predicted by string theory. If super symmetric particles don't start popping out it doesn't debunk the theory, it just sets it back so keep your fingers crossed :/

garandou

Germany518 Posts

December 07 2006 10:36 GMT

#15

As my math prof used to say: Imagining higher dimensions is easy. First, you have one dimension. The second dimension is perpendicular to the first one, the third dimension is perpendicular to the second dimension. Now, the fourth dimension is simply perpendicular to the third dimension, the fifth perpendicular to the fourth, and so on....

aseq

Netherlands3977 Posts

December 07 2006 10:44 GMT

#16

On December 07 2006 19:36 garandou wrote:
As my math prof used to say: Imagining higher dimensions is easy. First, you have one dimension. The second dimension is perpendicular to the first one, the third dimension is perpendicular to the second dimension. Now, the fourth dimension is simply perpendicular to the third dimension, the fifth perpendicular to the fourth, and so on....

Every next dimension is perpendicular to ALL preceding ones, otherwise some could coincide.

ic.Ichigo101

United States152 Posts

December 07 2006 10:46 GMT

#17

this is bullshit no offend to all u guys but we are in the matrix

KodoU-

United States129 Posts

December 07 2006 10:48 GMT

#18

First off, I dont even understand, What is 1D. I know 2D and 3D but not 1D, and your math prof. Did he ever try to convince you parallel lines can cross? because, mine tried, and im still stumped.

azndsh

United States4447 Posts

December 07 2006 10:51 GMT

#19

String theory is one possible explanation to the way things work. Some guy came up with it, and decided that it wasn't completely contradicted by the observable universe. Still I think it's too complicated to be right.

On December 07 2006 19:44 aseq wrote:

Show nested quote +

Every next dimension is perpendicular to ALL preceding ones, otherwise some could coincide.

That's because you're restricting yourself to three dimensions, thus they don't coincide when you add new dimensions.