Andy MacMartin Wrote:I just read the intro and the conclusions.
So did i and it made my poor brain hurt.
I consider myself (and am considered by others) quite an intelligent person, but this stuff goes way over my head. I guess i haven't got that extra nerd gene some of you have obviously got
I'm off for a long rest
Andy MacMartin Wrote:I just read the intro and the conclusions.
Think the dimensions of my brains warped slightly when I read those parts
So the topology of our universe could explain the amount of dimensions we have, right?
Topology Determines Geometry Wrote:We argue that if this Casimir energy has certain features, then it is possible, at least in toy models, to (1) stabilize the extra dimensions, (2) allow three dimensions to grow large, and (3) provide an effective dark energy in the large dimensions.
It worked on their toys...so
Interesting to me was, that I had the perception there always were 4 dimensions. 3 fysical and the time dimension. I have read about the string and dark matter theories in the past, The String theory has *alot* of dimensions, however the string itself is 2d? (something with Einsteins timecurve?, it's been over 2 years since I've been reading that).
Topology Determines Geometry Wrote:Explaining the existence of 3 large dimensions may thus reduce to explaining the topology of the universe.
I've been discovering that there's a real argument that everything derives from geometry. So this is really interesting in that it says that geometry in turn stems from topology. Maybe not on the deepest ultimate level, I don't think this paper goes quite that far. But at least that the particular type of geometry we see in an actual universe (i.e. the number of dimensions that are large in that universe) is derivative. It depends on the particular topology of that universe.
And if I remember correctly, the most widely accepted superstring theory has 11 dimensions, 4 of which are large (i.e. we perceive them as basically unlimited or everywhere), and 7 of which are compactified. I've never been too clear on where they actually are if they're compactified! I guess they are everywhere, but so small they can barely be detected. But I'm not sure of that one.
And I agree with Stu when he says there's a certain kind of nerdy way of thinking about things. When I was an undergraduate I took an introductory anthropology course with a guy who lived in the same house as I did. He barely got through the course, but then went on to get a Ph.D. in another less nerdy field, and was a BIG success in the business world (and eventually married the most beautiful girl in our law school, the bastard!).
It's probably obvious to you guys, but I'm realizing that being quick in nKP has as much to do with intelligence and subtlety as it does with physical tools. So I've been assuming you guys are all quite smart to be as quick as you are.
There aren't many people I can talk to about this nerdy stuff, so I'm grateful that you guys will sometimes play along with me on it.
Andy MacMartin Wrote:And if I remember correctly, the most widely accepted superstring theory has 11 dimensions, 4 of which are large (i.e. we perceive them as basically unlimited or everywhere), and 7 of which are compactified. I've never been too clear on where they actually are if they're compactified! I guess they are everywhere, but so small they can barely be detected. But I'm not sure of that one.
Wikipedia Wrote:A standard analogy for this is to consider multidimensional space as a garden hose. If the hose is viewed from a sufficient distance, it appears to have only one dimension, its length. Indeed, think of a ball just small enough to enter the hose. Throwing such a ball inside the hose, the ball would move more or less in one dimension; in any experiment we make by throwing such balls in the hose, the only important movement will be one-dimensional, that is, along the hose. However, as one approaches the hose, one discovers that it contains a second dimension, its circumference. Thus, an ant crawling inside it would move in two dimensions (and a fly flying in it would move in three dimensions). This "extra dimension" is only visible within a relatively close range to the hose, or if one "throws in" small enough objects. Similarly, the extra compact dimensions are only visible at extremely small distances, or by experimenting with particles with extremely small wavelengths (of the order of the compact dimension's radius), which in quantum mechanics means very high energies (see wave-particle duality).
Don´t know if a wikipedia entry is very reliable but that does sound like a possible explanation.
Edit: Happened to find
this blog entry with links to some interesting video lectures. Going to check out some of them today probably.
Andy MacMartin Wrote:So I've been assuming you guys are all quite smart to be as quick as you are.
Who´s paying you to say all these compliments about us?
But I do agree that there´s some intelligence needed in racing. You need to know a bit about physics and stuff to properly set up the car for instance, understand weight shifts etc.
Juha Wrote:Who´s paying you to say all these compliments about us?
I am a bit of a cheerleader type I guess
. But seriously, folks, I kind of feel that if you have something good to say, why not say it once in a while
Juha Wrote:nerdy cheerleader?
I like that better than nerdy lawyer, actually
Finished watching the
Elegant Universe miniseries mentioned in the blog entry I linked to earlier. As I haven´t looked into the string theory much before, watching that series did explain it really well IMO. Bet there´s more as interesting series as that one in their
archives.