Vmedvil2 Posted April 9, 2021 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2021 8 minutes ago, write4u said: I guess you are not familiar with Brian Greene then? Would you lend yourself to crackpottery? Why do you expect other physicists to commit crackpottery? Brian Greene Brian Greene Brian Greene, February 28, 2012 Born Brian Randolph Greene February 9, 1963 (age 58) New York City, U.S. Nationality American Alma mater Harvard University (BA) Magdalen College, Oxford (D.Phil) Known for String theory The Elegant Universe The Fabric of the Cosmos The Hidden Reality Spouse(s) Tracy Day Awards Andrew Gemant Award (2003) Scientific career Fields Physics Institutions Cornell University Columbia University Doctoral advisor Graham G. Ross James Binney https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene What is the equation for a string field and I will give you a pass on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted April 9, 2021 Report Share Posted April 9, 2021 (edited) 21 minutes ago, VictorMedvil said: What is the equation for a string field and I will give you a pass on this? String field theory Quote String field theories come in a number of varieties depending on which type of string is second quantized: Open string field theories describe the scattering of open strings, closed string field theories describe closed strings, while open-closed string field theories include both open and closed strings. Quote In addition, depending on the method used to fix the worldsheet diffeomorphisms and conformal transformations in the original free string theory, the resulting string field theories can be very different. Using light cone gauge, yields light-cone string field theories whereas using BRST quantization, one finds covariant string field theories. There are also hybrid string field theories, known as covariantized light-cone string field theories which use elements of both light-cone and BRST gauge-fixed string field theories.[5] Quote A final form of string field theory, known as background independent open string field theory, takes a very different form; instead of second quantizing the worldsheet string theory, it second quantizes the space of two-dimensional quantum field theories. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_field_theory It appears then that there is no single field equation that describes all fields. I do like the concept of Causal Dynamical Triangulation (CDT), proposed by Renate Loll et al Causal dynamical triangulation (abbreviated as CDT) theorized by Renate Loll, Jan Ambjørn and Jerzy Jurkiewicz, and popularized by Fotini Markopoulou and Lee Smolin, is an approach to quantum gravity that like loop quantum gravity is background independent. Quote This means that it does not assume any pre-existing arena (dimensional space), but rather attempts to show how the spacetime fabric itself evolves. Quote There is evidence [1] that at large scales CDT approximates the familiar 4-dimensional spacetime, but shows spacetime to be 2-dimensional near the Planck scale, and reveals a fractal structure on slices of constant time. These interesting results agree with the findings of Lauscher and Reuter, who use an approach called Quantum Einstein Gravity, and with other recent theoretical work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_dynamical_triangulation Edited April 9, 2021 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil2 Posted April 9, 2021 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2021 (edited) 33 minutes ago, write4u said: String field theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_field_theory It appears then that there is no single field equation that describes all fields. I do like the concept of Causal Dynamical Triangulation (CDT), proposed by Renate Loll et al Causal dynamical triangulation (abbreviated as CDT) theorized by Renate Loll, Jan Ambjørn and Jerzy Jurkiewicz, and popularized by Fotini Markopoulou and Lee Smolin, is an approach to quantum gravity that like loop quantum gravity is background independent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_dynamical_triangulation "String field theory was to be the theory of interacting strings. To describe interacting objects, you need a quantity called the Lagrangian (that's L in Kaku's equation). ... Now Michio Kaku's equation is clear. It is the Lagrangian describing the interaction of strings." I hope this has humbled you, maybe you don't know as much as you think you know, now watch the lectures. Edited April 9, 2021 by VictorMedvil Dubbelosix 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted April 9, 2021 Report Share Posted April 9, 2021 (edited) 49 minutes ago, VictorMedvil said: "String field theory was to be the theory of interacting strings. To describe interacting objects, you need a quantity called the Lagrangian (that's L in Kaku's equation). ... Now Michio Kaku's equation is clear. It is the Lagrangian describing the interaction of strings." I hope this has humbled you, maybe you don't know as much as you think you know, now watch the lectures. Thank you for that explanation, I have run across Kaku's equation but have not yet studied the narrative. As to in-depth knowledge of string theory, as an ex-musician, I never claimed anything but interest in the subject. I will watch the lectures unless you piss me off with unnecessary ad hominem . You will find me quite humble, but I don't like to be humiliated, OK? Edited April 9, 2021 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil2 Posted April 9, 2021 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2021 (edited) 45 minutes ago, write4u said: Thank you for that explanation, I have run across Kaku's equation but have not yet studied the narrative. As to in-depth knowledge of string theory, as an ex-musician, I never claimed anything but interest in the subject. I will watch the lectures unless you piss me off with unnecessary ad hominem . You will find me quite humble, but I don't like to be humiliated, OK? Good Girl! Do you want a biscuit? P.S. hahahaha, I would pay money to see the look on your face when you read this, now go watch the lectures. Edited April 9, 2021 by VictorMedvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted April 9, 2021 Report Share Posted April 9, 2021 3 hours ago, VictorMedvil said: Good Girl! Do you want a biscuit? P.S. hahahaha, I would pay money to see the look on your face when you read this, now go watch the lectures. Bye, bye ..... fool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil2 Posted April 9, 2021 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, write4u said: Bye, bye ..... fool. Success, I got one of the cranks to leave the forums, Victory is MINE! I guess you couldn't handle having to learn "Real Physics". Edited April 9, 2021 by VictorMedvil Dubbelosix 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted April 9, 2021 Report Share Posted April 9, 2021 You give yourself too much credit. I am not leaving this forum, I merely put you on ignore. BTW, your taste in music is atrocious. Click Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasti Posted April 14, 2021 Report Share Posted April 14, 2021 On 4/9/2021 at 12:31 AM, write4u said: I guess you are not familiar with Brian Greene then? Would you lend yourself to crackpottery? Why do you expect other physicists to commit crackpottery? Brian Greene Brian Greene Brian Greene, February 28, 2012 Born Brian Randolph Greene February 9, 1963 (age 58) New York City, U.S. Nationality American Alma mater Harvard University (BA) Magdalen College, Oxford (D.Phil) Known for String theory The Elegant Universe The Fabric of the Cosmos The Hidden Reality Spouse(s) Tracy Day Awards Andrew Gemant Award (2003) Scientific career Fields Physics Institutions Cornell University Columbia University Doctoral advisor Graham G. Ross James Binney https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Greene Wikipedia? Seriously? I cannot believe I actually have to say this here, but ALL wikipedia is conjecture BECAUSE ANYONE can edit the articles contained therein WITHOUT ANY peer-review by research-driven, scholarly or academic people or groups. Therefore it has ZERO weight as proof. This is what is known as an unverifiable citation, which is one of the FIRST THINGS you learn in BASIC English Composition classes REQUIRED for one to even BEGIN to conduct proper research. Did you fail that class or did you simply not attend or? *Rhetorical Question, I Don't Care* If you cannot be bothered to approach science from the PROPER channels, might I suggest a job as a tabloid column blogger? *Again, Rhetorical* ~Rasti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted April 14, 2021 Report Share Posted April 14, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, Rasti said: I cannot believe I actually have to say this here, but ALL wikipedia is conjecture You are wrong! That is not a refutation . Just because some of wiki is conjecture doesn't mean that all of wiki is conjecture. There is no library on earth that deals only with truth and no conjecture. Are there any libraries that have only truth? Get real, all you need to do is separate the wheat from the chaff. Do you believe Brian Greene, a credentialed physicist, would allow falsehoods to be posted? When YouTube posts a live on campus lecture by a credentialed scientists is that conjecture? If you doubt Brian Greene's credentials and his in person "live " lectures, call the Columbia University and ask them if he is a ghost or a real scientist. Do you believe Brian Greene would allow falsehoods to be posted? Edited April 14, 2021 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knothat Posted September 20, 2021 Report Share Posted September 20, 2021 On 8/25/2021 at 3:53 AM, JeffreysTubes8 said: There are three real possible types of time travel. The first is virtual, wherein you simulate history. The second is "cosmic redundancy" where your spacecraft travels at infinite speed googols of light years away where the probability of an identical solar system and human history is 1 in 1. And then there's the one that breaks reality altogether, in the sense of my "retrocausal" interpretation of quantum entanglement that replaces a particles actual history with a new one. This one breaks the mind a bit and where the paradoxes arise, if you use a quantum splicer to teleport a person into the past. Think a timeless decision-theory agent. First option I like more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceanBreeze Posted September 21, 2021 Report Share Posted September 21, 2021 On 3/28/2021 at 1:51 AM, VictorMedvil said: We have all heard about people claiming to be time travelers the following picture is a time travel device posted by one of them, do you think it would actually transfer matter backward in time? To me it just looks like a bunch of parts from a computer and several other devices all jammed together, "To me it just looks like a bunch of parts from a computer and several other devices all jammed together" It is just a pile of electronic junk. I can't believe this generated a thread on time travel! Vmedvil2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil2 Posted September 22, 2021 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2021 (edited) 7 hours ago, OceanBreeze said: "To me it just looks like a bunch of parts from a computer and several other devices all jammed together" It is just a pile of electronic junk. I can't believe this generated a thread on time travel! People are stupid, Oceanbreeze, tell them bullshit and they instantly jump on board, tell them the truth and they give you the middle finger. It is laughable that this piece of **** thread got comments but the (https://www.scienceforums.com/topic/37799-tipler-cylinders-and-the-temporal-paradox-device/) thread got nothing. People would believe a "Fake" Time Travel device, but then say "Oh, A real one, that's bullshit". Edited September 22, 2021 by VictorMedvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted May 22, 2023 Report Share Posted May 22, 2023 (edited) Here is a patent for time travel made in 2004, link = https://patents.google.com/patent/US20060073976?oq=Time+Machine Figure 2 Figure 1 Article 593 added to the scienceforums.com archives on time travel and interdimensional travel. Edited May 22, 2023 by Vmedvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted May 22, 2023 Report Share Posted May 22, 2023 John Titor is gonna be pissed you posted his time machine diagram. Vmedvil 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted May 22, 2023 Report Share Posted May 22, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Moontanman said: John Titor is gonna be pissed you posted his time machine diagram. Lol, Moontanman hopefully I don't get paradoxed to never exist. "This is a paradox — an inconsistency that often leads people to think that time travel cannot occur in our universe." A variation is known as the "grandfather paradox" — in which a time traveler kills their own grandfather, in the process preventing the time traveler's birth." Edited May 22, 2023 by Vmedvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceanBreeze Posted May 22, 2023 Report Share Posted May 22, 2023 1 hour ago, Moontanman said: John Titor is gonna be pissed you posted his time machine diagram. Who is John Titor? When I follow the link I come up with Marlin Pohlman as the inventor. Inventor: Marlin Pohlman Worldwide applications 2004 US Application US10/954,767 Events: 2004-10-01 Application filed by Pohlman Marlin B 2004-10-01 Priority to US10/954,767 2006-04-06 Publication of US20060073976A1 Status: Abandoned He has abandoned his project, even after writing all that Bullshit. He has at least three other oddball patents, all of which are also abandoned. He must have a lot of "time" on his hands! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.