Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ π -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**Lazernugget****Member**- Registered: 2011-01-22
- Posts: 47

As a kid who LOVES science, I am always trying to come up with new inventions, theories, and such...So here's an un-defined physics mystery Part 1:

1) An open question in fundamental physics is the so-called information loss paradox, or black hole unitarity paradox. Classically, the laws of physics are the same run forward or in reverse (T-symmetry). Liouville's theorem dictates conservation of phase space volume, which can be thought of as "conservation of information", so there is some problem even in classical physics. In quantum mechanics, this corresponds to a vital property called unitarity, which has to do with the conservation of probability (it can also be thought of as a conservation of quantum phase space volume as expressed by the density matrix).

2) Why does the predicted mass of the quantum vacuum have little effect on the expansion of the universe?

3) Does nature have more than four spacetime dimensions? If so, what is their size? Are dimensions a fundamental property of the universe or an emergent result of other physical laws? Can we experimentally "see" evidence of higher spatial dimensions?

4) Is the universe heading towards a Big Freeze, a Big Rip, a Big Crunch or a Big Bounce? Is our universe part of an infinitely recurring cyclic model?

So...I plan on writing a paper about this stuff when I can, and I would like to discuss this....start!

MATH......that is all.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 91,535

Hi;

3) String theorists who now dominate particle physics believe in at least 11 spatial dimensions. Started with a paper sent to Albert Einstein by I do not remember who. There is I believe no experimental proof of any part of string theory just ask Sheldon Glashow. According to string theorists they do not reequire any.

4) I think when they finally answer that they are going to come to the conclusion that it is a cycle of big bang followed by big crunch followed by big bang ... Forever!

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.**

**I agree with you regarding the satisfaction and importance of actually computing some numbers. I can't tell you how often I see time and money wasted because someone didn't bother to run the numbers.**

Offline

**Lazernugget****Member**- Registered: 2011-01-22
- Posts: 47

Ah yes...very true....

MATH......that is all.

Offline

**All_Is_Number****Member**- Registered: 2006-07-10
- Posts: 258

bobbym wrote:

String theorists who now dominate particle physics believe in at least 11 spatial dimensions. Started with a paper sent to Albert Einstein by I do not remember who. There is I believe no experimental proof of any part of string theory just ask Sheldon Glashow. According to string theorists they do not reequire any.

It's rather ironic that, until such time that *testable* hypotheses are developed to test string theory, it lies outside the realm of science!

*You can shear a sheep many times but skin him only once.*

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 91,535

Hi;

Yes, that is Sheldon's argument. He is right in asserting it is not physics at all. He calls it Witten theory!

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.**

**I agree with you regarding the satisfaction and importance of actually computing some numbers. I can't tell you how often I see time and money wasted because someone didn't bother to run the numbers.**

Offline

**Lazernugget****Member**- Registered: 2011-01-22
- Posts: 47

bobbym wrote:

4) I think when they finally answer that they are going to come to the conclusion that it is a cycle of big bang followed by big crunch followed by big bang ... Forever!

That's what the big bounce is....

MATH......that is all.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 91,535

Yes, such cutesy terms. If it all started in a singularity smaller than the head of a pin or smaller. If for no apparent reason that stable singularity suddenly decided to expand into the universe as we know it, and if there is enough matter to eventually stop the expansion of space then there is no reason to believe that it can not happen again and again. Or that it may have already happened an untold number of times. The Hindu's refer to it as a cycle like breathing.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.**

**I agree with you regarding the satisfaction and importance of actually computing some numbers. I can't tell you how often I see time and money wasted because someone didn't bother to run the numbers.**

Offline