| Author |
Message
|
| streamSystems |
 Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:31 am Post subject: would a possible G.U.T. end or enhance experimentation |
 |
|
Banned
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 950
Location: a reality you have all yet to properly explain
|
Would any Grand Unified Theory, theory of all things, whatever it would be called.......would it enhance our drive to experiment with space-time, or end it?
_________________
Does a theory of everything therefore need to be purely theoretical and only account for the known laws and forces in handling the improbability of fortune telling?
the www feature below can explain it better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Ophiolite |
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 4062
Location: Scotland
|
I'd like you define what you mean by 'experiment with space-time' by providing say three examples of current or recent experiments in space-time.
_________________
The Universe is not only weirder than we imagine it is weirder than we can imagine. J.B.S.Haldane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| streamSystems |
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Banned
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 950
Location: a reality you have all yet to properly explain
|
Before I answer that question, my real question was "given that most of our research and experimentation seeks that mythical space-time equation and understanding"......."would there be anything left for us to research AFTER we find that mythical figure of understanding".
It's like finding God, technically.............would, after finding God, we research God, constantly, this science God.........would we ask if that science God was allowed to bestow interesting God like ideas to other potentially yet to be released family members?
I could name three different magazines that propose research and experimentation relavent to a myriad of different research projects into space-time. But, simply, three research projects: research into into subatomic particles (subatgomic particle physics), into gravity (ask any covert aerospace agency), and black holes (astrophysics).
I think the finding of the G.U.T. will lead to faster turn-over of research and experiments, allowing for more different type of applications of the science to be explored, and thus a more thorough and juxtaposed reality of science as it equates with our living and working environment. I actually think it will be a new renaissance.
_________________
Does a theory of everything therefore need to be purely theoretical and only account for the known laws and forces in handling the improbability of fortune telling?
the www feature below can explain it better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ophiolite |
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 4062
Location: Scotland
|
| streamSystems wrote: |
| Before I answer that question, my real question was "given that most of our research and experimentation seeks that mythical space-time equation and understanding"......."would there be anything left for us to research AFTER we find that mythical figure of understanding". |
I don't agree with your fundamental premise. If you sum up the research involved in genetics, medicine, biology in general, earth sciences, planetary astronomy, etc it outweighs (in any terms - dollars, papers published, researchers) the research to find 'a theory of everything'.
| stream systems wrote: |
| would there be anything left for us to research AFTER we find that mythical figure of understanding |
Tons.
We would still be left with three massive areas of research:
1) Why are the equations and the constants what they are?
2) What are the causes, consequences and character of emergent properties?
3) What other emergent properties of the Universe might not yet have emerged?
As a side note, your phrase 'investigations in space-time' would have made more sense to me (a personal observation) if you had said 'investigations in fundamental physics (& cosmology)'.
_________________
The Universe is not only weirder than we imagine it is weirder than we can imagine. J.B.S.Haldane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| streamSystems |
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Banned
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 950
Location: a reality you have all yet to properly explain
|
But, I would rank "space-time" ahead of physics, that's the thing.
"Space-time" as a concept is the prize, physics is merely a path to understanding space-time.
I think it is possible to arrive at a G.U.T if the "envelope" parameters of space-time were considered and were ONLY considered in a general equation........"zero" and "infinity" for space and time..........in that general equation. Why? Because, like you, I know the never-endingness of research and calculation. That is why I have played with a theory that only researches the "envelope" of space and time, putting zero and infinity into a general equation for space and time to establish the zer and infinity parameters of space and time and their associated laws. I mean, if that theory could explain the "fundamental" forces of space and time, gee, I am thinking some would give that a "pass" than a fail.
I admire you, you know, you are very patriotic to your profession. I wish I had that.
_________________
Does a theory of everything therefore need to be purely theoretical and only account for the known laws and forces in handling the improbability of fortune telling?
the www feature below can explain it better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
