Einstein's unified field theory

[natenut]

I don't know how i got into this website but check out this article:

Einstein's Antigravity

Its all about physics experiments from World War 2. Quite interesting stuff assuming its real. Can anyone verify this info? I know alot of it is a hot bed of internet lore but there usually is a thread of truth in every story. It sure would explain a lot of UFO sightings.

 

[f95toli]

I guess the thread of truth in this story is that Einstein actually did work on a unified theory, and I think he even published it.

Unfortunately it was simply wrong; hence you can be sure that any project based on that theory would not work either.

 

[harpy82]

the newest unified theory right now is the STRING theory... best of both .. explains wat einstein can't .. and wat subatomicity can't....

 

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: harpy82
the newest unified theory right now is the STRING theory... best of both .. explains wat einstein can't .. and wat subatomicity can't....

subatomicity?

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: harpy82
the newest unified theory right now is the STRING theory... best of both .. explains wat einstein can't .. and wat subatomicity can't....

subatomicity?

was kinda wondering about that myself...

 

[natenut]

There's another thread going about zero point energy. it is discussed in the PDF and also on the web pages main section. also check out the lifters.

 

[cecallred]

Thanks for the link, that was a very interesting read...

Cec

 

[FuZoRBlade]

I'd rather go with string theory. The "theory of everything". Recentyl, large strides have been made in the field of string theory, and its definetly one of the hottest subjects debated in physics. Some people call it a philosophy since it cant be proven by conventional means.

 

[MAW1082]

From an episode of NOVA:

"There are two kinds of people studying science, there's physicists and there are string theorists.

Physicists observe and conclude, while string theorists philosophize."

What kind of person are you?

 

[FuZoRBlade]

I watched that the other day, it was pretty informative.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

stringtheory is born out of the dilemma that the older schools brought up. On the one hand u have Einstein and his theories about the big structures like universe, stars, galaxies, black holes. Other hand Molecules, Atoms and elementary particle are ruled by the Quantum mechanics. Both theories are working liking a charm within their own area. But - and thats the dilemma - if u combine the theories...lets say the Quantumtheorie of Gravitation, it leads to crazy results and this means that eventually both theories cant be completely correct. Thats the point when the stringtheory and guys like http://www.desy.de/fortbildung/vortraege/xluest1.jpg say: hi! Our funny stringtheory can - theoretically - combine all principles of those theories. The problems are that they still dont have the appropriate mathematical forms to fill the huge "combining everything-theory". And they cant calculate the mathematically and physically important numbers. or let me put in other words: they dont have the particle accelerator with the size of the milkyway yet to actually see one of the swinging strings that our world is made off. nor can they see or enter or prove the 7 further dimensions that the stringtheory predicts. must be some weird dimension...

 

[imported_jb]

i get a kick out of the story about the boat that disappeared and reappeared somewhere else, with the crew fused to the steel.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
stringtheory is born out of the dilemma that the older schools brought up. On the one hand u have Einstein and his theories about the big structures like universe, stars, galaxies, black holes. Other hand Molecules, Atoms and elementary particle are ruled by the Quantum mechanics. Both theories are working liking a charm within their own area. But - and thats the dilemma - if u combine the theories...lets say the Quantumtheorie of Gravitation, it leads to crazy results and this means that eventually both theories cant be completely correct. Thats the point when the stringtheory and guys like http://www.desy.de/fortbildung/vortraege/xluest1.jpg say: hi! Our funny stringtheory can - theoretically - combine all principles of those theories. The problems are that they still dont have the appropriate mathematical forms to fill the huge "combining everything-theory". And they cant calculate the mathematically and physically important numbers. or let me put in other words: they dont have the particle accelerator with the size of the milkyway yet to actually see one of the swinging strings that our world is made off. nor can they see or enter or prove the 7 further dimensions that the stringtheory predicts. must be some weird dimension...

I've read that one proof of string theory worked, but it required only one extra dimension for a total of 5. That doesn't seem too far fetched.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
stringtheory is born out of the dilemma that the older schools brought up. On the one hand u have Einstein and his theories about the big structures like universe, stars, galaxies, black holes. Other hand Molecules, Atoms and elementary particle are ruled by the Quantum mechanics. Both theories are working liking a charm within their own area. But - and thats the dilemma - if u combine the theories...lets say the Quantumtheorie of Gravitation, it leads to crazy results and this means that eventually both theories cant be completely correct. Thats the point when the stringtheory and guys like http://www.desy.de/fortbildung/vortraege/xluest1.jpg say: hi! Our funny stringtheory can - theoretically - combine all principles of those theories. The problems are that they still dont have the appropriate mathematical forms to fill the huge "combining everything-theory". And they cant calculate the mathematically and physically important numbers. or let me put in other words: they dont have the particle accelerator with the size of the milkyway yet to actually see one of the swinging strings that our world is made off. nor can they see or enter or prove the 7 further dimensions that the stringtheory predicts. must be some weird dimension...

I've read that one proof of string theory worked, but it required only one extra dimension for a total of 5. That doesn't seem too far fetched.

This is flat out factually incorrect. M theory adds an 11th dimension to the existing proposed ten-dimensional space - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
I've read that one proof of string theory worked, but it required only one extra dimension for a total of 5. That doesn't seem too far fetched.

There are no proofs of string theory. What string theories have tried to do is produce a version of string theory that looks just like the Standard Model for observable energies, and some of them call that a proof. However, since, by definition, experiments can't distinguish between the Standard Model and String Theory in that case, experiments offer no proof of String Theory in that case.

It would be like Einstein concluding GR was right because it reduced to Newtonian gravity in the low field limit. That's a necessary feature of a correct theory, but not a sufficient one. He needed later experiments that supported the differences between GR and Newtonian theory to support GR.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: cquark
There are no proofs of string theory. What string theories have tried to do is produce a version of string theory that looks just like the Standard Model for observable energies, and some of them call that a proof. However, since, by definition, experiments can't distinguish between the Standard Model and String Theory in that case, experiments offer no proof of String Theory in that case.

It would be like Einstein concluding GR was right because it reduced to Newtonian gravity in the low field limit. That's a necessary feature of a correct theory, but not a sufficient one. He needed later experiments that supported the differences between GR and Newtonian theory to support GR.

I was talking about a mathematical proof rather than experimental evidence. You would obviously be more informed on this than myself, but I'm sure I read/saw this somewhere. And yes, I understand fully that showing something mathematically doesn't make it true by a long shot.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: cquark
There are no proofs of string theory. What string theories have tried to do is produce a version of string theory that looks just like the Standard Model for observable energies, and some of them call that a proof. However, since, by definition, experiments can't distinguish between the Standard Model and String Theory in that case, experiments offer no proof of String Theory in that case.

It would be like Einstein concluding GR was right because it reduced to Newtonian gravity in the low field limit. That's a necessary feature of a correct theory, but not a sufficient one. He needed later experiments that supported the differences between GR and Newtonian theory to support GR.

I was talking about a mathematical proof rather than experimental evidence. You would obviously be more informed on this than myself, but I'm sure I read/saw this somewhere. And yes, I understand fully that showing something mathematically doesn't make it true by a long shot.

Ah, ok, so you're talking about a proof that would argue that such a string theory didn't produce the infinities that we get from attempting to treat gravity with quantum field theory techniques?

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: cquark
Ah, ok, so you're talking about a proof that would argue that such a string theory didn't produce the infinities that we get from attempting to treat gravity with quantum field theory techniques?

Yeah, just a matching solution that could give the same solutions as other theories I believe. It's been a while, but I think that was the idea.