Stephan, That is very interesting. I have been using a model based on the monads being enumrable as in an abstract Godelian Peano Arithmetic. Do you have a particular model in mind? Richard
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>wrote: > Hi Richard, > > This description assumes an embedding space-time that is separable > from the monads "in" it. One alternative is to work with an abstract model > of (closed under mutual inclusion) totally disconnected compact spaces > where the individual components of the space are the images that a set of > "mutually reflecting" monads have. This allows us to use Greene's r -> 1/r > duality and the Stone duality as well. ;-) > > On 8/22/2012 9:15 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > Yes Stephan, > The 10^500 possible windings of flux constraining the compactified > dimensions > are sufficient to populate some 10^120 universes with every monad unique > or distinct. > > The CYMs are known to be discrete > and since the hyperfine constant varies across the universe > it is likely that the monads are distinct. > > That this all comes from a subspace of ennumerable particles > to my mind satisfies Occum's Razor. > Richard > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>wrote: > >> Hi Jason, >> >> Nothing "in the theory" suggests that landscapes are a problem! But >> that is kinda my point, we have to use meta-theories of one sort or another >> to evaluate theories. Occam's Razor is a nice example... My point is that >> explanations should be hard to vary and get the result that one needs to >> "match the data" or else it is not an explanation at all. One can get >> anything they want with a theory that has landscapes. Look! >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory_landscape >> >> "The string theory landscape or anthropic landscape refers to the large >> number of possible false vacua in string theory. The "landscape" includes >> so many possible configurations that some physicists think that the known >> laws of physics, the standard model and general relativity with a positive >> cosmological constant, occur in at least one of them. The anthropic >> landscape refers to the collection of those portions of the landscape that >> are suitable for supporting human life, an application of the anthropic >> principle that selects a subset of the theoretically possible >> configurations. >> In string theory the number of false vacua is commonly quoted as 10500. >> The large number of possibilities arises from different choices of >> Calabi-Yau manifolds and different values of generalized magnetic fluxes >> over different homology cycles. If one assumes that there is no structure >> in the space of vacua, the problem of finding one with a sufficiently small >> cosmological constant is NP complete, being a version of the subset sum >> problem." >> >> Boom, there it is! The computation problem! >> >> >> On 8/22/2012 2:31 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> What in the theory suggests that landscapes are a problem? Is there any >> evidence in any theory that only one possible set of physical laws has to >> pervade all of existence, or is this just an unsupported preconception/hope >> of physicists who've spent a big chunk of their lives looking for a unique >> theory? >> >> To me, the effort of finding some mathematical explanation for why only >> one set of physical law can be is a lot like the Copenhagen theory's >> attempt to rescue a single history, despite that nothing in the theory or >> the math would suggest as much. >> >> Jason >> >> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Richard Ruquist <yann...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Stephan, >>> >>> I solved the landscape problem by assuming that each monad was distinct >>> consistent with the astronomical observations that the hyperfine >>> constant >>> varied monotonically across the universe. >>> Richard >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Stephen P. King >>> <stephe...@charter.net>wrote: >>> >>>> On 8/21/2012 3:58 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: >>>> >>>> Steinberg P. Soft Physics from RHIC to the LHC. arXiv:nucl-ex/09031471, >>>> 2009. >>>> >>>> Kovtum PK, Son DT & Starinets AO. Viscosity in Strongly Interacting >>>> Quantum >>>> Field Theories from Black Hole Physics. arXiv:hep-th/0405231. >>>> >>>> >>>> Good! Now to see if there any any other possible explanations that >>>> do not have the landscape problem... >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 8/21/2012 3:39 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: >>>>> >>>>> String theory predicts the viscosity of the quark-gluon plasma >>>>> already found at the LHC and several other sites. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Richard, >>>>> >>>>> Could you link some sources on this? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Stephen P. King < >>>>> stephe...@charter.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 8/21/2012 12:19 PM, meekerdb wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 8/21/2012 4:10 AM, Roger Clough wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>> >>>>>> Neither CYM's nor strings physically exist-- instead, they represent >>>>>> things that exist. >>>>>> Anything in equation form is itself nonphysical, although the >>>>>> equations >>>>>> might describe something physical. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The equations of string theory describe strings. So how does it >>>>>> follow that strings aren't real. That's like saying a sentence that >>>>>> describes my house shows that my house isn't real. >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree that string theory (or any other theory) is a model of >>>>>> reality and not reality itself. But, if it's correct, it refers to >>>>>> reality >>>>>> or at least some part of reality - like, "My house is green." refers to a >>>>>> part of reality, but "My house is blue." does not. >>>>>> >>>>>> Brent >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> When and if string theory makes a prediction that is then found >>>>>> to have a physical demonstration we might be more confident that it is >>>>>> useful as a physics theory and not just an exercise in beautiful advanced >>>>>> mathematics. The LHC is looking for such evidence... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> For example, if I live at 23 Main street, 23 Main Street is not my >>>>>> house, >>>>>> it is my address. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net >>>>>> 8/21/2012 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> > -- > Onward! > > Stephen > > "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed." > ~ Francis Bacon > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
