String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

[Zosimus]

Thats rich, all experiments to this day, one hundred years later still prove Einstein is right.

If that's true, why can't Einstein's theory be reconciled with quantum physics?

 

[Zosimus]

Firstly, there is no god.

This is an unwarranted opinion.

 

[idav]

If that's true, why can't Einstein's theory be reconciled with quantum physics?

There simply isn't a way we know to test GR against QM. It took science decades to devise experiments that barely scratch the surface to the truth of general and special relativity.

I'm just not so certain relativity all of sudden breaks at the point mathematicians have issues.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

If that's true, why can't Einstein's theory be reconciled with quantum physics?

more properly, the question is "why can't the two theories be unified?"

Well, physicists are working on that. There is lots of speculation--hypothesis development about what could explain the two theories in a common set of terms, and what kind of evidence might be used to find out. String theory is one such possible solution, but it hasn't yet come up with anything testable. At the extreme, perhaps humans can't understand why. More likely, we can come to an understanding, but it will take more research, time, and insight before we do.

Until then, it's best to say "We don't know, but we're working on it."

 

[Zosimus]

There simply isn't a way we know to test GR against QM. It took science decades to devise experiments that barely scratch the surface to the truth of general and special relativity.

Einstein's theory says that everything is determined by previous states according to specific laws. Quantum Mechanics says that sub-atomic particles behave randomly. It's not about the difficulty of testing. These two ideas cannot both be accepted.

 

[Thief]

Dr. Michio Kaku, a theoretical physicist at the City College of New York (CUNY) and co-founder of String Field Theory, says theoretical particles known as “primitive semi-radius tachyons” are physical evidence that the universe was created by a higher intelligence.

After analyzing the behavior of these sub-atomic particles - which can move faster than the speed of light and have the ability to “unstick” space and matter – using technology created in 2005, Kaku concluded that the universe is a “Matrix” governed by laws and principles that could only have been designed by an intelligent being.

“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence. Believe me, everything that we call chance today won’t make sense anymore,” Kaku said, according to an article published in the Geophilosophical Association of Anthropological and Cultural Studies.

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” Kaku, author of The Future of the Mind: The Scientific Quest to Understand, Enhance, and Empower the Mind, said in a 2013 Big Think video posted on YouTube.

“The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music, the music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

String Theory “revolutionized” mathematics and physics by demonstrating a “super symmetry” in the universe. Kaku said it also explains gaps in the Big Bang theory.

“First of all, the Big Bang wasn’t very big. Second of all, there was no bang. Third, Big Bang Theory doesn’t tell you what banged, when it banged, how it banged. It just said it did bang. So the Big Bang theory in some sense is a total misnomer,” the well-known physicist said in 2015.

“We need a theory that goes before the Big Bang, and that’s String Theory. String Theory says that perhaps two universes collided to create our universe, or maybe our universe is butted from another universe leaving an umbilical cord….

“Some people believe that maybe, just maybe, we have detected evidence of that umbilical cord.”

http://www.scienceworldreport.com/a...cientist-michio-kaku-proves-existence-god.htm

Your Thoughts?

God is not a mathematician.
at the point of singularity....a secondary point is not allowed
(it's not singular with two points)

lacking a secondary point....there are NO dimensions
there are NO number systems

I like Dr. Kaku
but it seems he is morphing his psyche unto God

 

[idav]

Einstein's theory says that everything is determined by previous states according to specific laws.

No that would be more Newtonian physics, Einstein got passed that, though he didn't really like the idea of spooky actions from a distance, he realized this is what is predicted.

 

[viole]

I do not tie myself to any religious beliefs or scientific theories.

There are laws in the universe that do not change. Energy can not be created or destroyed. All energy came from the same source and will eventually return to that source. Our understanding of the laws is highly limited by our human existence and that may change but the laws do not.

The big bang theory violates the laws of energy and that is why those promoting that theory are now claiming nothing is actually something.

The total energy of the Universe is zero. So, I am not sure what violation you are talking about.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Zosimus]

No that would be more Newtonian physics, Einstein got passed that, though he didn't really like the idea of spooky actions from a distance, he realized this is what is predicted.

God does not play dice with the universe said Einstein. This is, of course, the major problem with quantum mechanics. It cannot be reconciled with any other part of physics.

As for your claim that everything discovered so far confirms Einstein, think again.

 

[idav]

God does not play dice with the universe said Einstein. This is, of course, the major problem with quantum mechanics. It cannot be reconciled with any other part of physics.

As for your claim that everything discovered so far confirms Einstein, think again.

Whether he thought it was spooky or didn't like QM still the work remains intact. What experiments prove general or special relativity wrong, I know QM is proven right well so are GR and SR? in fact entanglement is every bit determined by locality, there is nothing spooky about it.
Which makes copenhagen interpretation mysticism at best.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox

How EPR is interpreted regarding locality depends on the interpretation of quantum mechanics one uses. In the Copenhagen interpretation, it is usually understood that instantaneous wave function collapse does occur. However, the view that there is no causal instantaneous effect has also been proposed within the Copenhagen interpretation: in this alternate view, measurement affects our ability to define (and measure) quantities in the physical system, not the system itself. In the many-worlds interpretation, locality is strictly preserved, since the effects of operations such as measurement affect only the state of the particle that is measured.[19]

 

[Zosimus]

Try http://phys.org/news/2010-04-discovery-quasars-dont-dilation-mystifies.html

This discovery makes it clear that something is wrong in the system. We don't know what that something is, but whenever a theory predicts something that fails to materialize, that theory becomes rather questionable.

 

[viole]

As for your claim that everything discovered so far confirms Einstein, think again.

How does this article show that Einstein was wrong about the speed of light?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Zosimus]

How does this article show that Einstein was wrong about the speed of light?

Ciao

- viole

1. If Einstein's theories are correct and if a Big Bang occurred and if the red shift from quasars indicates their relative speed moving away from the Earth (and by extension their total distance from the Earth), then we should observe greater time dilation in quasars that are more highly redshifted than in quasars that are not as highly redshifted.
2. We do not observe greater time dilation in quasars that are more highly red shifted and thus presumably more distant from the Earth than are those with lower red shifts.
3. Therefore, Einstein's theories are false, or a Big Bang never occurred, or the red shift from quasars does not indicate their relative speed moving away from the Earth (and thus their total distance from the Earth).
Q.E.D.

 

[viole]

1. If Einstein's theories are correct and if a Big Bang occurred and if the red shift from quasars indicates their relative speed moving away from the Earth (and by extension their total distance from the Earth), then we should observe greater time dilation in quasars that are more highly redshifted than in quasars that are not as highly redshifted.
2. We do not observe greater time dilation in quasars that are more highly red shifted and thus presumably more distant from the Earth than are those with lower red shifts.
3. Therefore, Einstein's theories are false, or a Big Bang never occurred, or the red shift from quasars does not indicate their relative speed moving away from the Earth (and thus their total distance from the Earth).
Q.E.D.

This is not the article I am addressing, yet. I believe.

Here is is: http://time.com/4083823/einstein-entanglement-quantum/

Posted by you. How does it show Einstein wrong, for what concert the speed of light?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Zosimus]

This is not the article I am addressing, yet. I believe.

Here is is: http://time.com/4083823/einstein-entanglement-quantum/

Posted by you. How does it show Einstein wrong, for what concert the speed of light?

Ciao

- viole

Einstein claimed that nothing moves faster than the speed of light. If, however, we are studying two linked particles that are distant from each other, a change in one produces an instantaneous change in the other. It is believed that some form of communication occurs between the two particles. Said communication would need to proceed faster than the speed of light because the time at which the change occurred and the distance at which the particles were exceeds the speed of light.

 

[viole]

Einstein claimed that nothing moves faster than the speed of light. If, however, we are studying two linked particles that are distant from each other, a change in one produces an instantaneous change in the other. It is believed that some form of communication occurs between the two particles. Said communication would need to proceed faster than the speed of light because the time at which the change occurred and the distance at which the particles were exceeds the speed of light.

Nope. There is no communication between the two particles. What we can say is that the composite system is in a superposition of two states: (particle 1 in state x, particle 2 in state y) and (particle 1 in state y, particle 2 in state x).

Consider the following classical analogy:

- I have two balls: one red the other blue
- I hide each ball in a box and seal the boxes
- My partners Alice and Bob saw what I did
- I put the two boxes in a secret room where a dummy robot shuffles them using a random number generator
- I open the room and give one box to Alice and one to Bob (nobody knows who get what)
- I ask Alice and Bob to synchronize their clocks and ask them to open the boxes at a predefined time
- I ask Alice to take the next starship to Proxima Centaury and to Bob to take the next starship in the opposite direction
- I tune things so that they open their boxes at exactly the same time when they are one parsec away from each other
- When the time comes they both open their boxes
- Alice sees she has a blue ball. She knows, at that exact moment, that Bob opened the box and found the red ball
- Lo and behold. Alice influenced the color of the ball observed by Bob instantly

Did I break relativity?

Ciao

- viole

 

[jeager106]

Finding one color of two colored balls would lead one to highly suspect that the other
colored ball would be in the other box.
So this proves what?
That humans can use intelligence to do very rudimentary logic?
Now if Bob had bacon and eggs for breakfast and Alice knew that instantly
I'd be a mite impressed.

 

[viole]

Finding one color of two colored balls would lead one to highly suspect that the other
colored ball would be in the other box.
So this proves what?
That humans can use intelligence to do very rudimentary logic?
Now if Bob had bacon and eggs for breakfast and Alice knew that instantly
I'd be a mite impressed.

My point, really.

Ciao

- viole

 

[jeager106]

My point, really.

Ciao

- viole

Well, ya shoulda said so.

 

[Zosimus]

Nope. There is no communication between the two particles. What we can say is that the composite system is in a superposition of two states: (particle 1 in state x, particle 2 in state y) and (particle 1 in state y, particle 2 in state x).

Consider the following classical analogy:

- I have two balls: one red the other blue
- I hide each ball in a box and seal the boxes
- My partners Alice and Bob saw what I did
- I put the two boxes in a secret room where a dummy robot shuffles them using a random number generator
- I open the room and give one box to Alice and one to Bob (nobody knows who get what)
- I ask Alice and Bob to synchronize their clocks and ask them to open the boxes at a predefined time
- I ask Alice to take the next starship to Proxima Centaury and to Bob to take the next starship in the opposite direction
- I tune things so that they open their boxes at exactly the same time when they are one parsec away from each other
- When the time comes they both open their boxes
- Alice sees she has a blue ball. She knows, at that exact moment, that Bob opened the box and found the red ball
- Lo and behold. The information about the color of Bob's ball travelled the whole parsec to Alice instantly

Did I break relativity?

Ciao

- viole

From http://www.livescience.com/28550-how-quantum-entanglement-works-infographic.html

Entanglement occurs when a pair of particles, such as photons, interact physically. A laser beam fired through a certain type of crystal can cause individual photons to be split into pairs of entangled photons.

The photons can be separated by a large distance, hundreds of miles or even more.

When observed, Photon A takes on an up-spin state. Entangled Photon B, though now far away, takes up a state relative to that of Photon A (in this case, a down-spin state). The transfer of state between Photon A and Photon B takes place at a speed of at least 10,000 times the speed of light, possibly even instantaneously, regardless of distance.