68514 - Re: To Charlie re previous post....

Reload Page | Topic Thread | Post a Followup | The Hawking Forum | Search | FAQ
Back in Thread | Back by Number | Next by Number | Back to Entry Point

Posted by Samuel A. (Sam) Cox on January 22, 2005 at 13:50:03
(Message posted from "unknown" at 68.45.160.182) - explanation

In Reply to: "Re: To Charlie re previous post...." posted by RingoKid on January 21, 2005 at 02:02:45

7D cosmology is really "stringy". you are absolutley correct.

Many cosmologists insist that the universe exists in higher D and the consentration is on 7 or 10, possibly 11 D, but also 24D etc. 11D is called the "triad".

I've stuck with the two-track 4D system...two three spaces connected by an eternal, cyclical time dimension which prevents the univese from being completely static (opening the door to motion and change as we observe it). The total D in the model is 7, with n dimensional potential.
In this model, 10D is really just 3, 3 spaces with the same periodic and eternal time dimension.

I've also stuck with this model because of the numbers...Schwaerzschild geometry gives correct solutions to GR....in fact those solutions were the first offered. In addition, this model matches the observatinoal submicroscopic and astronomical observations better than some others.

In string theory, the "extra" (they are not really "extra"...they are demanded) dimensions are curled up in a ball or are small as observed from our frame.

Small and large are relative terms, dependent on the way we observe the unverse. Scharzschild geometry demands the two three spaces be equal in size, space and time and that the two halves of the universe be superposed geometrically.

I agree...


Back in Thread | Back by Number | Next by Number | Back to Entry Point

Topic Thread:
Followup postings for this message are closed.


Reload Page | Topic Thread | Post a Followup | The Hawking Forum | Search | FAQ
Back in Thread | Back by Number | Next by Number | Back to Entry Point