Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - the String Theory
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closedthe String Theory

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234
Poll Question: What do you think of the theory.
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
10 [66.67%]
1 [6.67%]
1 [6.67%]
1 [6.67%]
2 [13.33%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2013 at 03:17
Gravity is called weak because it is weak in relation to the other forces (electromagnetism, strong & weak neuclear). If we were just talking about its affect on mass then the others are extremely weak by comparison (ie they have no effect). In absolute terms it is strong enough to main planets as spheroids and keep them in stable orbits around a star, it acts over sufficiently large distances to pull the galaxies in our local neighbourhood towards the "Great Attractor". It is not a weakling.

Edited by Dean - August 03 2013 at 04:23
What?
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2013 at 09:35
Originally posted by HackettFan HackettFan wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Gravity is by far the weakest force. It's ability to span distance has nothing to do with its inherent strength. 


What is your definition of inherent strength? The nuclear strong and weak forces have no effect whatsoever between planetary bodies. That is very weak. At quantum sizes/distances gravity is very weak. Again, the standard the forces are measured against have not been independent of physicists' more favored paradigm. This tends to be dominated quantum mechanics for many if not most modern physicists.


Coupling Constant

"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
HackettFan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2013 at 11:06
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:


Originally posted by HackettFan HackettFan wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Gravity is by far the weakest force. It's ability to span distance has nothing to do with its inherent strength. 


What is your definition of inherent strength? The nuclear strong and weak forces have no effect whatsoever between planetary bodies. That is very weak. At quantum sizes/distances gravity is very weak. Again, the standard the forces are measured against have not been independent of physicists' more favored paradigm. This tends to be dominated quantum mechanics for many if not most modern physicists.
Coupling Constant

Yes, and the coupling constant comes right out of quantum mechanics. The lack of distance spanned in the coupling constant calculation is simply an arbitrary artifact of the measurement used. Since we're comparing two different paradigms, a theory internal artifact is only helpful in conveying that one theory has greater internal beauty than the other. Since the disparity in strength of the forces doesn't actually bring an answer to any particular problem that I'm aware of I am not swayed by the internal beauty argument. Which is stronger electromagnetism or gravity? Gravity or dark energy? This is missing the point, I think. A theory independent observation is that the forces have different scope relations. One is responsible for tidal effects and the others don't because the scope of gravity is broader than the other three, but less than that of dark energy. Explain the make up of these different scope relations among the forces and you have a theory of everything.
Back to Top
Icarium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34055
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2013 at 11:15
are you saying there is 5 rather then 4 forces of nature, gravity force, electro-magnetic force, strong and weak nuclear force and dark energy force,

is dark energy force explaining the very big like general relativity or is it describing the small quantum mechanics.

also Hackett, would you join me at the Quantum Club and Cafe Wink  Cool and play some quantum pool or card game.
Back to Top
The Bearded Bard View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: January 24 2012
Location: Behind the Sun
Status: Offline
Points: 12859
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2013 at 14:08
No! How many times must I say this? He's not prog!



























Oh, sorry! Thought it said Sting Theory. Carry on!

Edited by The Bearded Bard - August 03 2013 at 14:09
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2013 at 21:02
Originally posted by HackettFan HackettFan wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:


Originally posted by HackettFan HackettFan wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Gravity is by far the weakest force. It's ability to span distance has nothing to do with its inherent strength. 


What is your definition of inherent strength? The nuclear strong and weak forces have no effect whatsoever between planetary bodies. That is very weak. At quantum sizes/distances gravity is very weak. Again, the standard the forces are measured against have not been independent of physicists' more favored paradigm. This tends to be dominated quantum mechanics for many if not most modern physicists.
Coupling Constant

Yes, and the coupling constant comes right out of quantum mechanics. The lack of distance spanned in the coupling constant calculation is simply an arbitrary artifact of the measurement used. Since we're comparing two different paradigms, a theory internal artifact is only helpful in conveying that one theory has greater internal beauty than the other. Since the disparity in strength of the forces doesn't actually bring an answer to any particular problem that I'm aware of I am not swayed by the internal beauty argument. Which is stronger electromagnetism or gravity? Gravity or dark energy? This is missing the point, I think. A theory independent observation is that the forces have different scope relations. One is responsible for tidal effects and the others don't because the scope of gravity is broader than the other three, but less than that of dark energy. Explain the make up of these different scope relations among the forces and you have a theory of everything.


So you're arguing that we can't compare them. Fine. If we're going to compare them, then this is the only sensible way to do it. And under this framework we must conclude that gravity is the weakest.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 04 2013 at 10:35
Originally posted by aginor aginor wrote:

are you saying there is 5 rather then 4 forces of nature, gravity force, electro-magnetic force, strong and weak nuclear force and dark energy force,

is dark energy force explaining the very big like general relativity or is it describing the small quantum mechanics.
I'm not sure that Dark Energy has been formally considered as a "force" (I don't think so), although I would say that it could well be a candidate, it can exert work (sending two clumps of matter away from each other overcoming the gravitational attraction between them).
But it does not "explain" anything, it just says that the expansion of spacetime is accelerating.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.477 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.