Good article. I've lost track of how many string theories there are, but the latest one, F-theory might be on the right track 😆
According to Albert Einstein:
"There's a genius in all of us."
"Genius is 1% talent and 99% hard work."
"A true genius admits that he/she knows nothing."
"Anyone can be a genius if they pick just one specific subject and study it diligently just 15 minutes each day."
The 12 dimensional F-theory is rather strange because it has two time coordinates, not one!
Imagine trying to live in a world with two times. It would put an episode of Star Trek to shame!
Imagine trying to live in a world with two times. It would put an episode of Star Trek to shame!
I have pretty much given up trying to understand all the various fundamental Quantum Gravity theories! The Maths is about 10 years college study IMO!
This, I am liking:
John M. Charap is emeritus Professor of Theoretical Physics at Queen Mary College, London. Written in 2002. Lots of pictures and diagrams. But not an equation in sight! 🙂
This, I am liking:
John M. Charap is emeritus Professor of Theoretical Physics at Queen Mary College, London. Written in 2002. Lots of pictures and diagrams. But not an equation in sight! 🙂
We still have not fully discussed the role of the Higgs boson and its Higgs firld in imparting mass to an object. I am particularly interested to understand how is works. Is it only active when an object is accelerated as in a body on a planet experienced gravity or alternatively in deep space when accelerating through an applied force. What happens when a body doe not experience either of these two equivalent conditions? What is the Higgs doing?
Firstly, we should make clear that the Higgs field is only responsible for giving elementary particles their mass. The mass of ordinary "objects" or "bodies" is much larger than the sum of the elementary particle masses.
What is the Higgs doing? Why, it's simply 'vibrating'!
Yes, a Higgs boson is a vibration of the Higgs field around its normal, non-zero, value.
My hypothesis is that an elementary particle or 'quantum wave packet' couples its own vibrations to those of the Higgs field.
And that the strength of that coupling depends on the quantum wavelength of the elementary particle.
I propose that the shorter the quantum wavelength of the particle, the greater the mass acquired.
Am I talking nonsense?
Mostly! 🤓
Oh Noes, it's those Strings again! Or is it Branes? These physicists definitely need more Branes.
Now don't go turning this thread into a Joke again. Physics is far more serious than that!
String Theory with hidden dimensions and branes is unlikely sounding stuff, and I plain don't like it. But it has huge theoretical strengths.
From Chapter 10 "Strings" of the Charap book:
If you don't know what the meson stuff is about, it is called a Regge trajectory:
That's quite interesting, @Galu. I hadn't thought about the De Broglie wavlength for matter. But Feynman always said most of quantum Theory lies in the double slit experiment.
Sort of problem a few of us here might solve with a bit of relativistic 4D algebra.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_wavelength
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave#Matter_waves_vs._electromagnetic_waves_(light)
We are interested in the wavelength of light of a certain energy and that of a rest mass of similar in terms of mc^2. Once the mass starts moving fast, I expect it gets more involved.
I believe, and I am not sure about this without a lot of revision, but a "Thermal Neutron" has a constant wavelength regardless of its speed. 😎
String Theory with hidden dimensions and branes is unlikely sounding stuff, and I plain don't like it. But it has huge theoretical strengths.
From Chapter 10 "Strings" of the Charap book:
If you don't know what the meson stuff is about, it is called a Regge trajectory:
That's quite interesting, @Galu. I hadn't thought about the De Broglie wavlength for matter. But Feynman always said most of quantum Theory lies in the double slit experiment.
Sort of problem a few of us here might solve with a bit of relativistic 4D algebra.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_wavelength
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave#Matter_waves_vs._electromagnetic_waves_(light)
We are interested in the wavelength of light of a certain energy and that of a rest mass of similar in terms of mc^2. Once the mass starts moving fast, I expect it gets more involved.
I believe, and I am not sure about this without a lot of revision, but a "Thermal Neutron" has a constant wavelength regardless of its speed. 😎
There was some discussion a while back about the Hubble tension and the idea that cepheid variability used as a measure of distance wasn’t accurate and called into doubt the Hubble tension. The study says it is not a factor
https://phys.org/news/2024-01-astronomers-explanation-hubble-tension.html’
https://phys.org/news/2024-01-astronomers-explanation-hubble-tension.html’
Is that surprising when a theory is shaped to fit? Einstein did that. His power is that it predicted certain things that could be checked and and were found to fit. He is also said to have stated that something better could possibly improve on it. Afraid I can't remember his exact words but this is what he implied and could relate to any theory on anything. A problem with modelling just about anything.
Rarely an object does not experience any acceleration ( or force which is equivallent). Apart an object at a Lagrangian point, I do not see cases.
I suspect, the mass of a "still" object is undefined, it is only defined when accelereted, hit by a particule in à CERN experiment for instance.
I agree. Even in the centre of one of the giant voids in space, there would be at some very small level forces acting on a body. I don’t think mass can be undefined though - it might just be that in its massless or weightless state we can’t measure it without applying a force to it. If this were not the case, what would be the implications for E=mc^2?
It may be worth repeating that the Higgs boson gives mass only to elementary particles such as electrons and quarks.
It does not give mass to all particles, even those composed of quarks like protons and neutrons.
Those nucleons, the principle constituents of an "object", get most of their mass from the strong nuclear force that holds their quarks together.
A "still" object will oppose any attempt to put it into motion, and a moving object will oppose any change in the magnitude or direction of its velocity.
This opposition is a fundamental property of matter that we call inertia.
Mass is defined as a quantitative measure of inertia, a definition that must apply equally to both still and moving objects.
A direct quantitative measure of inertia must be done by using an 'inertia balance'. A simple version is the 'wig-wag balance' used in school physics classes.
And, as you allude, the quantitative measure performed by such a balance does indeed depend on acceleration taking place.
Two spring steel arms support a tray into which solid metal cylinders can be inserted. The tray is set into sideways oscillatory motion with a frequency that is shown to decrease with increasing number of cylinders.
The oscillation of the system does not depend on the pull of the Earth. The period of oscillation, T , depends only on the mass, m , of the oscillating system, not its weight. T ∝√ m .
If the inertia balance is suitably calibrated, the period of oscillation can be used to determine an unknown mass.