Talk:String theory

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archives for this talk page: , (new)

The Funspace version of this page[edit]

... would include instructions on knitting a string-theory vest. (talk) 15:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Or possibly constructing cats-cradles. (talk) 22:55, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Miniature Black holes at the LHC (oh noes!)[edit]

There's another possible observation of the effects of String theory, or better: of the extra dimensions that show up in every string theory: If there are extra dimensions within reach of the LHC, it could be possible to produce artificial miniature black holes. These would decay almost immediately via Hawking radiation, emitting all sorts of interesting new particles 1. While I'm not sure if there are other frameworks which also predict the existence of extra dimensions, such a black hole would at least confirm one important prediction of String Theory. Should that be added under "Problems"? -- (talk) 16:56, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Exponentially? etc.[edit]

I just made a couple corrections, and am considering a few more:

  1. The term "exponentially" is used twice. I think the usage is incorrect, and "orders of magnitude" would be a good substitution. Agreed? (Partial rationale: Gravity is orders of magnitude stronger at great distances, but orders of magnitude weaker at small distances...)
  2. Also, the article ends on a weak note: ", and the scientific method (and the tools with which to test it) has advanced substantially since the 1800s." Any ideas on improving it? Otherwise, I think it's better off removed.
  3. Add this quote of Stephen Hawking on Confirming M-theory by observation:
"M-theory is the only possible unified theory, under certain assumptions, the most important of which is that there should be a relation between forces and matter called supersymmetry. This would predict that elementary particles should appear in pairs. It may be possible to observe this in the Large Hadron Collider which would go a long way towards confirming M-theory experimentally." Source

--BeKind (talk) 18:55, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, yeah, orders of magnitude is more accurate. No problem with the removal of the final line either. Petey Plane (talk) 13:19, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Uses of the higher dimensions[edit]

This is where the object you are looking for urgently disappears to - and from which it returns when you are sufficiently annoyed/late or have acquired a replacement.

Unfortunately, due to the complexities of mapping multi-dimensional space onto our three-dimensional space the process occasionally goes wrong: there are some things you never see again, and others which you know you never acquired: other items undergo a subtle metamorphosis so they differ to what you remember them to be. (talk) 10:21, 7 March 2017 (UTC)


Should there be a humorous link to this foodstuff? Anna Livia (talk) 09:22, 27 April 2018 (UTC)