If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
SDR
It's very simple: "If anywhere in your equations
Santa Claus is required: your equations are utterly
divorced from reality."
Well, the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory
and Ed Wood's, I mean Ed Witten's supersymmetry
nonsense (and thereby potentially bestows incalculably
monumental savings to the physics establishment by
keeping it from chasing rainbows with no pots of gold)
... the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory because
all string theory equations require the utterly embarrassing
notion of "dimensions" (a truly goofy Abbot &
Costello confusion which arises innocently enough
from the innocuous historical tradition of referring
to our reality as "three-dimensional").
Follow such time-wasting nonsense to its logical
conclusion and you're likely to end up lost in a
Star Trek script world full of time-travel, worm
holes, and dark matter/dark energy clouds teeming
with intelligent non-corporeal beings, Mister Spok.
It's rather all so simple that it pains me to have to
point it out (and why I had to come up with the Santa
Claus Law for theoretical physics, in the first
place):
In the "real" world there "is" no such a thing as
"dimensions" of any kind, sort, or flavor (be it the
eleven dimensions of string theory, or 11,000
dimensions, or the singularities of legend & lore):
The very idea that the world is somehow restricted to
three-dimensions is a purely mathematical fiction (a
mental convenience, mathematical shorthand) which
SEEING any object with more than six sides instantly
disproves (if such proof be needed). Hell, if we
lived in a universe in which only six-sided blocks
existed I might forgive some mental deficient
believing that such a universe was three-dimensional,
but purely six-sided blocks are rare natural objects
(just a few crystals), and therefore I can only look
with contempt upon those who still cannot separate
[the mathematical shorthand of calling ours a
"three-dimensional reality (universe)"] from [the
"real" universe]. Embarrassing to even be in the same
species as these theoreticians, for Heaven's sakes.
For purely illustrative and needless additional
elaboration: Once you assign an arbitrary number (as
is the "3" dimensions in the infamous historical
mathematical shorthand) you can use that number in
calculations/equations/theories to construct all
sorts of math; but this does not mean that that
particular number has any reality outside our minds
(and the purely mental, detached from all reality,
equations that can live in the brain exclusively
quite "elegantly"): Our reality should be better
described as something like "infinitely dimensional,"
since there is no practical means of limiting the
number of ways you can slice a sphere. All manifolds,
of whatever design, are impossible to separate from
our "spherical reality" and are merely "combinations
of perverse slices" of the "sphere."
The morbius strip, for example, is perhaps the
easiest and most self-evident misinterpretation of
reality (the suspension of its reality from the rest
of reality): Take a strip of paper and just before
gluing its two ends together twist one of the ends,
now you can run a pencil down one side of the strip
and discover that without having lifted the pencil
from that one side... the unbroken line you've drawn
runs down BOTH sides of the strip: Does this mean
you've created a piece of paper with only one side
(something akin to one-dimensionality)? No, of course
not. Or, more aptly: ONLY IN YOUR MIND.
Another optical illusion is the "two-dimensional"
film screen. In it you can "see" two-dimensional
objects "existing." And I have actually heard
otherwise very respected physicists (apparently the
modern day equivalents of metaphysicists or your
everyday lunatics, can't tell which) going on and on
about the existence of these "two-dimensional
objects," when describing what we "witness" on film
screens! But, as all first year art students know,
the purely merely "optical illusion" we're seeing is
achieved with different shades/colors and the art of
perspective: In reality, in the reality in which we
actually live, there is not even the remotest
anything related to "two-dimensionality" about
anything ever "seen" on any movie screen or a
Renaissance painting.
The same thing with the silly notion of a
"singularity" (or, a one-dimensional object), which,
like all things impossible, are/is "hidden" by their
magician theorizers by conveniently reducing it/them
"out of sight" and into a physically impossible small
size (absolute size... something which ought to be an
instant tip-off for even silly inflation aficionados
of entire universes growing out of jelly beans and
other flyspecks) in flagrant violation of all the
laws of physics.
Therefore: ANY and ALL mathematical models claiming a
connection with/to reality... which employ ANY
(always necessarily arbitrary) number to balance
their equations are and ever will be "ultimately"
divorced from reality (agreeing with reality ONLY
when forced into it, and only inside the human mind).
In special relativity, for example, the number "3" is
restricted to the construction of a three-dimensional
grid whose purpose extends ONLY to the orientations
of the required map (which is the principal purpose
of having devised/assigned the number "3" to the
"dimensions" of reality in the first place--That is,
so that such a map could be drawn up). And so:
S D Rodrian's Santa Claus Law:
"If anywhere in your equations Santa Claus is
required: your equations are utterly divorced from
reality."
S D Rodrian
http://poems.sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://music.sdrodrian.com
SDR
SDR
SDR
Uncle Al
>
> If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
>
> It's very simple: "If anywhere in your equations
> Santa Claus is required: your equations are utterly
> divorced from reality."
Tell it to Coca-Cola, or to about 40% of all annual commerce. If you
use Santa Clause, then your theory is only invalidated if it makes an
empirically falsifiable prediction. Hell, you turkey, you could
postulate Dark Matter and Dark Energy and have credible theory - at
least before empirical assay.
The Keebler Elves sell an awful lot of keeblers, bulk shipment and
dollars received.
> Well, the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory
> and Ed Wood's, I mean Ed Witten's supersymmetry
> nonsense (and thereby potentially bestows incalculably
> monumental savings to the physics establishment by
> keeping it from chasing rainbows with no pots of gold)
The midget stands on tiptoe and wonders what is on top of the desk.
[snip]
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
(Do something naughty to physics)
Patrick Powers
pointy-headed intellectuals. Common sense!
Franz Heymann
"SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
news:58087ec7.04011...@posting.google.com...
> If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
[Three guesses as to whether I read the snipped sewage.]
Franz
Alekzander
no one claims that you can't cut your sphere into as many pieces as
you want.. the number of dimensions has to do with the number of
_MUTUALLY ORTHOGONAL_ cuts you can make in a system. every slice you
make can be written as sums of the orthogonal vectors. in our spatial
reality, we commonly use 3 dimensions because there is no space
(sphere, cube, prism...) that can be completely described by more than
3 orthogonal vectors.
db
>
> If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
>
> It's very simple: "If anywhere in your equations
> Santa Claus is required: your equations are utterly
> divorced from reality."
>
> Well, the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory
> and Ed Wood's, I mean Ed Witten's supersymmetry
> nonsense
rather then calling it nonsense, why don't you show the Santa Clauses in
M-theory?
The theory has no internal mathematical inconsistencies.
The formulas for the 4 forces (of QED and Relativity) can be derived from it.
Needless to say that QED and Relativity have been thouroughly verified and have
not been disproven so far.
SDR
> SDR wrote:
> >
> > If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
> >
> > It's very simple: "If anywhere in your equations
> > Santa Claus is required: your equations are utterly
> > divorced from reality."
>
> Tell it to Coca-Cola, or to about 40% of all annual commerce.
Hey, bonehead, the Coca Cola equation REQUIRES Santa Claus
as a precondition of its fizz. Those are ALL special case equations
only: Don't they teach you juveniles fizz in your reformatory?
> If you
> use Santa Clause, then your theory is only invalidated if it makes an
> empirically falsifiable prediction.
Just like every punk in the world! No, you criminal cretin:
You are not just guilty ONLY if you get caught. (This guy's
headed for a bad end. Bet on it.)
> Hell, you turkey, you could
> postulate Dark Matter and Dark Energy and have credible theory - at
> least before empirical assay.
Duh! That's what a lot of turkeys have already done!
Where've you been this whole entire century!?!?!?
(No doubt in diabetic shock rehab... or some other rehab.)
> The Keebler Elves sell an awful lot of keeblers, bulk shipment and
> dollars received.
Their cookies are stale and their packages easily punctured
(so I can understand your affinity to the little people): But
you are forgiven your tooth-corrupted obsession with small
sweet things, honey. (Aside: Wouldn't it be something if
this guy was a priest!)
> > Well, the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory
> > and Ed Wood's, I mean Ed Witten's supersymmetry
> > nonsense (and thereby potentially bestows incalculably
> > monumental savings to the physics establishment by
> > keeping it from chasing rainbows with no pots of gold)
>
> The midget stands on tiptoe and wonders what is on top of the desk.
Now, now: Don't punish yourself so. Just slip on your best high-
"heel slippers" and dream THAT makes you tall enough to yet see
something above the desk--Think big! Sit on somebody's lap
if you haff'ta. And remember: No matter how small you are
you don't have to waste your life ogling only the bats & balls
playing mean smells at your limited current level of vision, you
nosy little fellow you! Now, see: who loves'ya, sugar!
> [snip]
SDR
> >
> > If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
> >
> > It's very simple: "If anywhere in your equations
> > Santa Claus is required: your equations are utterly
> > divorced from reality."
>
> Tell it to Coca-Cola, or to about 40% of all annual commerce.
Hey, bonehead, the Coca Cola equation REQUIRES Santa Claus
as a precondition of its fizz. Those are ALL special case equations
only: Don't they teach you juveniles fizz in your reformatory?
> If you
> use Santa Clause, then your theory is only invalidated if it makes an
> empirically falsifiable prediction.
Just like every punk in the world! No, you criminal cretin:
You are not just guilty ONLY if you get caught. (This guy's
headed for a bad end. Bet on it.)
> Hell, you turkey, you could
> postulate Dark Matter and Dark Energy and have credible theory - at
> least before empirical assay.
Duh! That's what a lot of turkeys have already done!
Where've you been this whole entire century!?!?!?
(No doubt in diabetic shock rehab... or some other rehab.)
> The Keebler Elves sell an awful lot of keeblers, bulk shipment and
> dollars received.
Their cookies are stale and their packages easily punctured
(so I can understand your affinity to the little people): But
you are forgiven your tooth-corrupted obsession with small
sweet things, honey. (Aside: Wouldn't it be something if
this guy was a priest!)
> > Well, the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory
> > and Ed Wood's, I mean Ed Witten's supersymmetry
> > nonsense (and thereby potentially bestows incalculably
> > monumental savings to the physics establishment by
> > keeping it from chasing rainbows with no pots of gold)
>
> The midget stands on tiptoe and wonders what is on top of the desk.
Now, now: Don't punish yourself so. Just slip on your best high-
"heel slippers" and dream THAT makes you tall enough to yet see
something above the desk--Think big! Sit on somebody's lap
if you haff'ta. And remember: No matter how small you are
you don't have to waste your life ogling only the bats & balls
playing mean smells at your limited current level of vision, you
nosy little fellow you! Now, see: who loves'ya, sugar!
> [snip]
S D Rodrian
http://poems.sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://democracy.sdrodrian.com
SDR
> >
> > If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
> >
> > It's very simple: "If anywhere in your equations
> > Santa Claus is required: your equations are utterly
> > divorced from reality."
>
> Tell it to Coca-Cola, or to about 40% of all annual commerce.
Hey, bonehead, the Coca Cola equation REQUIRES Santa Claus
as a precondition of its fizz. Those are ALL special case equations
only: Don't they teach you juveniles fizz in your reformatory?
> If you
> use Santa Clause, then your theory is only invalidated if it makes an
> empirically falsifiable prediction.
Just like every punk in the world! No, you criminal cretin:
You are not just guilty ONLY if you get caught. (This guy's
headed for a bad end. Bet on it.)
> Hell, you turkey, you could
> postulate Dark Matter and Dark Energy and have credible theory - at
> least before empirical assay.
Duh! That's what a lot of turkeys have already done!
Where've you been this whole entire century!?!?!?
(No doubt in diabetic shock rehab... or some other rehab.)
> The Keebler Elves sell an awful lot of keeblers, bulk shipment and
> dollars received.
Their cookies are stale and their packages easily punctured
(so I can understand your affinity to the little people): But
you are forgiven your tooth-corrupted obsession with small
sweet things, honey. (Aside: Wouldn't it be something if
this guy was a priest!)
> > Well, the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory
> > and Ed Wood's, I mean Ed Witten's supersymmetry
> > nonsense (and thereby potentially bestows incalculably
> > monumental savings to the physics establishment by
> > keeping it from chasing rainbows with no pots of gold)
>
> The midget stands on tiptoe and wonders what is on top of the desk.
Now, now: Don't punish yourself so. Just slip on your best high-
"heel slippers" and dream THAT makes you tall enough to yet see
something above the desk--Think big! Sit on somebody's lap
if you haff'ta. And remember: No matter how small you are
you don't have to waste your life ogling only the bats & balls
playing mean smells at your limited current level of vision, you
nosy little fellow you! Now, see: who loves'ya, sugar!
> [snip]
S D Rodrian
http://poems.sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://democracy.sdrodrian.com
SDR
Self-evidently, not even a single guess is required:
But I do admire your bravery in revealing like this
to all who guessed that you did NOT read it
that you have your head in the toilet. While, so sweetly
guileless, boasting to all who guessed that you DID read it
how you had already lost your head down the toilet
many moons ago! (Some premature flush, I take it.)
Luck with everything else, though!
SDR
news:<40017533...@nospamfor.me>...
> SDR wrote:
> >
> > If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
> >
> > It's very simple: "If anywhere in your equations
> > Santa Claus is required: your equations are utterly
> > divorced from reality."
> >
> > Well, the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory
> > and Ed Wood's, I mean Ed Witten's supersymmetry
> > nonsense
>
> rather then calling it nonsense, why don't you show the Santa Clauses in
> M-theory?
Obviously you did not read the original post. And,
since I despair of usenet users having the expertise
to work their way up a usenet thread... I reprint it
in full at the end of this post. Whatchagonna do?
> The theory has no internal mathematical inconsistencies.
Few works of science fiction show any internal dramatic
inconsistencies... yet they are ALL still fictions:
I have no objection to their being balanced equations.
I enjoy a game of chess now & then. I only object to
the superstition that their called-for reality supercedes
reality! (That we are all knights, bishops, or pawns.)
Sir: it's whether they are in agreement with the laws
of physics, with the reality of the universe outside
their however elegant agreements with themselves.
> The formulas for the 4 forces (of QED and
> Relativity) can be derived from it.
And apple pies and sugar plum fairies, if you just
waste the time to derive them from it... although you
might need to throw in 7 or 10 more dimensions still
to make your equations balance out (vs. themselves).
> Needless to say that QED and Relativity have been
> thouroughly verified and have
> not been disproven so far.
It's hard to disprove that map but by discovering a planet
orbiting a disembodied head somewhere: No, general
relativity is not something to be disproved. It's one flaw
is its inability to give any answers to why the universe/gravity.
(Why we exist at all.) But it does map them most elegantly.
Too many quantum field theories make far too ambitious
(pretentious) claims. It would be far better that quantum
theory went back to work as the marvelous instrument it is
for making informed guesses (statistical analysis, et al):
Once you begin to artificially impose (give preference of
place to) a reality derived from quantum theory (necessarily
merely informed guesses) over and above the reality of the
laws of physics/nature... you will get yourself into trouble.
And that's exactly where we are now.
Rather: Take the humbler route of the Standard Model and
study reality one atom (subparticle) at a time. I know it's
not as niftly as putting together a TinkerToy. But that's life.
START QUOTE:
If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
It's very simple: "If anywhere in your equations
Santa Claus is required: your equations are utterly
divorced from reality."
Well, the Santa Claus Law disproves string theory
and Ed Wood's, I mean Ed Witten's supersymmetry
The mobius strip, for example, is perhaps the
In general relativity, for example, the number "3" is
restricted to the construction of a three-dimensional
grid whose purpose extends ONLY to the orientations
of the required map (which is the principal purpose
of having devised/assigned the number "3" to the
"dimensions" of reality in the first place--That is,
so that such a map could be drawn up). And so:
S D Rodrian's Santa Claus Law:
"If anywhere in your equations Santa Claus is
required: your equations are utterly divorced from
reality."
S D Rodrian
Franz Heymann
"SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
news:58087ec7.04011...@posting.google.com...
> "Franz Heymann" <notfranz...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:<btrpqt$n58$2...@sparta.btinternet.com>...
> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> > news:58087ec7.04011...@posting.google.com...
> > > If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
> >
> > [Three guesses as to whether I read the snipped sewage.]
> >
> > Franz
>
> Self-evidently, not even a single guess is required:
I am glad that you find it is self-evident that you produced sewage
[snip]
Franz
SDR
> "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> news:58087ec7.04011...@posting.google.com...
> > "Franz Heymann" <notfranz...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:<btrpqt$n58$2...@sparta.btinternet.com>...
> > > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> > > news:58087ec7.04011...@posting.google.com...
> > > > If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
> > >
> > > [Three guesses as to whether I read the snipped sewage.]
> > >
> > > Franz
> >
> > Self-evidently, not even a single guess is required:
>
> I am glad that you find it is self-evident that you produced sewage
>
> [snip]
>
> Franz
People who do not come clean about their producing sewage
are probably just trying to hide that they are producing
more sewage than most: Hope no one blows the whistle on ya!
Friend to the EPA,
Franz Heymann
> "Franz Heymann" <notfranz...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:<btudt1$q9t$8...@sparta.btinternet.com>...
> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> > news:58087ec7.04011...@posting.google.com...
> > > "Franz Heymann" <notfranz...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> > news:<btrpqt$n58$2...@sparta.btinternet.com>...
> > > > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:58087ec7.04011...@posting.google.com...
> > > > > If String Theory Cannot Be Proved--Can It Be Disproved? Yes!
> > > >
> > > > [Three guesses as to whether I read the snipped sewage.]
> > > >
> > > > Franz
> > >
> > > Self-evidently, not even a single guess is required:
> >
> > I am glad that you find it is self-evident that you produced sewage
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > Franz
>
> People who do not come clean about their producing sewage
> are probably just trying to hide that they are producing
> more sewage than most: Hope no one blows the whistle on ya!
You're welcome to blow it any time you wish.
Franz