Page 1 of 2
#1
If he had more time to work out his theory, would it have discredited quantum theory? I mean he only came up with possibly the most important breakthroughs in scientific history, so why is it so easy for us to say he just went to sh*t after that?
We're only strays.
#2
Einstein didn't like quantum mechanics. He believed in simplicity and smoothness in nature. We know for a fact that quantum mechanics IS the cause for so many things that classical physics can't explain.

Einstein was the greatest mind of the 20th century, but he was a stubborn old man who couldn't accept the emerging truths.
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#3
You may also want to look up:
Principle of Plentitude
The Great Chain of Being

You know...if you're into that kind of stuff.
Quote by Grundy0
Never forget what really matters in life, friends and family.
Team Pale Yellow?
------m-------m------
| | (oo) | |
||(~)||



Mom <3
#5
well i dont know a lot on the subject i heard string theory could replace it although sting theory is pretty complicated. I do agree that as time goes on it will get simplier but we have to start at a more complicated level. I dont think we ever started at the simple level.
#6
^But String theory has the problem that it can't be proved.

Look on wiki for that one.
#7
Quote by masterohumans
well i dont know a lot on the subject i heard string theory could replace it although sting theory is pretty complicated. I do agree that as time goes on it will get simplier but we have to start at a more complicated level. I dont think we ever started at the simple level.


English class...
are you flunking it?
Quote by tjhome28
It annoys me when kids sit there playing the sweet child o mine or smoke on the water intro riff repeatedly
and badly
and so loud the whole shop can't hear themselves think
and with the worst amp settings possible

[/rant]


+1
#8
The general theory of relativity very accurately describes the physical behavior of light, gravitation, and objects undergoing accelerated motion. However, it does NOT accurately describe the behavior and interaction of very small particles such as atoms and their components. That's what quantum theory does.

Scientists now are trying to work towards a theory that accurately predicts things on any scale, which will be similar to, but not exactly the same as, both theories.

tl;dr- both theories are wrong, they only serve to approximate predictions on different scales. They're both very close, but both wrong.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that it goes both ways. When you apply quantum mechanics to large objects, the theory goes to shit.
Quote by Th6r6a6sH
The Pit is a reliable source of information
Quote by imdeth
My penis is tough. My penis is elite.
Quote by Oblivion_Rps
I like Luigi.

His cock is maximum.

Are You a PROG-HEAD? I am.

OPETH RULES.

Member of Åkerfeldtism

My last.fm
#9
Edit: on the quantum physics level:

But what if things AREN'T as random as we make them out to be? Maybe there really is complete order, but our understanding of science is too small to accommodate it? And maybe quantum theory just describes things in a way that "works" but isn't really true? I'm just speculating, btw, I don't know much about the stuff. I just think that someone as brilliant as Einstein shouldn't have been dismissed so hastily as a stubborn old man, as darkstar put it.
We're only strays.
#10
Quote by Martyr's Prayer
But what if things AREN'T as random as we make them out to be? Maybe there really is complete order, but our understanding of science is too small to accommodate it? And maybe quantum theory just describes things in a way that "works" but isn't really true? I'm just speculating, btw, I don't know much about the stuff. I just think that someone as brilliant as Einstein shouldn't have been dismissed so hastily as a stubborn old man, as darkstar put it.


This is how a P-N junction, the basis of a transistor, works. You are able to have a desktop because of this. And Einstein did not help in any way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunneling
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#11
Quote by Martyr's Prayer
If he had more time to work out his theory, would it have discredited quantum theory? I mean he only came up with possibly the most important breakthroughs in scientific history, so why is it so easy for us to say he just went to sh*t after that?


Depends what his theory turned out to be.

Most people don't think he went shit. Two of his three biggest "errors" actually look like they weren't errors at all: the cosmological constant and the idea of a GUT. The cosmological constant isn't quite as he envisioned it but most physicists accept the idea of a GUT. His other error was his rejection of QT and that looks like a probable error, it's not certain whether QT is the "final" theory as it were.


Note: String Theory is a bunch of made up wank.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#12
Quote by darkstar2466
This is how a P-N junction, the basis of a transistor, works. You are able to have a desktop because of this. And Einstein did not help in any way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunneling


Right, but the way we describe the particles behaving in that fashion may not be accurate at all. Like I said, maybe the apparent randomness (of the wave patterns exhibited by the quanta) isn't actually random at all? That doesn't mean that we still aren't able to utilize it, though.
We're only strays.
#13
Quote by Martyr's Prayer
Right, but the way we describe the particles behaving in that fashion may not be accurate at all. Like I said, maybe the apparent randomness of the wave patterns exhibited by the quanta aren't actually random at all? That doesn't mean that we still aren't able to utilize it, though.


A basic class in quantum mechanics will tell you that everything depends on the probability density. It is all probability at the quantum scale - nothing is definite.
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#14
Quote by darkstar2466
A basic class in quantum mechanics will tell you that everything depends on the probability density. It is all probability at the quantum scale - nothing is definite.


Nothing is definite, including the fact that everything is probability. There are a number of highly qualified physicists who will vehemently disagree that we are certain that is all probability. Many believe that there is some deeper reason/theory/logic behind quantum behaviour.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#15
Quote by Meths
Many believe that there is some deeper reason/theory/logic behind quantum behaviour.


I personally do, and I think Einstein was onto it.
We're only strays.
#16
Quote by Meths
Nothing is definite, including the fact that everything is probability. There are a number of highly qualified physicists who will vehemently disagree that we are certain that is all probability. Many believe that there is some deeper reason/theory/logic behind quantum behaviour.


Math and Physics have always been after elegance. If someone can formulate an elegant solution that replaces the "jitteryness" (as said by Brian Greene) of quantum mechanics, I'll be the first to embrace that. Until then, I'll stick to current models.
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#18
^ +1 @Darkstar

Einstein didn't like Quantum Mechanics from the begining because of the use of probability,
i.e. it wasn't elegant.
#19
Quote by LordBishek
Why?


He is a religious man. It might subconsciously have something to do with that. I used to believe in the formal god when I was in middle school, and when I read up on this stuff, I thought that there would certainly be a deeper meaning / higher order solution to this stuff, etc. Now I don't believe in a formal god and I don't think there is a deeper meaning.
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#20
Quote by LordBishek
Why?


Well because like I said, he was single-handedly (SP?) responsible for the most important scientific breakthrough in history. And when he died, he was working on what people are still trying to figure out to this day, i.e. a unified theory. I think if he had lived long enough to complete it, we'd be in a very different world right now.

EDIT: to darkstar's last post, there are plenty of minds in the scientific world that back up Einstein in this (as Meths pointed out), and I'm sure very few of them are religious. And please let's not let this degenerate into a religious discussion.
We're only strays.
Last edited by Martyr's Prayer at Sep 30, 2008,
#21
Quote by darkstar2466
He is a religious man. It might subconsciously have something to do with that. I used to believe in the formal god when I was in middle school, and when I read up on this stuff, I thought that there would certainly be a deeper meaning / higher order solution to this stuff, etc. Now I don't believe in a formal god and I don't think there is a deeper meaning.


Oh, OK. I thought there was other reasons.

Also, I still don't know what this betrayal shit is about.
#22
Quote by Martyr's Prayer
I personally do, and I think Einstein was onto it.


I think there quite possibly is but I'm not sure he was onto it. I'd have to know more about what he was trying though I guess. I'm pretty sure that string theory is entirely in the wrong direction though, he was probably closer than that is.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#23
Quote by Meths
I think there quite possibly is but I'm not sure he was onto it. I'd have to know more about what he was trying though I guess. I'm pretty sure that string theory is entirely in the wrong direction though, he was probably closer than that is.


I definitely know you don't know the math behind string theory and I definitely know that I don't know the math behind string theory. Until you and I learn it, I don't think we're in a position to throw out layman feces at the theory. It is pretty powerful, as it unites the Einsteinian field theory with quantum mechanics...
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#25
I've been through that site before but I was never in a position to understand the math. I'll get a BS in Physics eventually, and then I may be able to understand and work my own solutions out. A lot of the statistical mathematics and PDE stuff you need to solve these things don't come from regular math classes. You need to take courses under the physics department...
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#26
^Yeah statistics and probability can be hard, basically because you need Analysis and Measure Theory to get things.
#27
Quote by darkstar2466
I definitely know you don't know the math behind string theory and I definitely know that I don't know the math behind string theory. Until you and I learn it, I don't think we're in a position to throw out layman feces at the theory. It is pretty powerful, as it unites the Einsteinian field theory with quantum mechanics...


No, but I'm pretty damn sure I know what the definition of "theory" is and I know that string theory does not meet it. I also know some of the conceptual flaws behind it. The maths is irrelevant if it's a faulty concept.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#29
But Meths, concepts arise FROM math. Why do you think they decided to call it a string? Because Leonard Susskind likes string cheese? NO. It's because those packets of energy display the oscillation properties of a loose string.
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#30
I think that the ideas from people like Wolfram, and how the Universe operates like a computer program, or cellular automata, have the most groundbreaking ideas. Essentially our universe is run by a set of rules, everything is computable, for everything that happens there is an infinitely logical solution, and our reality could be a computer program itself. Although don't think of a computer like a Windows or Mac.
#31
^^to support Darkstar's post

def.- A string is a subspace K of R^3 homeomorphic to S^1 (i.e the circle).

Taken from my Topology book
#32
You were watching Science channel last night werent you ?


Me too

Science channel
YELLOWFRIZBEE s FreezerBurn


Stepco's Master
|Colowomble 2016|PSN=yellowfrizbee| + UG Community Radio|
#33
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eC14GonZnU

I have such a hard time explaining digital physics, but here's a great video on what I'm trying to say.
#34
Quote by Ostinattos
^^to support Darkstar's post

def.- A string is a subspace K of R^3 homeomorphic to S^1 (i.e the circle).

Taken from my Topology book


GET THAT DISCRETE MATH AWAY FROM MEEEE.

Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#35
Quote by Martyr's Prayer
I personally do, and I think Einstein was onto it.


of course

there HAS to be a unifying theory of the universe.
Quote by The Spoon
Unless you're sure she likes you, telling her you like her has a 110% chance of failing.

But hey, at least you have a 10% chance of absolutely guaranteeing failure.
#38
Quote by Ostinattos
^Could you elaborate on that one?


String Theory is background dependent. A GUT will be background independent.

Quote by darkstar2466
But Meths, concepts arise FROM math. Why do you think they decided to call it a string? Because Leonard Susskind likes string cheese? NO. It's because those packets of energy display the oscillation properties of a loose string.


The maths behind string theory was originally done on the back of a few concepts. Incorrect ones.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#39
The thing about Digital Physics is that right now in Physics, we have General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Maxwell's Equations, Gravity, Thermodynamics, etc. and they all lead us to true conclusions, but they all seem to conflict with each other. It's very choppy in other words. If our universe is really run like a computer program like these cellular automata, under a set of rules, and we could find out what these rules are, our understanding of the universe is perfect and flawless.
#40
^ I don't have access to sound at the moment (too lazy to get mah headphones ) but I'll check out the video later.
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
Page 1 of 2