How thick is a string in String Theory?

[joinfree]

If the thickness of a string is zero meters, then the string is not physical. So, the String Theory is not physical. So, it is divine. So, there is God in String Theory.

 

[majj27]

If the thickness of a string is zero meters, then the string is not physical. So, the String Theory is not physical. So, it is divine. So, there is God in String Theory.

That's a strange bunch of assumptions to tie together.

a) I'm not certain you can say that a 1 dimensional construct is not physical. It CAN be measured (length), so there is at least some physicality to it. It's also really, really teensy.

b) I'm not certain you can say that things that aren't physical are by definition divine.

c) Even if these were both true (which I don't think they are), God is a part of String Theory only in that God is some form of omnipresent. But I don't think String Theory has God sitting in their equations as a variable.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

If the thickness of a string is zero meters, then the string is not physical. So, the String Theory is not physical. So, it is divine. So, there is God in String Theory.

String Theory, like Quantum Field Theory is a model of how observable reality behaves. In QFT, particles are modelled as point-like (zero dimensional), in String Theory they're modelled as one-dimensional loops or lines that can vibrate as harmonic oscillators. The different vibrational modes correspond to different particles.

In neither case are the points or strings anything more than mathematical models. At the scales involved, it doesn't really make sense to ask what they really look like - they're excitations of quantum fields. As Hawking once said, 'The Dreams That Stuff Is Made Of'.

 

[majj27]

String Theory, like Quantum Field Theory is a model of how observable reality behaves. In QFT, particles are modelled as point-like (zero dimensional), in String Theory they're modelled as one-dimensional loops or lines that can vibrate as harmonic oscillators. The different vibrational modes correspond to different particles.

In neither case are the points or strings anything more than mathematical models. At the scales involved, it doesn't really make sense to ask what they really look like - they're excitations of quantum fields. As Hawking once said, 'The Dreams That Stuff Is Made Of'.

Much better said than I did. Kudos!

 

[bhsmte]

LOL

 

[joinfree]

That's a strange bunch of assumptions to tie together.

a) I'm not certain you can say that a 1 dimensional construct is not physical. It CAN be measured (length), so there is at least some physicality to it. It's also really, really teensy.
....

1DIM body embedded into 3DIM Universe is not physical, because its size (thickness) can be measured and it is zero.

 

[majj27]

1DIM body embedded into 3DIM Universe is not physical, because its size (thickness) can be measured and it is zero.

Hmm... think I'll get an expert to weigh in, because sub-3D physical properties simply aren't my field. Things get wonky in Q-M conceptual space.

 

[Jon Osterman]

1DIM body embedded into 3DIM Universe is not physical, because its size (thickness) can be measured and it is zero.

The difficulty here is your definitions. What do you mean by size? What do you mean by thickness? What are you actually trying to measure?

String Theory is pure speculation, but the same issues arise for particles, which are not. So these would be a better thing to discuss.

So, how do we measure the "size" of a point-particle? We fire stuff at it and watch how it bounces off. So when discussing "size" we are really asking about the range of the forces we use to interact with it. Do you understand? It is no different for a string.

 

[joinfree]

The difficulty here is your definitions. What do you mean by size? What do you mean by thickness? What are you actually trying to measure?

String Theory is pure speculation, but the same issues arise for particles, which are not. So these would be a better thing to discuss.

So, how do we measure the "size" of a point-particle? We fire stuff at it and watch how it bounces off. So when discussing "size" we are really asking about the range of the forces we use to interact with it. Do you understand? It is no different for a string.

Talking, that particle is point like (or string is line-like), means what we are talking about mathematical object with 3DIM physical field. Correct?

 

[HitchSlap]

1DIM body embedded into 3DIM Universe is not physical, because its size (thickness) can be measured and it is zero.

So what you’re saying is, size matters.

 

[durangodawood]

...is not physical. So, it is divine.....

So, are ideas divine?

 

[joinfree]

So, are ideas divine?

Do you collect them like mushrooms in forest? Do they grow on trees like apples? Are they being dig out the earth like diamonds? No. No. No. They are not material!

 

[joinfree]

So what you’re saying is, size matters.

Size of Big Bang Beginning is the perfect zero, thus, BB is not physical. Thus, it is spiritual. God is there in Big Bang Theory.

 

[Kylie]

If the thickness of a string is zero meters, then the string is not physical. So, the String Theory is not physical. So, it is divine. So, there is God in String Theory.

So many false dichotomies.

If it has a width of zero then it can't be a physical thing? Citation required.

If it's not physical, then it must be divine? Citation required.

If it's divine, then it must be God? Citation required.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

If the thickness of a string is zero meters, then the string is not physical.

Are you sure?

So, the String Theory is not physical.

String Theory is a theory, not a string. It describes the behaviour of strings.

So, it is divine. So, there is God in String Theory.

That's just a non-sequitur.

Using your logic you should reason: Strings are not physical -> Strings are divine -> String Theory describes God.

ходящий по глупости

 

[DogmaHunter]

If the thickness of a string is zero meters, then the string is not physical. So, the String Theory is not physical. So, it is divine. So, there is God in String Theory.

In other words: when something doesn't seem to make sense to you, just insert "God" and pretend that that makes it sensible

 

[DogmaHunter]

Do you collect them like mushrooms in forest? Do they grow on trees like apples? Are they being dig out the earth like diamonds? No. No. No. They are not material!

Indeed. But in your OP, you made the assertion that things that aren't physical, are divine.

So, ideas are divine?
They aren't physical or material, right?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Size of Big Bang Beginning is the perfect zero, thus, BB is not physical. Thus, it is spiritual. God is there in Big Bang Theory.

BB doesn't start with any kind of "zero".

 

[joinfree]

So many false dichotomies.

If it has a width of zero then it can't be a physical thing? Citation required.
IT IS MATHEMATICAL THEN.

If it's not physical, then it must be divine? Citation required.
ACCORDING TO ARISTOTELES THERE ARE TWO AREAS: 1. PHYSICS, 2. METAPHYSICS. THE METAPHYSICS CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO PHYSICS. AGREE?

If it's divine, then it must be God? Citation required. THE MOST POWERFULL SPIRIT CAN BE NAMED "GOD".

 

[bhsmte]

Size of Big Bang Beginning is the perfect zero, thus, BB is not physical. Thus, it is spiritual. God is there in Big Bang Theory.

Prove it.