| String Theory Discussion Forum |
| [ String Theory Home ] [ Forum Index ] |
Re: Superstrings cannot be 'fundamental'Posted by Jfnewell7 on July 20, 2002 at 07:22:23: In Reply to: Re: Superstrings cannot be 'fundamental' posted by buzzzsaw on July 08, 2002 at 00:44:21: I may very well not understand this accurately, but I was under the impression that the energy itself involved the shaping of space at that level, rather than being something different within a space of that many dimensions. In other words, shape of space and energy become the same thing. If not, then the question arises, what is energy that would be different from the shape of space? Even if a string is a shape in space, it still has parts - parts of that shape. One hypothesis would be the one in this thread that the real fundamental must be a single unit of some kind. On the other hand, perhaps the real fundamental could be just space itself before units form. The touching points model also gives us several points that are in some ways distinct, yet in some ways are so united they can be thought of as one unit. So we have a possibility of a unit which is also somewhat differentiated without ceasing to be one unit. This would be a subtler and more complex fundamental, and what is is would partly depend on how many dimensions is possible, which isn't known yet. Jim Newell
Follow Ups: (Reload page to see most recent)
|