Thread: UFOs: Threat or Menace?

Originally Posted by Ariasexta

In fact the universe under Einsteins Relativities is a bit boring, I have come to doubt the existence of blackholes, they are foundamentally not in consistence of the Relativities, neither in concord with Quantum theories. Completely close space-time by gravity simply is meaningless, it means, a stellar body as massive as a blackhole should not remain upon our current dimension of space-time, it would have disappear from our universe by warping into higher dimensional space-time.

Ed Witten has reportedly unified gravity with the other 3 forces by sufficiently describing the 10th spacial dimension in the correct mathematics. But this below is from 'way back in 1995.

"The strong coupling dynamics of string theories in dimension d greater than 4 are studied. It is argued, among other things, that eleven-dimensional supergravity arises as a low energy limit of the ten-dimensional Type IIA superstring, and that a recently conjectured duality between the heterotic string and Type IIA superstrings controls the strong coupling dynamics of the heterotic string in five, six, and seven dimensions and implies S duality for both heterotic and Type II strings."

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9503124.pdf

If everything is weirdly dimensioned strings vibrating in 10 dimensions resulting in 10 dimensional shapes we can't even envision, and thereby coupling in unique ways with some exchange particles but not others
AND fields are influential because of mere 'bumps' in their condensates, then no more reduction and simplifying is needed. Everything is very simple, including gravity (strings?) which emanates across all the adjacent 'bounded’ universes?

Originally Posted by Roger Knox

I think that in times of great fear and stress people are more susceptible to experiencing things as paranormal phenomena. As for Congressional Hearings, they have more important things to do. Maybe you have written about this before, but I wonder if with all the time you've spent observing the sky as a meteorologist or astronomer, have you ever seen a UFO?

I didn't expect to be able to estimate the height of clouds by type and appearance comparisons, as we were taught. But eventually I could (checking them with the Rotating Beam Ceilometer and PIREPS).

But no, not even unidentified aircraft where I've worked. I decided that people needed to want to see UFOs, but I certainly listened seriously to what happened to them... In Athens Greece I worked on one of the Seven Hills overlooking the Parthenon (near the quarry the marble blocks came out of) and many folks saw UFOs over their famous site.. I guess that's to be expected. The Greeks are very proud of their past. When I got a taxi ride from the airport the taxi driver had a list of English words hanging from his dashboard derived from Greek. I thought wow, such pride!

Originally Posted by Luchesi

Ed Witten has reportedly unified gravity with the other 3 forces by sufficiently describing the 10th spacial dimension in the correct mathematics. But this below is from 'way back in 1995.

"The strong coupling dynamics of string theories in dimension d greater than 4 are studied. It is argued, among other things, that eleven-dimensional supergravity arises as a low energy limit of the ten-dimensional Type IIA superstring, and that a recently conjectured duality between the heterotic string and Type IIA superstrings controls the strong coupling dynamics of the heterotic string in five, six, and seven dimensions and implies S duality for both heterotic and Type II strings."

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9503124.pdf

If everything is weirdly dimensioned strings vibrating in 10 dimensions resulting in 10 dimensional shapes we can't even envision, and thereby coupling in unique ways with some exchange particles but not others
AND fields are influential because of mere 'bumps' in their condensates, then no more reduction and simplifying is needed. Everything is very simple, including gravity (strings?) which emanates across all the adjacent 'bounded’ universes?

I also am interested mathematics but not in the same mood with the arts. I have some thoughts about the string theory also, and probably could overturn it while leaving out some formulae to revisit. However, so far the higher dimensions are a pure math concept, experimentally unrealistic, but I personally believe that higher dimensions are true. Current mathematical models only give quantum ambiguity to evade the necessity of the higher dimensions. And if we already "have" the Higgs boson to explain gravity, do we really need higher dimensions? It seems to me that Higgs boson and Superstring theory are in contradiction to each other.

Originally Posted by Ariasexta

I also am interested mathematics but not in the same mood with the arts. I have some thoughts about the string theory also, and probably could overturn it while leaving out some formulae to revisit. However, so far the higher dimensions are a pure math concept, experimentally unrealistic, but I personally believe that higher dimensions are true. Current mathematical models only give quantum ambiguity to evade the necessity of the higher dimensions. And if we already "have" the Higgs boson to explain gravity, do we really need higher dimensions? It seems to me that Higgs boson and Superstring theory are in contradiction to each other.

I like the idea that instead of pointlike particles in the Standard Theory, String Theory says that the particles we think we see are one-dimensional strings. And they have the familiar behavior of strings — and this can explain what Dark Matter is and why it has its peculiar attributes. So I admire the work that’s being done.


Without that exotic Dark Matter stuff we wouldn't be here, so it is relevant to our existential condition. I mean, if the sun contains more than 20% Dark Matter then it’s a big part of our theoretical predictions about habitability on our jewel of a planet. 'Kinda important.

Look at these two interesting articles: the former is from 2001, the latter is from 2016 after the the supposed Higg boson discovery. The rhetorics are contradicting each other, the latter is trying hard to explain away something:

How does the Higgs boson affect string theory?

February 26, 2001

Still, enough is known about string theory that there are some suggestive connections to our world. Most important, string theory seems to require our world to have a property called supersymmetry. And a supersymmetric Standard Model with string theory boundary conditions has Higgs bosons and explains their properties. Whereas the mass of the Higgs boson cannot be calculated in the Standard Model, in the supersymmetric Standard Model the mass can be calculated approximately to be 9040 GeV, a range that contains the likely discovered value.

Finding a Higgs boson thus strongly supports the supersymmetric Standard Model, which in turn supports the notion that string theory is indeed the right approach to nature. If so, it is very likely that more confirmation of the existence of the Higgs boson will be discovered in the next few years at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, where data collection will begin in March 2001.

Difference Between Higgs Boson and String Theory
August 23, 2016
by Kuma
7 min read

Unlike in photon, invariant masses of graviton or gluon are zero; the Higgs boson is a massive particle with a mass in the range of 125 GeV/c2 -126 GeV/c2. Therefore, a large amount of energy is needed to create a Higgs boson. In a particle accelerator, charged particles are accelerated and strike against each other. As a result, the energy of the particles is converted into mass according to the Einstein equation E = mc2 . In order to create a Higgs boson, a particle accelerator must be able to accelerate the particles very close to the speed of light because Higgs boson is a massive particle. However, in 2013, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN announced that they had succeeded in discovering the Higgs particle. Even though the standard model isn’t a completely acceptable story of matter and energy, the existence of the Higgs particle confirmed some other important predictions of the standard model: the existence of the Higgs field, the Higgs mechanism, and the way particles acquire their mass.

The strings in the string theories may be either closed or open strings or both. One can start to develop a string theory from any type of these strings. If he wants to develop a string theory only for bosons, it is a bosonic string theory. A bosonic string theory explains all the fundamental interactions except matter. The bosonic string theory is a theory of 26 dimensions. But if someone wants to develop a string theory which is capable of explaining all the fundamental interactions as well as matter, a special symmetry between the bosons (force carriers) and the fermions (matter particles) called “supersymmetry” is needed. Such a string theory is known as a “superstring theory.” There are five types of superstrings theories, and they are still being developed. The latest revolution in the string theory is “the M-theory” which is still under development.

It is interesting to see the huge gap between the estimated mass of the Higg and the founded mass by CERN, why？ Likely because the earlier model of string theory had a large gap between the Quantum mechanics and its theorized symmetric structures. We have to note that Sting theory of any kind is centered around the concepts of symmetry or supersymmetry, which are meant to be a bridge between the Quantum and Relativities theories. However, their constructed symmetries are like broken islands in an ocean of chaos that can not be explained away. Also, originally Superstring Theory calls on 11 dimension, but for the Higgs, we are going to have 26 dimensions, it shows that the earlier dimensional structures were unable to hold the water for the Higg experimental datas: the energy required to produce the Higgs bump was larger than their original calculation.

Originally Posted by Luchesi

I like the idea that instead of pointlike particles in the Standard Theory, String Theory says that the particles we think we see are one-dimensional strings. And they have the familiar behavior of strings — and this can explain what Dark Matter is and why it has its peculiar attributes. So I admire the work that’s being done.


Without that exotic Dark Matter stuff we wouldn't be here, so it is relevant to our existential condition. I mean, if the sun contains more than 20% Dark Matter then it’s a big part of our theoretical predictions about habitability on our jewel of a planet. 'Kinda important.

The dark matter theory is too evasive that I do not like it at all. But I do like the String Theory however I can pick faults with it for now. I go with instinction as well as scientifical proofs, so doing I recommend everyone to follow.( Maybe the word string reminds of music, so it resonates with me). Also coincidentally, my own theory about the string theory also has its foundation on the dark energy(my version of the dark matter), as it is too close to truth, yet theoretically naive, it could be dangerous to publish it for now. I will have to wait for the science and general social conditions to progress to complete my own theory. My math level is undergraduate with a bit graduate senses, I can only theorize without proving it. SO basically, string theory is still important to me I have to wait for it to mature to compliment my theory, I am not in favor of Higgs in the long run. Instinct alert.

The math is not as difficult as it looks, but it will take massive energy to get some solid skills in it. You can do it by starting with Classical Mechanic and Calculus, and then going to the Diophantine problems. I devide Math into 3 topics: 1-Mechanics;2-Calculus;3-Arithmetics(Algebra is a branch of arithmetics, Diophatine problems are the root of them both).The number 3 is the most difficult to figure, you will need profound skills and experience to get some scores out of it.

By watching yt videos on the Higgs and its experiments, you will have a lot of necessary ideas. Back to the topic, we still have a long way to go before we can unlock the sacred secrets of the universe, my theory only tells me that the final answers are not atheistic but will also reveal our spiritual and religious history as well. It is going to be as elegant as it is orderly, as mysterious as it is gnostic, finally I can say that there is an end to the science, we are going steadily toward it now.

Also, there are important significant meanings in all the "wrong" scientifical theories and experiments, science to me is not necessarily to reveal the facts and truth all the time, it is mostly importantly an art of approximation. No matter what is to be proven right at the end, there is nothing to be unnecessary in the history of science including religion and other failed theories. They will finally reveal something truthful at the end. It is Ok to learn whatever theories we have today, the scientifical truth is not meant to be monopolistic, but redemptive, like a light beam that suddenly brightening up the darkness, everything will become truthful and given meaning: there is no falsehood exists under the light of truth.

Originally Posted by Ariasexta

Look at these two interesting articles: the former is from 2001, the latter is from 2016 after the the supposed Higg boson discovery. The rhetorics are contradicting each other, the latter is trying hard to explain away something:

It is interesting to see the huge gap between the estimated mass of the Higg and the founded mass by CERN, why？ Likely because the earlier model of string theory had a large gap between the Quantum mechanics and its theorized symmetric structures. We have to note that Sting theory of any kind is centered around the concepts of symmetry or supersymmetry, which are meant to be a bridge between the Quantum and Relativities theories. However, their constructed symmetries are like broken islands in an ocean of chaos that can not be explained away. Also, originally Superstring Theory calls on 11 dimension, but for the Higgs, we are going to have 26 dimensions, it shows that the earlier dimensional structures were unable to hold the water for the Higg experimental datas: the energy required to produce the Higgs bump was larger than their original calculation.

I wouldn't be too critical of this history because even the physicists I work with could explain this history to you. I don't want to post something that isn't correct, so seek out someone more knowledgable. I have problems keeping up with the new developments in my field of dynamic meteorology and global circulations. Most scientists want predictions to be wrong so that they can learn something unexpected. Science is just a self-correcting approach and an acknowledged mechanism.

Originally Posted by Ariasexta

The dark matter theory is too evasive that I do not like it at all. But I do like the String Theory however I can pick faults with it for now. I go with instinction as well as scientifical proofs, so doing I recommend everyone to follow.( Maybe the word string reminds of music, so it resonates with me). Also coincidentally, my own theory about the string theory also has its foundation on the dark energy(my version of the dark matter), as it is too close to truth, yet theoretically naive, it could be dangerous to publish it for now. I will have to wait for the science and general social conditions to progress to complete my own theory. My math level is undergraduate with a bit graduate senses, I can only theorize without proving it. SO basically, string theory is still important to me I have to wait for it to mature to compliment my theory, I am not in favor of Higgs in the long run. Instinct alert.

I’ve read that the strength of the Higgs field is 10,000 trillion times weaker than it should be.
The per unit strength of Dark Energy should be 10 to the power of 120 times stronger than the value measured in astronomy. That number is a trillion trillion quadrillion times bigger than the number of atoms in the entire universe.
Something's wrong with human thinking, and if not, then it's the result that physicists don't like to find, i.e. these values are highly improbable and unique to this universe. 'Not acceptable.

Why are the per unit strength of Dark Energy and the strength of the Higgs field both so far to the weak side of their theoretical ranges? We shouldn’t complain, it’s the reason we’re here. But why? Could the answer be that there’s just so many universes? 10^500 universes according the vibrational states of the 10 spatial dimensions of string theory.
This Higgs “fiasco” stuff has gotten wild with the theorized range of the strength for the Higgs and the range of the per unit strength of Dark Energy. Both are peculiar findings. But they can explain why we're here. ...and that's what science is all about.

Apparently, string theory can explain these wild conditions, but the telltale hints of new particles need to be found. There's none in the energy window reached by CERN as was hopefully predicted by the string theory. It’s been called a fiasco.

Originally Posted by Luchesi

I’ve read that the strength of the Higgs field is 10,000 trillion times weaker than it should be.
The per unit strength of Dark Energy should be 10 to the power of 120 times stronger than the value measured in astronomy. That number is a trillion trillion quadrillion times bigger than the number of atoms in the entire universe.
Something's wrong with human thinking, and if not, then it's the result that physicists don't like to find, i.e. these values are highly improbable and unique to this universe. 'Not acceptable.

Why are the per unit strength of Dark Energy and the strength of the Higgs field both so far to the weak side of their theoretical ranges? We shouldn’t complain, it’s the reason we’re here. But why? Could the answer be that there’s just so many universes? 10^500 universes according the vibrational states of the 10 spatial dimensions of string theory.
This Higgs “fiasco” stuff has gotten wild with the theorized range of the strength for the Higgs and the range of the per unit strength of Dark Energy. Both are peculiar findings. But they can explain why we're here. ...and that's what science is all about.

Apparently, string theory can explain these wild conditions, but the telltale hints of new particles need to be found. There's none in the energy window reached by CERN as was hopefully predicted by the string theory. It’s been called a fiasco.

The high energy is an ideology already, the Quantum Chaos is a pool of endless probability to be exploited. I am sure that Higgs bump was something, but not what they say to be. Overally, Cern does find something from time to time, but our definitions of them could be wrong, at least for now. Higgs Field is not equal to Higgs boson, it is a field of probability also, it is why the colliders had to run many many times to reach that bump.

Originally Posted by Ariasexta

The high energy is an ideology already, the Quantum Chaos is a pool of endless probability to be exploited. I am sure that Higgs bump was something, but not what they say to be. Overally, Cern does find something from time to time, but our definitions of them could be wrong, at least for now. Higgs Field is not equal to Higgs boson, it is a field of probability also, it is why the colliders had to run many many times to reach that bump.

Those are very good points. I always get this feeling that humans are not up to this task of understanding. We can experiment with only 4% of the mass (actually less than that) and then there's all those pesky higher spacial dimensions with their totally unseen effects, Calabi Yau shapes and/or undiscovered vibrational states and spin states. Colliding branes and multiverses.

added: Those physicists don't want to learn that this universe is completely unique and nothing in general can be learned, except that it's UNIQUE. A dead end for them!

Originally Posted by Luchesi

Those are very good points. I always get this feeling that humans are not up to this task of understanding. We can experiment with only 4% of the mass (actually less than that) and then there's all those pesky higher spacial dimensions with their totally unseen effects, Calabi Yau shapes and/or undiscovered vibrational states and spin states. Colliding branes and multiverses.

added: Those physicists don't want to learn that this universe is completely unique and nothing in general can be learned, except that it's UNIQUE. A dead end for them!

Our understanding is always on the approximation without a complete convergence on a definite value, the more we approach to the truth the more the error matters, and there is a possibility that these small or tiniest errors would turn out to be a portal to the world which is totally inverse to our own. Does errors matter? yes, and we are going to face them soon and the consequences could be biblical.

Yet, our current science can serve us as long as we observe the rules we set for ourselves. I guess if we want the truth after tiresome trials, truth will just come out the blue and hit us very hard, it is how life evolves.

Originally Posted by Jacck

but that is speculative physics. The real bedrock is the Standard Model and that is spectacularly confirmed by experiments. Lay people see these crazy predictions of String Theory and conclude that somehow all physics must be wrong. The fact is that the Standard Model is a crowning achievement of 300 years of painstaiking research and unification and it is fabulously precise in its predictions. Sure, it cannot explain everything, but physics would become boring if we had the TOE
https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/art...l-cant-explain

Classical Mecs is about 3 dimensional physics, when we peep into higher dimensions only God knows what we are dealing with. Somebody could punch us in the face through the worm hole and shut it up.

Being of a practical turn, I must ask re string or superstring theory: Is there a prediction that any of these can make that is even theoretically testable, in order to support or invalidate them? I have read that there is not, but have no idea whether or not this is true.

In my book, a hypothesis that cannot be tested lies outside the realm of science, like supernatural phenomena (God etc.)