UPSB v4
Serious Discussion / Physics
-
Date: Sat, Dec 18 2010 17:06:24
For those physics geeks out there. There has been a rise of a unified field theory callestring theory. The theory is the closest to describe how the universe is all described in one equation. Also if you look at the moon does it suddenyl appear if you look at it?
-
Date: Sat, Dec 18 2010 17:35:38
A rise... And fall. Stick to QCD for now, until the LHC or it's successor come up with something experimental we can work with.
-
Date: Sat, Dec 18 2010 22:36:04
id rather stick with throrectical phsyics
-
Date: Sat, Dec 18 2010 23:36:19
Yea MORDERN PHYSICS! @strat1227 we need you on this thread
-
Date: Sun, Dec 19 2010 14:09:21
Hidekyo wrote: id rather stick with throrectical phsyics
It's a world of fantasy. Physics is about realism, not fantasy. -
Date: Mon, Dec 20 2010 04:53:37
theoretical physics has historically predicted as much real life stuff as experimental has "discovered", so they're both equally valid Fresh
-
Date: Wed, Dec 22 2010 03:00:30
Hehe fresh so ur saying einstein wad just a crazy old man? I dont think so. String theory is only a theory but it is the closest to a unified field theory.
-
Date: Mon, Dec 27 2010 03:19:40
[video=youtube;U0kXkWXSXRA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kXkWXSXRA&feature=related[/video] Love this vid
-
Date: Mon, Dec 27 2010 16:39:39
hidekyo: string theory is a reaction though, and reactionary theoretical physics are rarely correct
-
Date: Mon, Dec 27 2010 18:11:33
Niceee
-
Date: Mon, Dec 27 2010 23:54:46
still theoretical physics isn't fantasy. Might be wrong but I believe it'll propel physics to a new level
-
Date: Tue, Dec 28 2010 00:02:34
-
Date: Tue, Dec 28 2010 00:03:26
Hippo2626 wrote: still theoretical physics isn't fantasy. Might be wrong but I believe it'll propel physics to a new level
Most things that propel sciences to a new level come from outside university teams. Its more likely to be a random genius with an incredible theory, but those are really rare. -
Date: Tue, Dec 28 2010 00:12:55
Awesome wrote: Most things that propel sciences to a new level come from outside university teams. Its more likely to be a random genius with an incredible theory, but those are really rare.
Oh yea I forgot to type it out. I was referring to thinking about things no one thinks about like how Einstein thinks and how the string theory came about. -
Date: Sun, Jan 2 2011 14:31:45
You know, Awesome, that was the case with advances such as Newton and Einstein, but modern theoretical physics hasn't had one of those for quite some time. Advances in string theory have been joint efforts. But meh, I'm just a first-year physics student. What do I know~
-
Date: Sun, Jan 2 2011 18:58:40
Surge wrote: You know, Awesome, that was the case with advances such as Newton and Einstein, but modern theoretical physics hasn't had one of those for quite some time. Advances in string theory have been joint efforts. But meh, I'm just a first-year physics student. What do I know~
There were also people making small advances through joint effort at the times of Newton and Einstein. I meant it more like its impossible to predict what will actually revolutionize sciences that brings it to the "next level", and indeed it's a rare event.