[Felix Schrodinger]

Originally Posted by Profpat Now we are at the fundamental question. Given everything is made up of mass or energy, and as discussed above, I believe mass is made up of strings, so what are strings made up of?My most recent thoughts are that perhaps strings are not SUBSTANCE in the usual sense, but rather energy itself. Now the question is what is energy made of? Let us go back to the sine waves of EMR.

Hi Profpat

Following Einstein's equation linking mass and energy we have become accustomed to thinking of them as the same thing. This is not actually logical. Obviously they behave differently and this leads to them being different manifestations of the same thing (which is slightly different). I believe that it is the vibration of the string which manifests itself as mass/energy but I am still struggling to understand the difference between them. They are not, therefore, 'made of' anything - both mass and energy are effects.

The issue of the extra dimensions is better understood if they are considered to be 'degrees of freedom'. As regards your model - I am in agreement that a wound up ball is at the centre of things - I call it a 'mason' and it fulfills the function of the Higgs boson amongst other things. The key question for me at present is: are quarks the actually string or are they composed of a number of strings in combination?

Felix

[Felix Schrodinger]

Originally Posted by dipayankar Felix, I do not have any issues with strings as long as they do not demand 10 dimensions. Now on the point of extra dimensions, apart from the fact that they might be curled up etc. etc. I liked another idea that we are probably oriented in such a way in the Universe that we percieve only three dimensions.

Hi Dippy

I have no need of extra dimensions. I see them as a mathematical device to explain the fundamentally flawed paradigm which persists in current mainline physics.

Felix

[Profpat]

Hi Felix;

I'm not sure why you would have problems as identifying sound , color and octants as a dimensional reality. Wiki has the following definition for dimension;
The second meaning of the term "dimension" in physics relates to the nature of a measurable quantity. In general, physical measurements that must be expressed in units of measurement, and quantities obtained by such measurements are dimensionful. An example if a dimension is length, abbreviated L, which is the dimension for measurements expressed in units of length, be they meters, nautical miles, or lightyears. Another example is time, abbreviated T, whether the measurement is expressed in seconds or in hours. Speed, which is the distance (length) travelled in a certain amount of time, is a dimensionful quantity that has the dimension LT−1 (meaning L/T). Acceleration, the change in speed per time unit, has dimension LT−2.

Surely color and sound and octants are quantifiable and are different sounds or shades or position. They are as real as L,W,H.

Do Re Mi Fa So La Ti and then back to Do to start a new octave.
3 primary colors 3 secondary colors, white and black.
Every 3 dimensional object has the octants of inner space.

I think our reality DEMANDS these extra dimensions, otherwise we wouldn't have sight or sound and perhaps other things.

Best,

Pat

P.S. If not part of our reality where does color and sound come from? My An Idea explains this as being those inner dimensions rolled up in our reality.

[Profpat]

Addendum:
The colors of the visible light spectrum[2]colorwavelength intervalfrequency interval
red~ 630–700 nm~ 480–430 THz
orange~ 590–630 nm~ 510–480 THz
yellow~ 560–590 nm~ 540–510 THz
green~ 490–560 nm~ 610–540 THz
blue~ 450–490 nm~ 670–610 THz
violet~ 400–450 nm~ 750–670 THz

Of course a primary color and it's complementary secondary color gives you WHITE and BLACK is the null or empty set, the absence of light.

P.S. Sorry colors didn't print out. Please ignore

[Felix Schrodinger]

Originally Posted by Profpat I'm not sure why you would have problems as identifying sound , color and octants as a dimensional reality

Hi Profpat

I don't have any problem with these things in reality - I just don't call them 'dimensions'. I prefer the term 'degrees of freedom' in order to differentiate from the normal use of the word 'dimension' which refers to HWL and T.

Felix

[Profpat]

OK. I thought they met with Wiki's definition of dimension though. Like Rod Sterling said at the beginning of the TWILIGHT ZONE, its the dimension of Sight and Sound. Welcome to the Twilight Zone Felix

Best,

Pat

[dipayankar]

So are we converging to the fact that we do not need extra dimensions? Prof, apart from the difference in literary meanings, do we really need the extra 'dimensions' or are we looking at two sides of the same coin??

[Profpat]

Originally Posted by dipayankar So are we converging to the fact that we do not need extra dimensions? Prof, apart from the difference in literary meanings, do we really need the extra 'dimensions' or are we looking at two sides of the same coin??

I don't think it's a question of needing them Dipanyankar, rather it's a question of do we have them. We either do or we don't and any answer we come up with won't change that fact.

I don't know why you and Felix don't like my Idea that color and sound are those inner dimensions. Without those dimensions we would not have sight or sound. Can you imagine a soundless black universe. Thank God I can't though That is how Helen Keller lived her life.

So are they necessary?

I think on this point we can only agree that we disagree.

Now for Felix's excellent question. What are strings or fundamental substance made of?

Best,

Pat

[dipayankar]

Actually I am trying to shrug off what I was taught in school. Dimensions are properties of space. Then we had time thrust on us as the fourth dimension. Now as we are trying to salvage ourselves from this onslaught, comprehending colour and sound as dimensions would be like an avalanche for me....

Originally Posted by Profpat I don't think it's a question of needing them Dipanyankar, rather it's a question of do we have them. We either do or we don't and any answer we come up with won't change that fact. I don't know why you and Felix don't like my Idea that color and sound are those inner dimensions. Without those dimensions we would not have sight or sound. Can you imagine a soundless black universe. Thank God I can't though That is how Helen Keller lived her life. So are they necessary? I think on this point we can only agree that we disagree. Now for Felix's excellent question. What are strings or fundamental substance made of? Best, Pat

[Profpat]

Hi Dipayankar and Felix;

What are strings made of? According to NOVA, they are vibrating strands of energy. According to NASA, nothing makes them up. They are the fundamental constituent of matter.

In string theory, there are no elementary particles (like electrons or quarks), but pieces of vibrating strings. Each vibration mode corresponds to a different particle and determines its charge and its mass. In the current understanding of the theory, those strings are not "made of" anything: they are the fundamental constituent of matter. The consequences of replacing point-like particles by vibrating microscopic strings are enormous. The only consistent framework to describe those strings implies a 10- or even conceivably an 11-dimension world in which 6 or 7 dimensions are curled up. Those extra dimensions are the ones which determine the properties of the world we live in. The larger dimensions are what we perceive as the ordinary space and time.

Best,

Pat