But i am sure 0(3_1) is in fact a simpler original version of relativistic theory, without the extra complication of (s). It is a string theory compilation isn't it?
There's no difference between the two. The S just means that the determinants of all of the matrices are normalized to one, which amounts to an overall scaling factor, which divides out anyway. There is essentially no difference.
It means that a 3 dimensional cube can be described as a single condensed "higher" dimension. This "higher" dimension can then be "unfolded" into a 3 dimensional cube. Sort of like a hierarchy.... That's odd. So what do the number in brackets represent, if they don't represent the number of dimensions? Why can't we quantize gravity?
I can't remember. Sorry. This is just the statement that general relativity and quantum mechancis aren't mutually consistent. This is a whole thread by itselfPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Are you seriously not curious enough to at least look that up!? LOL!!!!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I'm not the one with the qualifications here!!!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I'm the one who is teh amateur. Nobody ever taught me any of this stuff. Well, then let's get that one started then! I would love to know why they are not consistent! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Well, I'm sure I've learned it somewhere. I know that generally it's SU(N), where the dimension of the Cartan sub-algebra is N-1. This is the number of dots that are on top of each other in the center of the picture above.
Please Ben, try to simplify your language a bit mate Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The reason why gravity is not quantized as yet (or at least one of the reasons), is that gravity travels freely throughout the dimensions and this makes the litle buggers difficult to find, if they exist at all. If we want to quantize gravity, we need to first locate the graviton for Grand Unification, and we haven't found one as of yet.
The graviton must either be extremely powerful and scarce or not scarce at all and very weak. Since we haven't found any, one can presume that gravitons are extremely powerful particles.... you know what I mean? Huuuummm......
Or the graviton could be more then 1 particle? Maybe all the 18 missing particles are the "graviton" we are looking for.... :shrug:
From my understanding, gravity is far too weak (caused by its abillity to move about so freely), so you where correct on that behalf. However, there is standing theories that gravity should become quite ''strong'' at high enough energies, and this might help us find it. As for your other postulate, the graviton might be found to have partners. Ben will know more than me on this, as he studies string theory - this is not my area.
Ok, in order to keep this discussion on track, I will start a new thread. It's before 5 AM here, and I have a plane to catch, and I am not a morning person. Back to E8 and Garrett Lisi!
And this video explains A LOT. Must watch it!!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xHw9zcCvRQ&feature=related
Hum, The video makes the pattern prettier, but it is still just a shadow of the relationships in 8 dimensional space.
The explanations make it a little bit more understandable though.... Altough it's still pretty confusing... LOL!!!!
The Aether Wave Theory (AWT) has proposed the explanation of E8 before some time already. The most important point (which wasn't mentioned till now) is, the Lie group is not just void geometrical structure. It's root system is describing the tightest structure of kissing hyperspheres, where the kissing points are sitting at the centers of another hyperspheres, recursively. The AWT proposes at least two dual ways, how to interpret such structure. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The cosmological one is maybe easier to realize: it considers, the current Universe generation is formed by interior of giant dense collapsar, which behaves like black hole from outer perspective. This collapse was followed by phase transition, which proceeded like crystallization from over-saturated solution by avalanche-like mechanism. During this, the approximately spherical zones of condensing false vacuum have intersect mutually, and from these places the another vacuum condensation has started (a sort of nucleation effect). We can observe the residuum of these zones as a dark matter streaks. The dodecahedron structure of these zones should corresponds the E8 group geometry, as being observed from inside. The second interpretation of E8 is relevant for Planck scale, i.e. for outer perspective. The dense interior of black hole is forming the physical vacuum, which is filled by spongy system of density fluctuations, similar to nested foam. Such structure has even a behavior of soap foam, because it gets more dense after introducing of energy by the same way, like soap shaken inside of closed vessel. Such behavior leads to the quantum behavior of vacuum and particle-wave duality. Every energy wave, exchanged between pair of particles (i.e. density fluctuations of foam) is behaving like less or more dense blob of foam, i.e. like gauge boson particle. Every boson can exchange its energy with another particles, including other gauge bosons, thus forming the another generation of interacalated particles. Therefore the E8 Lie group solves the trivial question: which structure should have the tightest lattice of particles, exchanged by another particles? And such question has even perfect meaning from classical physics point of view! Such question has a perfect meaning in theory, describing the most dense structure of inertial particles, which we can even imagine, i.e. the interior of black hole. For me personally is rather difficult to track your replies in many congruent topics, so please, if you're interested about details of this model, use the dedicated forum for further questions to keep the forum well-arranged and synoptical.
