Applications Google
Menu principal

Post a Comment On: Backreaction

"Honest Questions"

19 Comments -

1 – 19 of 19
Anonymous UncleAl said...

Does the Equivalence Principle (EP) have a parity violation? Do local left and right hands vacuum free fall identically? Newton and Einstein say "yes; the EP is parity-even." Cartan, Weitzenböck, and heterotic string theory say "no; the EP can be parity-odd." Somebody should look.

All composition EP tests have exactly nulled,

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm#b22
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2006/775.html

Hyper-bound, hyper-spinning, hyper-magnetized, superconducting neutronium (binary pulsars) orbit to General Relativity spec within experimental error, including orbital decay from gravitational radiation. What else is there to test?

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm#b21

There is only *one* EP violation between 10^(-10) and 10^(-13) difference/average consistent with gravitation theory and 420+ years of observation - a geometric parity violation. Spacetime then has a demonstrated chiral pseudoscalar vacuum background.

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/invert.gif

Does a single crystal solid sphere of parity space group P3(1)21 quartz (right-handed screw axes) vacuum free fall identically to a macroscopically and compositionally identical single crystal solid sphere of parity space group P3(2)21 quartz (left-handed screw axes)?

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz3.pdf

Somebody should perform the parity Eötvös experiment and find out.

11:53 AM, May 03, 2006

Blogger Robert said...

There is the opposite problem as well: You sit in the audience and want to ask a question. Or you are the chair and nobody asks a question therefore politeness dictates you have to ask a question. What do you ask?

In my time at DESY, I learned that at least at least if the abstract of the talk contained "next to leading order (NLO)" or even "next to next to leading order (NNLO)" there is always a sure bet: You just ask "Which scheme did you use?". Or in case the speaker had already stated he/she uses scheme XYZ, you ask "why did you use XYZ and not ABC?". And I promise, if you don't ask that question, somebody else surely will.

11:59 AM, May 03, 2006

Blogger InsightAction said...

Thats a very good question - reminds me of an obscure reference to...

Opps, did I miss the point of your blog entry? Were you actually asking for questions? ;o)

Aaron

11:59 AM, May 03, 2006

Blogger stefan said...

Dear Bee,


that's an intersting idea, this question thing for lunch. How is it supposed to work? Someone - you this Friday - has to come up with a maybe naive question, but one that is deep and difficult to answer? Questions that usually are not discussed? What, for example, have been typical questions in the past?

Your general classification of questions really hits the mark! Questions of type 1 and type 6, I have usually taken them quite seriously, thinking about them long after the talk. When compiling my thesis, I was thinking several times, about this or that issue, there was once this good question, maybe I should comment about this point in more detail... I guess it has in general improved the text, but also inflated it ;-)

Best, Stefan.

1:58 PM, May 03, 2006

Blogger Bee said...

What, for example, have been typical questions in the past?

You mean besides those about black THINGIES?

Well, the problem is there are too little questions. That's why Don was asking for volunteers. I think the question should better not be too deep and difficult to answer, I don't want the lunch meeting to last until dinner ;-)

2:08 PM, May 03, 2006

Blogger InsightAction said...

How about these:

Did Hawking really need all that math stuff to show that information is never lost in a black thingie? When he could have simply said that as a particle approaches a singularity the uncertainty principle allows the particle to scatter in some random direction away from the singularity, re-emerging at some point on the event horizon in the future?

Or what about this:

Does Godel's Incompleteness theorem gaurantee that it is impossible to find a grand unified theory of all thingies black or otherwise coloured?

and this:

How is it that we live in a universe that allows for more degrees of intellectual freedom than nessecary? I mean why isn't the universe constrained so that we could simply deduce the laws of the universe by you know going 'so we have numbers 1,2,3... thus everything else follows by deduction'?

Oh and your poem reads very well while listening to 'I can't wait' by the White Stripes, who I think I've been listening to too much lately.

Good Luck!

Aaron

3:55 PM, May 03, 2006

Blogger Bee said...

I mean why isn't the universe constrained so that we could simply deduce the laws of the universe by you know going 'so we have numbers 1,2,3... thus everything else follows by deduction'?

maybe it is, we just haven't figured out how to do that. would be rather boring though.

4:42 PM, May 03, 2006

Anonymous Spatulated said...

Sounds scary, but you forgot question repeater. you know, the questions that get asked and asked and asked, and the asker usualy only changes the sentance structure and isnt actualy listening to your answers?

7:21 PM, May 03, 2006

Blogger Bee said...

you forgot question repeater

Ah, thanks for pointing that out :-) I would say, it's a subclass of the never-ending question. An eternal bounce.

7:31 PM, May 03, 2006

Anonymous Garrett said...

Random question:

Wick rotation

It works, and is needed in many calculations -- does it mean anything physically? Does it relate Riemmannian and Lorentzian spacetime, or is it just a calculational trick?

1:54 AM, May 04, 2006

Blogger Eurogirl said...

random comment: why can't we deduct everything starting from 1,2,3?

"There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened."

;-)

9:10 AM, May 04, 2006

Blogger InsightAction said...

And the meaning of life is 42, but we don't yet know the question.

I too can recite the geek catechism.

Now where did I put that towel...

Aaron

1:30 PM, May 04, 2006

Blogger Bee said...

Garrett said: Wick rotation

It works, and is needed in many calculations -- does it mean anything physically? Does it relate Riemmannian and Lorentzian spacetime, or is it just a calculational trick?


It means something. The dolphins told me.

2:01 PM, May 04, 2006

Blogger InsightAction said...

Wick Rotations? I don't understand what do spinning Druids have to do with anything?

2:59 PM, May 04, 2006

Anonymous Garrett said...

Not Wicca rotations, Wick rotations!

With my luck, the earth will be destroyed before this question is clarified.

There was actually a pod of spinner dolphins out this morning where I was surfing. I asked them about Wick rotations, but they said I should go consult the spinor dolphins.

10:34 PM, May 04, 2006

Blogger stefan said...

So, what was your question, then?
And was it answered in a satisfactory way?

Cheers,
Stefan.

6:20 PM, May 05, 2006

Blogger Bee said...

The question was "Why do we live in 3+1 dimensions?". I would have been very surprised if someone had been able to answer it. Will write more about it soon, have to get my seminar slides done now.

6:24 PM, May 05, 2006

Anonymous Garrett said...

Oh, that...
Well, if you can stomach anthropic arguments:
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9702052

11:52 PM, May 05, 2006

Blogger Bee said...

Garrett, I was about to write a post about our gravity lunch last Friday. Thanks for the link, the funny thing is, thats were the discussion ended at. As Don put it: Well, if you wanted to go anthropic, we could have gone there directly! ;-)

2:43 PM, May 08, 2006

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL