Go to Post As JFK said we did not do this because it was easy, we did it because it was hard. - Glenn [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Other > Math and Science
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 31-08-2005, 23:14
Joe Matt's Avatar
Joe Matt Joe Matt is offline
Wake Up Get Up Get Out There
no team
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: CAK
Posts: 5,067
Joe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Y.
The actual show is online here.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/

Not necessarily. It might be true. It might not be true. That is the mystery of string theory. There is no way of testing it.
Thus lies the problem, science is based upon and DEPENDENT on constant trials and tests to prove something is right. If you cannot test something, and just believe in it using reasoning skills, you now have philosophy not physics. Thus, it shouldn't be called a theory. Theory is a set of statements that are devised to explain a group of facts or phenomenons, and those that have been tested (from dictionary.com).

NOW, I DO believe in string theory, and I love it, but I think we need to take a step back and look at what really classifies as science (gravity & evolution) and a theory and what isn't. (i.e. creationism & intelligent design).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 00:01
Doug G's Avatar
Doug G Doug G is online now
Coach / Teacher
FRC #0701 (Robovikes)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Fairfield, CA
Posts: 876
Doug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond reputeDoug G has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephM
Thus lies the problem, science is based upon and DEPENDENT on constant trials and tests to prove something is right. If you cannot test something, and just believe in it using reasoning skills, you now have philosophy not physics. Thus, it shouldn't be called a theory. Theory is a set of statements that are devised to explain a group of facts or phenomenons, and those that have been tested (from dictionary.com).
We just can't test it, yet. There was a time we thought it would be impossible to discover evidence of black holes and gravitational waves but technology is leading the way taking measurements and observations of these phenomena. Perhaps some day soon, Hawking radiation will also be discovered. Only time will tell (silly drumbeat - indicating a lame pun)
__________________
Work Hard, Have Fun, Make a Difference!

Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 12:33
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,726
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephM
NOW, I DO believe in string theory, and I love it, but I think we need to take a step back and look at what really classifies as science (gravity & evolution) and a theory and what isn't. (i.e. creationism & intelligent design).
In my texbooks, science is defined as what is observable, measurable, recordable, and repeatable. Gravity falls uder this, but evolution, creationism, and intelligent design do not. For those last three, we only observe the effects of whichever one is true. (Have you observed any evolution recently? If so, tell the world. Of course, I haven't actually observed either of the others. Actually, microevolution-change within a species-has been proven. It's called selective breeding. And please don't flame me, but macroevolution-changing from one species to another-is unproven and unlikely.) So far as I know, string theory is not recorded, measured, or observed, so according to the definition of science I am using here, it is not science. It may be science according to another definition, but I don't know what that definition is.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 13:12
Alan Anderson's Avatar
Alan Anderson Alan Anderson is offline
Software Architect
FRC #0045 (TechnoKats)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
Posts: 9,112
Alan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
So far as I know, string theory is not recorded, measured, or observed,...
The existence of additional tiny curled-up dimensions of space is predicted to have measureable effects at really really short distances. There have already been experimental observations which provide an upper bound on the "size" of those dimensions if they exist. So current string theory is testable, and definitely counts as science.
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 13:43
Pat Roche Pat Roche is offline
Mechanical Engineer
FRC #0134 (Team Discovery)
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Pembroke, NH
Posts: 211
Pat Roche is a splendid one to beholdPat Roche is a splendid one to beholdPat Roche is a splendid one to beholdPat Roche is a splendid one to beholdPat Roche is a splendid one to beholdPat Roche is a splendid one to beholdPat Roche is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to Pat Roche
Re: String Theory

As discussed before, string theory is based on the unifying of the four fundamental forces of nature (this is through Theory of Relativity and Quantum Physics);gravity, electromagnetism, weak force, and strong force. Currently weak force and electromagnetism have been linked. Mathematicians and scientists are currently working to unify the Strong Force and Electroweak Force. My understanding is that they are very close to completing work proving the combonation of the two forces. The biggest challenge lies in the unification of gravity. Gravity has a very small effect on atoms and even smaller the corks that make up atoms. Currently (if what I've read is true), we do not have the technology to make measurements on gravity at such a small size; thus not allowing us to make any physical test for observation. Is this a theory? Yes because nothing is proven but the idea is out there kicking around and not completed. Is it a law of science yet? No, we don't have any proof saying that it's true and completed.

Hope this is helpful,

-Pat
__________________
Team Discovery #134 Alumni 1999-2004
Division by Zero #229 Alumni 2004-2009
Team Discovery again?
2010 and Beyond


Where have the last 11 years have gone?
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 15:20
billbo911's Avatar
billbo911 billbo911 is offline
I prefer you give a perfect effort.
AKA: That's "Mr. Bill"
FRC #2073 (EagleForce)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Elk Grove, Ca.
Posts: 2,348
billbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephM
I think we need to take a step back and look at what really classifies as science (gravity & evolution) and a theory and what isn't. (i.e. creationism & intelligent design).
I need to say this as respectfully as possible. I don't believe you can prove nor disprove either evolution or creationism beyond a shadow of a doubt. Neither are fully testable, therefore, you can't call either a theory according to the description of what qualifies as a theory in this discussion.

When you make statements like this in a public forum, you are guaranteed to offend several people. May I suggest that you carefully consider your statements. Posting your opinion is fine, but be ready to prove it.

One example of proving a point:
Let's consider the clotting mechanism of the blood. What triggers it? What prevents it from triggering all the time? What tells it when to stop?

Evolution says this process had to develop over time. If that were true, no forms of warm blooded creatures could survive. Once the first cut occurred, the creature would bleed out. Modifying this behavior, over time would not work, all creatures with blood would die. But, suppose clotting did develop, without the ability to stop the process, the entire bloodstream would clot. Again, the creature dies. and no further progress is made on the clotting process. Lastly, the trigger mechanism shouldn't work unless needed otherwise the same result would occur, death. One failure in any of these steps would have the same result. All three processes need to develop simultaneously and completely without failure. I just don't see evolution supporting this process.

Intelligent Design on the other hand.............

I'm not trying to flame you Joseph. I'm just expressing my opinion, and I believe there are more facts to support (I didn't say prove) my point of view than yours. This is just one. Nothing personal.
Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 15:26
Joe Matt's Avatar
Joe Matt Joe Matt is offline
Wake Up Get Up Get Out There
no team
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: CAK
Posts: 5,067
Joe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by billbo911
I need to say this as respectfully as possible. I don't believe you can prove nor disprove either evolution or creationism beyond a shadow of a doubt. Neither are fully testable, therefore, you can't call either a theory according to the description of what qualifies as a theory in this discussion.

When you make statements like this in a public forum, you are guaranteed to offend several people. May I suggest that you carefully consider your statements. Posting your opinion is fine, but be ready to prove it.

One example of proving a point:
Let's consider the clotting mechanism of the blood. What triggers it? What prevents it from triggering all the time? What tells it when to stop?

Evolution says this process had to develop over time. If that were true, no forms of warm blooded creatures could survive. Once the first cut occurred, the creature would bleed out. Modifying this behavior, over time would not work, all creatures with blood would die. But, suppose clotting did develop, without the ability to stop the process, the entire bloodstream would clot. Again, the creature dies. and no further progress is made on the clotting process. Lastly, the trigger mechanism shouldn't work unless needed otherwise the same result would occur, death. One failure in any of these steps would have the same result. All three processes need to develop simultaneously and completely without failure. I just don't see evolution supporting this process.

Intelligent Design on the other hand.............

I'm not trying to flame you Joseph. I'm just expressing my opinion, and I believe there are more facts to support (I didn't say prove) my point of view than yours. This is just one. Nothing personal.
Oh, don't worry, water off the back man. But here's something to ponder, did I post it purely out of the fact it's my opinion? Or was there some sort of other motive? Here's another thing to ponder too, if God (or whoever created life, alienes if it be your thing) hand his hand in the gene pool in creating life through intellegent design, then why do we have so many flaws? Do these flaws say God is flawed? Or did he create us with flaws? But then why did he create us with flaws?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 15:54
billbo911's Avatar
billbo911 billbo911 is offline
I prefer you give a perfect effort.
AKA: That's "Mr. Bill"
FRC #2073 (EagleForce)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Elk Grove, Ca.
Posts: 2,348
billbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephM
Oh, don't worry, water off the back man. But here's something to ponder, did I post it purely out of the fact it's my opinion? Or was there some sort of other motive? Here's another thing to ponder too, if God (or whoever created life, alienes if it be your thing) hand his hand in the gene pool in creating life through intellegent design, then why do we have so many flaws? Do these flaws say God is flawed? Or did he create us with flaws? But then why did he create us with flaws?
Awesome questions!!!!
If you want, I'll get into the fallen nature of man, you know, the Adam, Eve and sin thing. In a nut shell, we were created perfect! But though choosing to sin, Adam began a downward spiral for all mankind. As an example, look at the lifespans of Adam, then his children, then grandchildren, then.... You will see a gradual shortening all along the way. That continued until very recent history when man discovered and learned a lot more about how we are (sorry for this) created and function. Now our medical treatment, technology and abilities are far greater than they have been throughout history. That being said, we still know so little about life it's self. Gettin' heavy here.....

One of the greatest abilities God gave us was the ability to choose. Ultimately, those choices lead to where we are now. So you ask "Why would God give it to us?" Because you can't be forced to love something, you can only choose to.
Reply With Quote
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 15:59
Dave.Norton Dave.Norton is offline
Registered User
FRC #1157
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 16
Dave.Norton is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by billbo911
Evolution says this process had to develop over time. If that were true, no forms of warm blooded creatures could survive. Once the first cut occurred, the creature would bleed out. Modifying this behavior, over time would not work, all creatures with blood would die. But, suppose clotting did develop, without the ability to stop the process, the entire bloodstream would clot. Again, the creature dies. and no further progress is made on the clotting process. Lastly, the trigger mechanism shouldn't work unless needed otherwise the same result would occur, death. One failure in any of these steps would have the same result. All three processes need to develop simultaneously and completely without failure. I just don't see evolution supporting this process.
Alas, I see a hole in your argument; you are looking at the current state of a mechanism, removing a feature and seeing that it fails, then proposing that the mechanism couldn't have developed. I think all that you have demonstrated is that it didn't follow that specific path. Along this same line watching the news of late I find I have more in common genetically with a male chimp than I do with the lady working down the hall, how is that for irony? I suspect she might agree... Anyway, let’s go back to string theory, it may not be enough of an explanation to really qualify as a theory yet, but it is interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2005, 16:25
billbo911's Avatar
billbo911 billbo911 is offline
I prefer you give a perfect effort.
AKA: That's "Mr. Bill"
FRC #2073 (EagleForce)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Elk Grove, Ca.
Posts: 2,348
billbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond reputebillbo911 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave.Norton
Alas, I see a hole in your argument; you are looking at the current state of a mechanism, removing a feature and seeing that it fails, then proposing that the mechanism couldn't have developed. I think all that you have demonstrated is that it didn't follow that specific path. Along this same line watching the news of late I find I have more in common genetically with a male chimp than I do with the lady working down the hall, how is that for irony? I suspect she might agree... Anyway, let’s go back to string theory, it may not be enough of an explanation to really qualify as a theory yet, but it is interesting.
Agreed. I personally am intrigued by string theory. I anxiously await further development(s) in this field. I also agree this is a thread about string theory, not creationism and evolution. If there were a forum on this board that lent it's self to that discussion that is where this discussion would belong. That is a discussion that could quite easily continue at infinitum.

(BTW, You say that there is a hole in my logic. If there is, then explain, using evolutionary principles, how the clotting mechanism developed from a one celled organism to what it is today. I would love to understand how such a complex process could have developed without any errors in the process throughout it's development cycle.) Oops, I digress. Sorry, feel free to PM me if you want with the explanation. This thread (string ) has drifted far enough
Reply With Quote
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-09-2005, 14:11
Dan Zollman's Avatar
Dan Zollman Dan Zollman is offline
7
FRC #1712 (Dawgma)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: May 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Ardmore, PA
Posts: 392
Dan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond reputeDan Zollman has a reputation beyond repute
Re: String Theory

Although there are many equations that support string theory, much of the theory depends on assumptions. String theory answers many questions about physics, but some of those answers are just generated so that the answer can be incorporated into the theory.
However, there are some specific experiments that will be done that can confirm some of what string theory has said and if the experiments are successful, they might give some very solid evidence. The "Laser Interferometer Space Antenna" will be launched in 2013, and is supposed to detect "gravity waves" from the big bang which are predicted by the theory. The Large Hadron collider which is currently built will search for particles predicted by string theory.
I was personally very happy when I saw the cover of the August 2005 Discover magazine: "Is String Theory about to Snap?"
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
pic: 6 speed?? Great in theory - lets see how it works! CD47-Bot Extra Discussion 63 28-10-2008 02:13
100yr anniversary of Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Einstein stage the place to be? Elgin Clock Rumor Mill 6 08-09-2004 09:38
is string legal? Jeremy L Kit & Additional Hardware 7 07-03-2004 16:28
my theory on IA robot180 Website Design/Showcase 7 21-10-2003 18:05
Makin' a home-brewn dashboard program, and I need theory help! DanL Programming 33 05-07-2002 01:26


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:48.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi