Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dark matter highlights extra dimensions
Nature Magazine ^ | 02 September 2005 | Philip Ball

Posted on 09/02/2005 11:33:22 AM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last
Related thread: Finding a Way to Test for Dark Energy [Cosmology].
1 posted on 09/02/2005 11:33:23 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Doctor Stochastic; js1138; Shryke; RightWhale; ...
SciencePing
An elite subset of the Evolution list.
See the list's explanation at my freeper homepage.
Then FReepmail to be added or dropped.

2 posted on 09/02/2005 11:34:55 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. The List-O-Links is at my homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

This does certainly sound extremely speculative, interesting though, guess Hollywood films with creatures from the 6th dimension still have legs!


3 posted on 09/02/2005 11:37:13 AM PDT by x5452
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Einstein found this talk about extra dimensions vaguely annoying. He actually didn't approve of any actual solutions to his equations, although there appear to be an infinite number of them that would not be inconsistent with the universe as it appears to be and a lot more that aren't consistent with physics at all.


4 posted on 09/02/2005 11:40:29 AM PDT by RightWhale (Load counter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Teacher? ...Teacher? I have a question: How, exactly, can a dimension be "small"? We have three, visible, physical dimensions of which we are all aware. Do you describe those dimensions as "large" or "small"? It seems to me that the terms hold no meaning when talking about dimensions, or rather, the terms are redundant and self-referential. The terms "large" and "small" imply the existence of a dimension in which those relative measurements apply. Don't they?


5 posted on 09/02/2005 11:42:00 AM PDT by TChris ("The central issue is America's credibility and will to prevail" - Goh Chok Tong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Well, in New Orleans I am truly witnessing an alternate universe.


6 posted on 09/02/2005 11:42:57 AM PDT by Ursus arctos horribilis ("It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees!" Emiliano Zapata 1879-1919)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x5452

"This does certainly sound extremely speculative, interesting though, guess Hollywood films with creatures from the 6th dimension still have legs!"

Buckaroo-Banzai - accross the 8th Dimension!


7 posted on 09/02/2005 11:45:40 AM PDT by roaddog727 (P=3/8 A. or, P=plenty...............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All
The article mentions Lisa Randall, so ...


8 posted on 09/02/2005 11:49:09 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. The List-O-Links is at my homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Thanks for the ping!


9 posted on 09/02/2005 11:49:22 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TChris
How, exactly, can a dimension be "small"?

It's like an extreme case of atmospheric refraction, the mirage, where everything in that direction is compressed into near flatness as seen by the eye. Everything is still in there, but you can cover it all with your thumbnail.

10 posted on 09/02/2005 11:52:28 AM PDT by RightWhale (Load counter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: x5452

But those legs are only a few nanometers long!

Seriously, I wonder how this is related to Brane Theory. Could dark matter simply be graviational attraction for masses that exist in parallel universes? I have read that gravity may act in these extra dimensions and can be detected between adjacent universes.


11 posted on 09/02/2005 11:54:53 AM PDT by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

For a hard science, there's a whole lotta speculatin' goin' on.


12 posted on 09/02/2005 11:55:04 AM PDT by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: js1138
For a hard science, there's a whole lotta speculatin' goin' on.

As long as it's consistent with the evidence, it's tolerable -- barely. The trick will be to find a way to test it.

13 posted on 09/02/2005 11:58:34 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. The List-O-Links is at my homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

It's just interesting to think about all the posters who argue that science is not allowed to speculate, or that science lacks the imagination to deal with extra dimensions, and so forth.


14 posted on 09/02/2005 12:10:48 PM PDT by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Professor Randall seems to have an interesting mind.
15 posted on 09/02/2005 12:18:47 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: js1138
It's just interesting to think about all the posters who argue that science is not allowed to speculate...

Well, in my observation, those posters exist only in fantasy.

...or that science lacks the imagination to deal with extra dimensions...

Well, those exist in one sense, but you've misconstrued them in any event.

...and so forth.

That's rather vague.

16 posted on 09/02/2005 12:19:35 PM PDT by AntiGuv ("Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: js1138
It's just interesting to think about all the posters who argue that science is not allowed to speculate, or that science lacks the imagination to deal with extra dimensions, and so forth.

Scientists don't tell them how to decorate their double-wides, and they shouldn't tell scientists how to think.

17 posted on 09/02/2005 12:19:53 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. The List-O-Links is at my homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: doc30

Extra dimensions would give the brane-layers of space-time at least one degree of freedom to fold in. So yes, it could apply. Not that I would know a minkowski laminate from an affine vector-space.


18 posted on 09/02/2005 12:21:01 PM PDT by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: js1138

PS. The dimensions that science cannot deal with are those which follow no consistent, rational patterns and which exhibit no properties of materiality. In other words, dimensions which are indistinguishable from non-existence.


19 posted on 09/02/2005 12:23:07 PM PDT by AntiGuv ("Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

20 posted on 09/02/2005 12:30:41 PM PDT by atomic_dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson