[tophat9000]

bump

[IamConservative]

Particle Physics gives me a hadron.

Sometimes I think being smart enough to think about subjects like this beyond the realm of just understanding would be a great burden.

[tx_eggman]

OK, I’ve read the article ... now my head hurts.

[William of Barsoom]

We have all heard that Einstein determined that space and time were actually aspects of the same thing: Spacetime. And we’ve all seen the “world-line” funnels, and the super-C forbidden action zones and suchlike, so we know in an important sense, space IS time.

Since from the Science of econimics we also know that time is money, does it follow that space, therefore is money?

[Another but related subject:]
My former partner was fond of observing that, “time is money, but it ain’t cash.”

[InterceptPoint]

I expect that the String Theory Lobby will not be happy with this development. Personally I like it since it is testable, a feature that seems to be lacking in ST.

[bigbob]

General Theory ver. 2.0!

[stefanbatory]

the list ping

[Mad Dawgg]

Freepers have known for years that space/time is not where the real mysteries reside. It is well known on this site that the real answers will be found in the mǿǿse/cheese continuum.

Ask Laz or C.D.

[TheThinker]

I don’t think GR and Quantum mechanics can be reconciled by such tricks. We’re missing some facts, some kind of measurement needed to reconcile the two theories.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Oddly enough, the value of this idea is less that it might provide a great theory, than that it challenges existing theory, and forces its reexamination.

This is the underlying problem with such theories. As soon as they are accepted, they become barriers, like walls. All you can do is to build up the wall further. You cannot transcend it without destroying it. Fortunately, the taller a wall gets, the less stable it becomes, contributing to its own destruction.

And this is a great general theory of knowledge, by the way.

As far as the subject goes, I rather like the idea of space-time, and I think that this theory gives it short shrift, in the quest to discover the gravity particle, which may or may not exist.

Just because mass and gravity affect time-space doesn’t mean they are the same things. In fact, it implies that mass and gravity transcend time-space, and affect space-time so strongly that it is bent into their mass and gravity dimension.

[Mr. Lucky]

...things shrink as they move faster.

Are there any Purdue grads on this thread? Doesn't mass increase with speed?

[The Comedian]

If it will finally rid us of the pseudo-science of Silly String Theory, I'm all for it.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[BrandtMichaels]

ping

[samtheman]

Interesting comments by Julian Mann at the end of the article.

[steve86]

"removed Lorentz symmetry"

Why is that a valid thing to do? Seems whimsical, like a theory based on Alice in Wonderland.

[Kevmo]

I’ve been saying for a long time that relativity needs to be revisited. Here are some of the articles I’ve posted on FR.

Rethinking relativity: Is time out of joint?
Monday, November 02, 2009 9:29:43 PM · by Kevmo · 58 replies · 2,519+ views
New Scientist ^ | 21 October 2009 | Rachel Courtland

Re-Analysis of the Marinov Light-Speed Anisotropy Experiment
Friday, June 12, 2009 11:25:41 PM · by Kevmo · 27 replies · 1,652+ views
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0612/0612201v2.pdf ^ | Reginald T. Cahill

The Suppression of Inconvenient Facts in Physics
Sunday, June 07, 2009 7:50:26 PM · by Kevmo · 80 replies · 2,374+ views
Suppressed Science.Net ^ | 12/06/08 | http://www.suppressedscience.net/

The End of Snide Remarks Against Cold Fusion
Friday, June 05, 2009 5:56:08 PM · by Kevmo · 96 replies · 2,393+ views
Free Republic, Gravitronics.net and Intrade ^ | 6/5/09 | kevmo, et al

SubQuantum Kinetics, wide ranging unifying cosmology theory by Dr. Paul LaViolette
Wednesday, August 22, 2007 12:00:43 PM · by Kevmo · 68 replies · 1,785+ views
THE STARBURST FOUNDATION ^ | January 2007 | Dr. Paul LaViolette

[E8crossE8]

I should point out that this article, as is the case with far too many popular science articles, has various misleading and inaccurate statements. To wit:

And so space-time - the malleable fabric whose geometry can be changed by the gravity of stars, planets and matter - was born. It is a concept that has served us well, but if physicist Petr Horava is right, it may be no more than a mirage.

This is astoundingly wrong. Petr's work implies no such thing. His explicit calculations simply take account of the fact that, based on an assumption that there was a very high average temperature in the early universe, Lorentz invariance is violated at finite temperature. As a result, he makes use of a set of techniques that are together called "finite temperature quantum field theory," in which Lorentz invariance is violated, rather than zero temperature quantum field theory, in which Lorentz invariance is not violated. (Both finite- and zero-temperature QFT are very well known. The fact that Lorentz invariance is broken in finite temperature QFT is also very well known. Basically (oversimplifying things a bit), the new idea was to apply this method to the explicit calculation of interactions involving gravitons in the early universe.) There is certainly no notion, quantitatively or qualitatively, either in the original Horava paper or in any of the subsequent papers that cite it, of spacetime being a "mirage." The author of the popular article should have had his article vetted by a physicist prior to releasing the final copy. (Petr Horava would never have put things the way the author of the popular article did.)