Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs) m Archiving 2 thread(s) from Talk:String theory. |
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs) m Archiving 2 thread(s) from Talk:String theory. |
||
Line 112:
gravity and electromagnetism unify in hidden dimensions, the test
should involve gravimeters. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/109.58.249.18|109.58.249.18]] ([[User talk:109.58.249.18|talk]]) 08:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== "Correct" ==
From the lead section:
:"Five major string theories were formulated. The main differences among them were the number of dimensions in which the strings developed and their characteristics. All of them appeared to be correct, however."
I find the statement "All of them appeared to be correct" slightly strange and at odds with the rest of the article, which says that the theory has not even made any testable experimental predictions. So, in what sense is "correct" being used? [[Special:Contributions/86.179.1.213|86.179.1.213]] ([[User talk:86.179.1.213|talk]]) 01:29, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
:It's being used in a theoretical sense [[User:Dauto|Dauto]] ([[User talk:Dauto|talk]]) 02:10, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
::And what does correct mean in a theoretical sense? (I think this sentence should be rephrases.)[[User:TimothyRias|T]][[User talk:TimothyRias|R]] 05:52, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
:::(OP) I agree. Perhaps it just means "consistent"?? [[Special:Contributions/86.160.208.79|86.160.208.79]] ([[User talk:86.160.208.79|talk]]) 11:17, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
::::Since there have been no further comments, and pending clarification of exactly what it means, I have removed the sentence. At the moment I feel it does more harm than good because to the ordinary reader "correct" means "an accurate model of the real physical world". [[Special:Contributions/86.160.212.182|86.160.212.182]] ([[User talk:86.160.212.182|talk]]) 17:02, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
== Unified Strings (u21s19) Theory - NASA Conference Presentation ==
I added the following to '''Online Material'''...
*Watson II, Richard 'Brad'shaw. ''Identifying 'True Earth-like Planets' - All New Worlds Are Built On 7_4 (like Earth) Or 6_4'' http://exep.jpl.nasa.gov/exep_exoMtgPosters.cfm Presentation at the [[NASA]] Conference ''Missions for Exoplanets 2010-2020'' held in Pasadena, CA on April 21-23, 2009 - ''Unified Strings'' (u21s19) ''Theory'' is presented with the aspects of 1-dimensional time symmetry. Indirect evidence of strings is documented for the first time and u21s19 theory is used to predict the characteristics of all 'true Earth-like planets'. - Brad Watson, Miami [[Special:Contributions/66.229.56.118|66.229.56.118]] ([[User talk:66.229.56.118|talk]]) 13:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
That's a very strange paper. I wonder how stuff like that gets on a NASA conference. It reminds me of the timecube guy [[User:Bhny|Bhny]] ([[User talk:Bhny|talk]]) 14:30, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
Bhny, your comment reminds me of those that attacked Galileo's, Newton's, and Einstein's theories. - Brad Watson, Miami [[Special:Contributions/66.229.56.118|66.229.56.118]] ([[User talk:66.229.56.118|talk]]) 14:42, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
| |||