We posted the following comment to Cosmic Variance but the string was “snipped” after the word and which is marked below in orange – but what else could we expect from string theory? [actually, the snip was caused by the way html commands are handled as text]
that word describes our double-edged scissored view of string theory, which seems like a postmodern system of epicycles …. or … do branes have brains?
“What are the main logical problems with string theory (alleged physical laws) from our point of view?
a. Perceived physical reality in physics is always a function of the system of measurement. Measurements are by definition relations presupposing frames of reference to be measured by some sort of “measurement ruler”. Thus, “measured” reality is
1) a function of the frames of reference chosen for the relationships being measured (for example, particles, waves or “strings”) and
2) the means of measurement (motion, inertia, velocity, weight, dimension, extension, contraction, etc.) “….
Speaking of “measure”, has anyone considered the rather simple idea that “God” did not “make” the universe, but that God “is” the measured universe….
Perhaps the world is an “ultimate” string – but no string ever vibrates by itself, but needs to be plucked by something – frankly, we think that the idea of an infinitely extensible and unsnippable vibrating “rubber band” is better than simple string theory because it would more accurately reflect a yo-yo world alternating between the impossibles of absolute something and absolute nothing ….
For the math freaks this means that the Universe U could conceivably be defined by the formula
U = > 0 and < 1
where U is greater than 0 and less than 1 and where 0 and 1 both represent totality and singularity, i.e. absolute mass and absolute void, neither of which, apparently, are possibilities… which then results in the world that we “appear” to have….