The M-Theory for a Physics Newbie

[Pieman333272]

Hey everybody. Recently amongst all the “Stephen Hawking and God” news, I read he supports (or, possibly, wrote/contributed to, I don’t have my facts straight) a theory called the M-Theory, which, as I understand, states there are 11 dimensions and there may be more than one universe. I have some questions about it first…

1. 
   *]Could someone give me an in-depth description of the theory?
   *]Does this theory have an explanation for the creation of the multi/universe? Or only the fine-tunedness of it (if that)?
   *]My understanding is there is little or no evidence to support this outside of mathematics. Is this (still) true, and if so, is it even possible to find non-mathematical evidence for it?
   *]Does this actually disprove God? Or is that just something said by Atheists?
   
   I must apologize for my ignorance, but I would like to learn about this theory. I would especially like to hear answers from both believers and non-believers, as then I can see why it would both help, hinder and non affect God’s existence .

 

[Soulewolf]

Hey everybody. Recently amongst all the “Stephen Hawking and God” news, I read he supports (or, possibly, wrote/contributed to, I don’t have my facts straight) a theory called the M-Theory, which, as I understand, states there are 11 dimensions and there may be more than one universe. I have some questions about it first…

1. 
   *]Could someone give me an in-depth description of the theory?
   *]Does this theory have an explanation for the creation of the multi/universe? Or only the fine-tunedness of it (if that)?
   *]My understanding is there is little or no evidence to support this outside of mathematics. Is this (still) true, and if so, is it even possible to find non-mathematical evidence for it?
   *]Does this actually disprove God? Or is that just something said by Atheists?
   
   I must apologize for my ignorance, but I would like to learn about this theory. I would especially like to hear answers from both believers and non-believers, as then I can see why it would both help, hinder and non affect God’s existence .

1. 
   1.) An indepth description would be kinda impossible on a forum. I reccomend “the fabric of the cosmos” by brian greene.
   
   2.) Supposedly stephen hawking has created such a theory. I’ll be getting his new book on the 9th.
   
   3.) So far yes, math is the only proof. Yes it is possible. Because of its nature, Gravity is the only force capable of an effect across all dimensions because it is a force caused by a “dimple” in the fabric of space time (so far as i’ve read. i’m not done with the book) Although looking for gravitational effects on a quantum scale is beyond the technology we have currently.
   
   4.) Doubtful. Stephen Hawking is a christian as far as i know. His theory might disprove the “first mover” argument, but that does not disprove the existence of “god”

 

[Just_Lurking]

M-theory predicts the existence of magnetic monopoles, and so is experimentally testable in that regard.

 

[challam2010]

Along with Greene’s book mentioned above, see if you can get a copy of the PBS presentation of it, which is very well done and fascinating.

One of the first things I thought of while watching/reading his work was the basis for a plausible, scientific explanation for (proven) miracles, and the scientific (for lack of a better word) understanding of some of our greatest God-related mysteries – the overcoming of the time/space barrier, etc. It seems like a deeper look into the wonders God has created and maybe even a peek at some of His methods.

If you don’t have a scientific background, you may enjoy the audio book – it seemed a little easier to understand to (liberal arts) me.

Have fun… it’s an adventure.

 

[bona_fides_1]

M-theory predicts the existence of magnetic monopoles, and so is experimentally testable in that regard.

Magnetic Monopoles were mathematically predicted long before M theory came around. I attended a lecture/proof in 1975 ot 1976 when a scientist thought he had observed them in an experiment he performed. It was all the craze back then and everyone was jumping on the bandwagon to find the mathematical proofs to back up what they thought they saw (I think the results of the experiment were later proven to be unreliable and noise). At any rate I don’t think that if somone proved the existence of Magnetic Monopoles by observation that it would follow that M Theory is valid since its just one component of the theory.

I am starting to think that the mathematicians have gotten too far into voodoo science and are cloaking their nonsence behind impossibly difficult mathematical theories and ever increasing mathematical complexity. They keep having to patch up models that don’t work too well together. String theory looked promising at one time but I really am thinking they are clueless and less than a dozen people world wide can really follow all the theories with any level of deep understanding. It’s going to be hilarious if it turns out that the earth really is the center of the universe as the ECFs all thought and all the assumptions of cosmology are hokum.

BF

 

[Just_Lurking]

At any rate I don’t think that if somone proved the existence of Magnetic Monopoles by observation that it would follow that M Theory is valid since its just one component of the theory.

But when people finally accept that there is no magnetic monopole, M-Theory will have been disproven.

 

[Windfish]

Yikes. Some egg-heads in here.

 

[Touchstone]

Hey everybody. Recently amongst all the “Stephen Hawking and God” news, I read he supports (or, possibly, wrote/contributed to, I don’t have my facts straight) a theory called the M-Theory, which, as I understand, states there are 11 dimensions and there may be more than one universe. I have some questions about it first…

1. 
   *]Could someone give me an in-depth description of the theory?

1. 
   Hmmm. I have lots of places to point you, but will just say that if you want to get anywhere with String Theory, it’s a lot of work, and a big hill to climb if you are not starting from a good position on macro physics and QM. Just a note one Brian Greene’s Elegant Universe and Fabric of the Cosmos, both have some very good introductory material, but both are out of date on substantial matters. Elegant Universe has become a bit of joke on itself since it was published; the much sought after “core elegance” has eluded us, and what has emerged is a decided inelegant landscape of solutions, rather than the “grand unifying answer” for the cosmological constants, among other things.
   

   *]Does this theory have an explanation for the creation of the multi/universe? Or only the fine-tunedness of it (if that)?

   Yes and yes. But some caveats about “theory” – “hypothesis” is really the correct word. And even then, it’s a controversial subject as to whether String Theory is really a qualified hypothesis – the kind of framework that can even become a theory and be tested, and is liable to falsification. Without that, it might as well be religion (albeit religion with exceedingly deep and hardcore maths!).
   
   I think the consensus is right now that there is no currently practical way to achieve the high energy tests that are needed to really put String Theory to the test, but it’s quite possible in principle, and we have every reason to think, based on our trajectory of technology advancement, that at some point, String Theory will be able to exercised in crucial ways. Until then, though, it’s in some kind of no-man’s-land.
   
   But the model has far reaching implications. The maths place our universe as just on “dot” on a mathematical landscape, one of innumerable possible solutions to parameters for universes. Not only does the “fine tunedness” fall out to be just another conceit of humans (it’s not tuned at all, just a statistical case where some universes will have configurations like ours inevitably), the framework has built in the physical “quantum foam” that has universes popping into and out of existence in the “cosmic landscape”. So, creation and the explanation of the cosmological constants would be products of the framework, yes.
   

   *]My understanding is there is little or no evidence to support this outside of mathematics. Is this (still) true, and if so, is it even possible to find non-mathematical evidence for it?

   In principle there CANNOT be evidence for the ideas about “before the universe” or “outside the universe”. But, that limitation in mind, String Theory is grounded in and strongly compatible with macro physics and QM. That means its not “just math”, not hardly. It is math that resolves with stunning precision problems in this universe, verified by empirical testing and rigorous trial. Those are the hardest of all credentials for math to come by. What cannot be tested in String Theory yet is the part beyond our knowledge with GR and QM, but it is compatible with both, and is a framework that attempts to unify them into on holistic theory of everything. It won’t replace them as much as subsume and harmonize them, if it succeeds.
   

   *]Does this actually disprove God? Or is that just something said by Atheists?

   Nothing can ever, possibly disprove the Christian God. The Christian God has been carefully defined to protect it completely from ANY liability of falsification. There is no conceivable circumstance, no evidence, no scenario, that would prevent the Christian from saying “YHWH is behind and above all that”. You just can’t see him, interact with him, test him, etc.
   
   So you have nothing to worry about that if that is your concern. YHWH as a belief lives in an impenetrable fortress, utterly undisprovable.
   

   I must apologize for my ignorance, but I would like to learn about this theory. I would especially like to hear answers from both believers and non-believers, as then I can see why it would both help, hinder and non affect God’s existence .

   Like I said, nothing ever can put the Christian God in danger of disproof. But String Theory, like evolution and other scientific advancements, is compatible with Christian theism, but its net effect is to make God just that much more superfluous, unneeded for understanding even fairly deep questions like why the universe is the way it is.
   
   -TS

 

[rossum]

Hey everybody. Recently amongst all the “Stephen Hawking and God” news, I read he supports (or, possibly, wrote/contributed to, I don’t have my facts straight) a theory called the M-Theory, which, as I understand, states there are 11 dimensions and there may be more than one universe. I have some questions about it first…

1. 
   *]Could someone give me an in-depth description of the theory?
   *]Does this theory have an explanation for the creation of the multi/universe? Or only the fine-tunedness of it (if that)?
   *]My understanding is there is little or no evidence to support this outside of mathematics. Is this (still) true, and if so, is it even possible to find non-mathematical evidence for it?
   *]Does this actually disprove God? Or is that just something said by Atheists?
   
   I must apologize for my ignorance, but I would like to learn about this theory. I would especially like to hear answers from both believers and non-believers, as then I can see why it would both help, hinder and non affect God’s existence .

1. 1. M-theory can be thought of as String Theory on steroids - String Theory is a subset of M-theory. There is a reasonable introduction to them here: The Myth of the Beginning of Time, which was originally published in Scientific American so has very little maths in it. For something with more equations try What Came Before the Big Bang?.
   2. In a multiverse there is no need for fine tuning. Life will appear in those universes which are suitable for life and will not appear in those universes which are not suitable. Given that there are trillions of universes the question is irrelevant. Google “Weak Anthropic Principle”.
   3. That has recently changed. String Theory at least now appears to be testable through Quantum Entanglement: Scientists Say They Can Now Test String Theory.
   4. It fills a gap. Instead of “How did the Universe originate?” God now answer the question “How did the Multiverse originate?” It is not wise to rely on a God-of-the-gaps because science is always working to make the gaps smaller. Gods like Thor were devised to answer the question “How does thunder originate?” You do not want to make your God like Thor so do not try to use Him to fill scientific gaps.
   rossum

 

[grannymh]

1. M-theory can be thought of as String Theory on steroids - String Theory is a subset of M-theory. There is a reasonable introduction to them here: The Myth of the Beginning of Time, which was originally published in Scientific American so has very little maths in it. For something with more equations try What Came Before the Big Bang?.
2. In a multiverse there is no need for fine tuning. Life will appear in those universes which are suitable for life and will not appear in those universes which are not suitable. Given that there are trillions of universes the question is irrelevant. Google “Weak Anthropic Principle”.
3. That has recently changed. String Theory at least now appears to be testable through Quantum Entanglement: Scientists Say They Can Now Test String Theory.
4. It fills a gap. Instead of “How did the Universe originate?” God now answer the question “How did the Multiverse originate?” It is not wise to rely on a God-of-the-gaps because science is always working to make the gaps smaller. Gods like Thor were devised to answer the question “How does thunder originate?” You do not want to make your God like Thor so do not try to use Him to fill scientific gaps.

rossum

I have never liked the god-of-the-gaps theory in any scientific discipline.

 

[bona_fides_1]

I have never liked the god-of-the-gaps theory in any scientific discipline.

Me either. My own theory is based on the premise that God is competent enough to construct a Divine Veil to hide his Glory behind His Creation that is so perfect and ordered in making Him transparent to His creatures that no one will be able to prove He exists. It would be a violation of the principal of love if He could bully or intimidate His creatures into loving Him without a pure free assent of faith. No one gets to peek behind the veil until we are committed, elevated in nature and able to look without dieing in awe…

BF

 

[Anselm33]

Hey everybody. Recently amongst all the “Stephen Hawking and God” news, I read he supports (or, possibly, wrote/contributed to, I don’t have my facts straight) a theory called the M-Theory, which, as I understand, states there are 11 dimensions and there may be more than one universe. I have some questions about it first…

 

[rossum]

I have never liked the god-of-the-gaps theory in any scientific discipline.

Neither do I, which is why I advised against it.“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we do not know; God wants us to realize his presence, not in unsolved problems but in those that are solved.”

• Dietrich Bonhoeffer
  rossum

 

[Pieman333272]

Thanks everyone. I ordered the Grand Design and I might get Mr. Greene’s book, too, if I want more or don’t understand.