Super sensitive single string hypothesis and extended periodic table

[AlexanderSamualDunnett]

First post here on scienceforums.net.

My speculation is that the universe could be desribed by the infinitely unique path of a single piece of 'string'.

Along the string path itself would be negatively charged, but loops of the path would create positive charge- much like in mathematics how subtracting a negative number is the same as adding the absolute value of the number. The overall charge value of positivity to negativity would remain at zero overall to stay balanced, as we find with the periodic table of elements. Negativity is repulsed by itself, as is positivity, but opposite charges are atttacted.

It seems to me at the moment to be the most plausible explanation for creation and perception.

I also found a pattern in the periodic table which leads me to believe in more elements than the 118 or 128 commonly found in my internet searches.

Please excuse my amateur sketch but please let me know if you have any thoughts about any of this or how I could prove or disprove any of this.

[Mordred]

Hi and welcome to the forum.

41 minutes ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

 

Please excuse my amateur sketch but please let me know if you have any thoughts about any of this or how I could prove or disprove any of this.

 

Well first off proving or disproving any theory in physics involves mathematics. If the theory cannot be described mathematically then it's not a theory that cannot make testable predictions.

 You may not be aware that a string in String theory takes a point like particle that represents its quantum properties via the string where the string is a mathematical representation of how that property behaves. How the endpoints relate to the x axis for example represent charge. Each quantum particle property has a subsequent representation of said string that is additionally mathematically described.

So the first question is can you mathematically describe a single string to encompass the entirety of the standard model of particles let alone the periodic table ? Including the principle properties of said particles and atoms ?

 It must be able to help understand how those properties correlate to examination.

 

[AlexanderSamualDunnett]

This is not like existing string theories, I'm trying to get away from a particle mentality because it must be the combination of internal and external matter that creates our perceptions and detections and even the appraisal of our experience. It seems unlikely I am made of particles, and can use a device made of particles to perceive something made of particles as particles.

We could attribute a formula to the theoretical string path, where instead of y=mx+c, there is a relationship described by the every changing interaction of how it could be approximately plotted in space-time (about the x-axis, y-axis, z-axis and time dimension) but due to the nature of how I imagine the string might be I'm not sure if this would be beneficial.

Perhaps using one or more powerful supercomputers we could model a closed system (unless it was a rough approximation of our open system universe) that could determine how internal and external matter interact to create our experiences. We could model an example of internal and external experience for references sake where the combination of external matters' vibration between approximately 420 THz and 750 THz and it's resonance with a modelled eye and mind could be modelled and even outputted to a monitor. Or the vibrations between 20 Hz and 20 Khz and a hearing system and mind could be modelled and outputted to a speaker system.

Perhaps I could create an experiment similar to the Millikan oil drop experiment, or an experiment like Rutherford, Thomson or Bohr developed I'm just not sure how to progress with this yet.

[Genady]

13 minutes ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

It seems unlikely I am made of particles, and can use a device made of particles to perceive something made of particles as particles.

Why is it unlikely?

[swansont]

So what you have is a vague guess. It’s a far cry from that to having science to discuss. You lack a mathematical model, and thus can make no specific predictions.

[AlexanderSamualDunnett]

On 12/26/2022 at 9:32 AM, Genady said:

Why is it unlikely?

What is your belief about the sub quantum/sub electric nature of the universe? Why is the standard model doesn't even describe where positivity and negativity come from? The universe is infinitely unique.

This is quite specific and not that vague. You're definition of science must not be the same as mine. I held this model to be true in my logical mind upon years of observation and testing and it explains almost everything in a much more elegant way than the tacked on standard model. There is math behind it but predictions are always going to be approximations. To imply any otherwise is unwise.

[Genady]

7 minutes ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

On 12/25/2022 at 7:32 PM, Genady said:

Why is it unlikely?

What is your belief about the sub quantum/sub electric nature of the universe? Why is the standard model doesn't even describe where positivity and negativity come from? The universe is infinitely unique.

No, I've asked first:

On 12/25/2022 at 7:32 PM, Genady said:

On 12/25/2022 at 7:17 PM, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

It seems unlikely I am made of particles, and can use a device made of particles to perceive something made of particles as particles.

Why is it unlikely?

 

[joigus]

Vagueness, vagueness everywhere, nor any prop to think!

--Rime of the Ancient Physicist

[AlexanderSamualDunnett]

5 hours ago, Genady said:

No, I've asked first:

 

Because everything needs to come from somewhere. Before the very first thing in the universe there must be nothing. It seems charge remains balanced around 0, if not exactly 0 universally so it seems logical that there must be some negativity and positivity. However two negative make a positive so maybe a string could loop on itself to create positivity. It's just a hypothesis.

[Genady]

13 minutes ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

two negative make a positive

Not necessarily. E.g., (-1) + (-1) = (-2)

[swansont]

8 hours ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

There is math behind it but predictions are always going to be approximations. To imply any otherwise is unwise.

Predictions are exact. Measurements will have uncertainty. But physics tends not to predict fundamental properties, unless they are zero.

[Mordred]

6 hours ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

Because everything needs to come from somewhere. Before the very first thing in the universe there must be nothing. It seems charge remains balanced around 0, if not exactly 0 universally so it seems logical that there must be some negativity and positivity. However two negative make a positive so maybe a string could loop on itself to create positivity. It's just a hypothesis.

I don't see how you would get a string loop to represent charge.... In string theory itself charge is represented by where the endpoints lie on the graph/ brane.

 However string theory doesn't apply a single string either. Quite frankly having a single string represent all of the periodic table would be an impossibility.

[AlexanderSamualDunnett]

On 12/28/2022 at 9:13 PM, Genady said:

Not necessarily. E.g., (-1) + (-1) = (-2)

When multiplied. I didn't specify multiplication because I was afraid of being verbose.

On 12/29/2022 at 12:30 AM, swansont said:

Predictions are exact. Measurements will have uncertainty. But physics tends not to predict fundamental properties, unless they are zero.

Not all predictions are exact yet.

On 12/29/2022 at 3:10 AM, Mordred said:

I don't see how you would get a string loop to represent charge.... In string theory itself charge is represented by where the endpoints lie on the graph/ brane.

 However string theory doesn't apply a single string either. Quite frankly having a single string represent all of the periodic table would be an impossibility.

Negativity is represented by the string path, positivity is represented inside where the string loops on itself. This is not like existing string theories. I guess you could call it a path theory. It would not be impossible to represent any of the existing periodic tables I've seen this way, but as accuracy and understandability increase so would the challenge I would imagine.

[Genady]

32 minutes ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

When multiplied

Why should they be multiplied rather than added? When the string doubles in the loop, shouldn't it negativity double as well?

[Mordred]

4 hours ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

When multiplied. I didn't specify multiplication because I was afraid of being verbose.

Not all predictions are exact yet.

Negativity is represented by the string path, positivity is represented inside where the string loops on itself. This is not like existing string theories. I guess you could call it a path theory. It would not be impossible to represent any of the existing periodic tables I've seen this way, but as accuracy and understandability increase so would the challenge I would imagine.

String theory uses path integrals. The difference is the strings of string theory are fully mathematically described.

 If your serious about trying to define your strings I would recommend you study how String theory does so and then apply mathematics to your String.

[AlexanderSamualDunnett]

If the string is infinitely unique and infinitely complex then it doesn't seem like math would be best option to describe it. Perhaps sections could be approximated using a space-time matrix or approximate calculations could be made but I don't see why it needs math.

[Mordred]

Math is a requirement to make testable predictions. Any model for physics is literally useless if it cannot be tested.

[joigus]

8 hours ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

If the string is infinitely unique and infinitely complex then it doesn't seem like math would be best option to describe it.

Maths is the proper language to describe/ascertain uniqueness and/or complexity. What makes you think there is a better language?

Approximate calculations without maths? And how would that go?

[Genady]

9 hours ago, AlexanderSamualDunnett said:

If the string is infinitely unique and infinitely complex then it doesn't seem like math would be best option to describe it. Perhaps sections could be approximated using a space-time matrix or approximate calculations could be made but I don't see why it needs math.

Oh, sour grapes!