but i just downloaded a book (on string theory and other babble) which may or may not be good... if i find anything interesting i'll keep in touch... in the mean time keep making great video responses!
Well Hawking uses mathematical proofs to discuss how there is required to be multiple parallel universes in which black holes independently would not exist with separate histories so that 'information' will not be deleted from existence, meaning that the base law of physics would not be broken by what he called the "information paradox"
Well what we have to keep in mind is that Hawking, though a brilliant physicist does not discuss things in terms of math, as he is unable to use mathematical formula quick enough to really accomplish anything, instead he has developed for himself a way of visualizing things accurately enough in his head to have properly developed the mathematical formula that allows us to explain black holes.
yes i am actually well aware of his metamathematical calculations on black holes (he was the first to reverse the formulas (a very complicated reversal) on black hole theory and proved and introduced the idea of a "white hole")
really!?... you might not know this, but i am a math and physics nerd (and i love theoretical physics... i dont know about you but too me its almost exiting you could say) so i would love it if you could point me in the direction where i could read about the math support. (but with only level 2 engineering calculus. i probably wont understand much of it) .... if you dont know where to find it, its ok... i'll try google tomorrow...SHIT... i need to wake up in 5:15h... bye.
Alright well good luck. You'll have to research that but I believe there was some excellent work done by both Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan, both of course who were astoundingly well comprehending of the universe. I would recommend them as a start of research, particularly in Hawking's work of matter and black holes (well read in "A Brief History of Time"),I though have not surpassed a high schooleducation of mathematics, as I'm rather pathetically weak at it, sorry I could notbe more help here
WELL I DID READ (sorry caps) a brife history of time a few years back, and from what i remember string theory was only 'lightly' explained. it showed no evidence of anything.. i dont even remember if Hawkins even suggested there was evidence. (Let alone mathematical evidence, since a brief history of time was written in VERY simplistic terms to appeal to the public... or in other word, dumb people like us who probably wouldn't understand a complex rant on the nature of gravity or string theory)
huummm... im very sceptical to that theory... they have very poor evidence to support it... but apparently once they get that "super" particle accelerator built (in France i think, im not sure) they can start doing some real experiments. and then maybe I'll take a second look at it.
but i just downloaded a book (on string theory and other babble) which may or may not be good... if i find anything interesting i'll keep in touch... in the mean time keep making great video responses!
Phibins 3 years ago
Well Hawking uses mathematical proofs to discuss how there is required to be multiple parallel universes in which black holes independently would not exist with separate histories so that 'information' will not be deleted from existence, meaning that the base law of physics would not be broken by what he called the "information paradox"
Ethrock 3 years ago
huummm... well it couldn't of been in my version of the book... (I am looking at ch. 11 where he discuses the unification theory and strings...)
we are talking about history of time right?
anyway... i still have some books of his that i havnt yet read... so i'll get on it.
(first i am going to reread history of time... since its been 2+ years since my first read... and back then i was even dumber than i am now...)
Phibins 3 years ago
Well what we have to keep in mind is that Hawking, though a brilliant physicist does not discuss things in terms of math, as he is unable to use mathematical formula quick enough to really accomplish anything, instead he has developed for himself a way of visualizing things accurately enough in his head to have properly developed the mathematical formula that allows us to explain black holes.
Ethrock 3 years ago
yes i am actually well aware of his metamathematical calculations on black holes (he was the first to reverse the formulas (a very complicated reversal) on black hole theory and proved and introduced the idea of a "white hole")
Phibins 3 years ago
really!?... you might not know this, but i am a math and physics nerd (and i love theoretical physics... i dont know about you but too me its almost exiting you could say) so i would love it if you could point me in the direction where i could read about the math support. (but with only level 2 engineering calculus. i probably wont understand much of it) .... if you dont know where to find it, its ok... i'll try google tomorrow...SHIT... i need to wake up in 5:15h... bye.
Phibins 3 years ago
Alright well good luck. You'll have to research that but I believe there was some excellent work done by both Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan, both of course who were astoundingly well comprehending of the universe. I would recommend them as a start of research, particularly in Hawking's work of matter and black holes (well read in "A Brief History of Time"),I though have not surpassed a high schooleducation of mathematics, as I'm rather pathetically weak at it, sorry I could notbe more help here
Ethrock 3 years ago
WELL I DID READ (sorry caps) a brife history of time a few years back, and from what i remember string theory was only 'lightly' explained. it showed no evidence of anything.. i dont even remember if Hawkins even suggested there was evidence. (Let alone mathematical evidence, since a brief history of time was written in VERY simplistic terms to appeal to the public... or in other word, dumb people like us who probably wouldn't understand a complex rant on the nature of gravity or string theory)
Phibins 3 years ago
it sound like you are a supporter of string theory... am i right?
Phibins 3 years ago
You would be correct
Ethrock 3 years ago
huummm... im very sceptical to that theory... they have very poor evidence to support it... but apparently once they get that "super" particle accelerator built (in France i think, im not sure) they can start doing some real experiments. and then maybe I'll take a second look at it.
Phibins 3 years ago
Actually though the literal physical evidences are limited at best, the mathematical support for the theory is outstanding.
Ethrock 3 years ago