Sign Guestbook Back to The Complete Idiot's Guide to String Theory
| Date | 2009-04-29 |
| Location |  |
| Message | Please send me more information!!! |
| Date | 2009-04-28 |
| Location | |
| Message | Mr. Musser, Okay, I have a String Theory emergency on my hands. I've read your book and I loved it. As a non-math major, I found it exceedingly accessible and overall a fun and informative read. Okay, enough sucking up and on to my emergency. In your book, I could have sworn I read a portion where you stated that if two trains were moving AWAY from each other at 51% the speed of light, to each train it would appear as though the other train was traveling at 102%. Is this accurate or am I just a nut case? (Even if it IS right, there is no guarantee that I'm NOT a nutcase.) I made this statement in a Yahoo group I belong to (a Zen group, of all things) and we have been discussing it back and forth for about two months now. Please bail me out.- Vince |
Private Message added 2009-04-24 |
| Date | 2009-03-29 |
| Location | |
| Message | Just finished your book String Theory. Terrific! Very much in the tradition of Kaku and Greene in making hugely complex stuff much clearer for interested laypersons such as myself. My work has been in postmodern criminology/law and i have had many occassions to develop insight by crossing disciplines (topology theory, string theory, field theory, multiple dimensions, dynamic systems theory). Thanks for your superb book. Take care, Dragan Dragan Milovanovic, Ph.D. Professor and Bernard J. Brommel Distinguished Research Professor Justice Studies Dpt. Northeastern Illinois University Chicago, Ill. USA 60625 |
| Date | 2009-03-20 |
| Location | |
| Message | I was wondering, if string causes everything, where does string come from? And where does that come from? And so on, and so forth. Does string really explain everything, in the cases I asked. If so, how? Also, are 'we' string? As in the particals in our brain, and the electric current that may create consciesness. If so, what happens when we die? |
| Date | 2009-03-07 |
| Location | |
| Message | Regarding the origins of String Theory, I have to suggest a review of Dewey B Larson's work on The Reciprocal System of Theory. Unfortunately, being an engineer, Mr. Larson was straight away locked out of the physicists club, suffering the standard treatment as a quack. It will be a great day when the human race graduates from its reliance upon pomp and circumstance. |
| Date | 2009-03-04 |
| Location | |
| Message | I AM A RAD TECH AND WAS TAUGHT THE USUAL ON RADIATION AND THE PRINCIPLES...MANY YEARS AGO... I NOW AM WORKING IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND WAS CONVERSING WITH AN INMATE AND HE IS VERY INTERESTED IN THE STRING THEORY, I AM NOT CONTACTING YOU ON HIS BEHALF, HOWEVER, OUR DISCUSSION HAS TWEEKED MY CURIOSITY, AND I WILL PURCHASE YOUR BOOK. I S'POSE THE REAL REASON FOR THIS MESSAGE TO YOU IS TO EXPRESS THAT I FEEL THE MIND DOES NOT QUIT TURNING, EVEN IF THE BODY IS LOCKED UP. THERE ARE ALOT OF FREETHINKERS EVERYWHERE AND THE STRING THEORY YOU WRITE ABOUT IS A POSITIVE SUBJECT AND ACTUALLY GIVES HOPE TO THOSE IN BONDAGE,,,FOR WE ALL ARE CONNECTED... THANKS FOR TAKING THE TIME SINCERLY DEBBIE COOK |
| Date | 2009-02-17 |
| Location | |
| Message | The much-bandied beauty of string theory arose from the idea that the many free parameters of the standard model might be calculable from the geometry of the extra dimensions and the idea that the zoo of fundamental particles was explainable in terms of a single entity, the string. However if the number of fundamental entities balloons with the inclusion of branes and the geometry of the extra dimensions can not be nailed down except to the broad subset of Kaluba-Yau forms (and btw, what imposes this restriction to Kaluba-Yau), then how can the theory still be considered "beautiful"? Has not one zoo been traded for another (probably fundamentally unobservable) one and the numerical free parameters been replaced with equally ambiguous geometric free parameters? |
| Date | 2009-02-17 |
| Location | |
| Message | What leads physicists to believe that the dimensions of M-theories are the same "kind" of dimensions as Minkowski space? In other words, standard quantum theoretical descriptions of systems in Hilbert space require an infinite number of dimensions for their formulation and yet no one has the gall to preach that their are an infinite number of dimensions beyond 3+1 dimensional space. What is the difference between the mathematically required extra dimensions of Hilbert space and the (mathematically required) extra dimensions of M-theories? |
| Date | 2009-02-17 |
| Location | |
| Message | I'm an artist that wants to learn more about String Theory, but my right brain won't allow my left brain to learn more about it. Hmmm, to put it in more simple terms, can't you just say, "We are all connected?" |
Page 22 of 23 << First < 19 20 21 22 23 >