Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by John J. Bannan, Aug 5, 2008.
Right, so you want me to do this or not?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Look, it will contain calculations you will see beyond A-Level, right?
What did you mean by this:
"Branes can. "
Are you speaking from a purely mathematical standpoint or has modern string theory something to say about branes smaller than Planck length?
It does matter. If you are not asking why to probe a deeper fundamental question, than you haven't made your point. I am not denying you can ask an infinite number of "whys?" I could ask "why" infinitely about an infinitely regressive series of numbers. I am denying you can ask an infinite number of "why does that exist?" when probing into deeper and deeper fundamentals of the universe provided the universe derives from nothingness. The "whys" of asking deeper and deeper fundamental questions would stop when you got to the point of saying the universe exists because it is nothingness.
Well there's just no getting through to some people!
Ditto.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Then it seems you do understand. Well done. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I give up. You don't understand my point, and I still don't agree with you.:bawl:
I'm glad we got this sorted!
You know what, let's see if the horse can speak. Can you answer questions from me? Do you feel confident, you fucking low-life?
Frankly, I don't care. If you want to waste your time, go ahead. As I said, writing up something you can find on formula sheets and in textbooks (which you claim to have) doesn't mean you can do it.
I've linked you to enough lecture notes that you could post equations from graduate courses. Doesn't mean you know how to apply them.
Branes are not defined by a set length, like strings. They are defined by the behaviour of the ends of strings. Hence they can split and combine in ways strings cannot. This is why they were such a huge thing when Polchinski proved they are actual physical objects.
In M theory they do things like shrink to zero size or wrap circles which then shrink to zero radius. That's how you get string theory from M theory.
You don't understand our answers and you still ask questions about concepts you make no attempt to grasp.
You and I have done this before. Remember the challenge you set me last September. You and I try to answer questions Rpenner on PhysOrg asked. You answered none, I answered quite a few. Rpenner I trust to ask viable questions because he knows quite a bit of physics and the areas he doesn't he knows where to get good questions. I imagine you'll not ask any algebra ones, because you don't know any algebra, or if you do you'll copy them from elsewhere and not know how to answer them yourself.
Tell you want, you answer some questions and then I'll answer yours. How's that? I asked you first. Infact, I've asked you many many times. Alternatively, you ask some questions but you also PM someone like Quarkhead with your answers to a few of them. Then we know you can do some of them and you aren't just trying to find the hardest questions online you can.
And you know I can do such questions. I've shown I can in the past. I've corrected a huge number of your posts. I've posted the work I do. In less than a month I'll post a published paper of mine (I've finished it, I'm waiting for someone else to publish their paper first). I've got a degree and masters in mathematical physics. I'm doing a PhD in theoretical physics. Thus I've proven to people who research this stuff I know how to do it. Where've you done that? Oh yeah, NOWHERE. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
And? It doesn't stop you being a fucking low-life eh?
For starters, how much of a fucking contradiction is this?
''Frankly, I don't care. If you want to waste your time, go ahead. As I said, writing up something you can find on formula sheets and in textbooks (which you claim to have) doesn't mean you can do it.''
''I've linked you to enough lecture notes ''
Oh really??????? Any fucking retard can do that!
Except I don't just link to lecture notes, I've provided plenty of evidence I can do them too. Like when I mopped the floor with you in your challenge.
''Except I don't just link to lecture notes''
Oh well. An extra three points for being a smart retard.
What's that I hear? Why it's the sound of back peddling!
Still waiting to see if you'll accept my challenge. Will you answer some questions? Or would you prefer to ask some questions but privately provide a few of the answers to show you're able to do them.
Or are you ignoring those because you know you can do neither of them?
Oh wow! THE RETARD MADE A FUNNY!
How about accepting something like a question from me?
No you didn't :shrug:
So I ask you first, many times over many months, having previously accepted a challenge like this from you and beaten you to a pulp and you get to go first?!
But just to show you I'm not worried, fire away. Of course I don't guarantee I can answer it, I'm not omniscient. I've proven I can do physics and maths to the level of a graduate student to the people who matter, my examiners. What about you? The question is whether you can do anything you claim.
Like relativity, quantum mechanics and vector calculus.
Alphanu-fucking-meric, you sought out enemies here, be glad you've made one.
Separate names with a comma.