PDA

View Full Version : What is the universal substance?



Siegfried
Monday, August 13th, 2007, 04:38 PM
What is the universal substance, i.e. what is the universe made of? Please only pick more than option if you really believe the universe is made up of more than one substance. For example, if you believe matter is really a form of energy, only pick the option 'energy'; if you believe matter and energy are two different substances which interact with one another to yield the universe, pick both of them.

Ægir
Monday, August 13th, 2007, 05:13 PM
Energy...for all things are made of It. But where did the energy come from...:rolleyes:

Flash Voyager
Monday, August 13th, 2007, 05:20 PM
Energy...for all things are made of It. But where did the energy come from...:rolleyes:

Matter can't be destroyed, I think the same goes for energy. It's origins are difficult fundamental questions in physics and metaphysics, it will take a long time for physicists to come up with the correct answer. Now the scientific world sticks with the assumption that it always has existed.

Ægir
Monday, August 13th, 2007, 05:52 PM
Matter can't be destroyed, I think the same goes for energy. It's origins are difficult fundamental questions in physics and metaphysics, it will take a long time for physicists to come up with the correct answer. Now the scientific world sticks with the assumption that it always has existed.

I agree with you…but matter is made of energy according to many contemporary physics theories.

Erhard
Tuesday, August 14th, 2007, 04:17 AM
There is only one universal substance, of which everything in the universe -- all matter, all energy and all forces -- are made of: strings of energy vibrating in the 10th spatial dimension. Their form, their vibrations and their specific intertwining with the extra tiny spatial dimensions determine which particles are created and can be observed.

These strings are extremely small, so small that we will probably never be able to see one or to gain direct evidence for their existence. It is assumed they are 0.000000000000000001 fermis (or 10^-32 cm) in length. In fact, if one would envision that an atom has the size of our solar system, then a string would be the size of a tree. With current technology, we would need miscroscopes of the size of our milky way to see strings.

That's what M-theory predicts, and it is currently the only theory that manages to unite the general theory of relativity, explaining gravity, with the standard model, describing electromagnetism, as well as the strong and weak force. The only theory whose mathematics work out both on the sub-atomic level of quantum mechanics and the level of giant mass accumulations, as observed in stars and described by general relativity. The only theory that unites all four fundamental forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, the weak force and the strong force) on every scale. So it's unlikely that it is completely wrong, whatever the future may bring. It will anyway remain at least a way to look at things, maybe not seeing the whole picture, but at least one side or a reflection of that what really is.

M-theory predicts a massless graviton, very heavy super-symmetric particles and extra dimensions. Hopefully, the new giant CERN atom smasher that is currently constructed and will start its operation next year, will give indirect evidence for some of the predictions of M-theory. But already the observation of the Higgs boson, predicted the standard model, would be a giant step forward. Minuscule black holes could be created and observed and their mathematics and behavior could be described by M-theory. Who knows, we might even be able to create strange matter, composed of up, down and strange quarks, in contrast to nucleic matter, consisting of up and down quarks only. The chemical and physical properties of such strangelets are almost completely unknown. There are calculations that predict that the ordinary matter around us is actually meta-stable and strange matter would be the matter with the lowest energy state.

Whatever we might learn in the next ten or twenty years, I believe the mathematics of M-theory is simply too beautiful and elegant to be completely wrong. Already Euler figured out the basic equation that triggered string theory and published it as a curiosity. Only centuries later it was discovered that it describes the strong force, completely unknown at Euler's time. I expect adaptions in future, corrections and amendments by new discoveries and increased understanding of the world around us, similar to how Newton's laws were altered by general relativity, but not a rudimentary deviation from the fundaments of M-theory.

Thus, yes, I think it is safe to claim the basic universal substance is energy; but energy can also be seen as particles and has particle properties. We can convert matter to energy and vice versa. Energy and matter are different apparitions and manifestations of the same substance: strings vibrating, dancing and playing music in the symphonic orchestra that is our universe.