Subject: Questions about topological fundamentals of string theory
From: Shalender Singh
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 21:19:18 -0800 (PST)
I have some very basic and fundamental questions on
string theory and basis/fundamentals of physics.
These questions arise from the concept of inertia (or
resistance to change), which in turn lead to concepts
of space, time, processes and variation.
Fundamentally I ask this question: "Why there is
inertia?", which leads me to a information/variation
based model of discrete space-time, with a very
different philosophical basis.
In the string theoritical model of space-time and
universe there is a inherent assumption of space-time
like topology, partially in the concept of string
itself and partially in the laws governing interaction
of strings.
Assumptions of non-trivial topology in the string
structure and interactions also means and assumption
of inertia because all the three concepts: inertia,
non-trivial topology and concept of controlled
variation are actually highly inter-related.
If a string assumes a non-trivial topological
structure then it inherently assumes inertia or
"structure in information transfer" in other words. So
the string theory is not deeply fundamental.
Also my contentions:
1. In philosophical fundamentals of set theory there
is a basic philosophical assumption of "Absolute
Existence". So everything which exists must have a
container.
2. To create non-trivial topology over that we create
'artificial' structure of containership or sets where
some sets are preferred over others.
I start with a different philosophical basis:
1. I start with the concept of "Relative Direct
Existence", which means there is no need of a
"container" for a existence. A entity X directly
exists for entity Y but might not directly exist for
entity Z.
2. Then there is a concept of "existence capability"
of anything with "Relative Existence". This means: "to
how many other entities this entity directly exists?".
For any non-trivial topological/inertial entities the
capabilities of existence should be finite.
3. There is a concept of "chain of existence"...
(2) and (3) would automatically create a non-trivial
topological structure.
I would appreciate any feeback from you. Would you
appreciate I write these things in more details to
you?
Best Regards,
Shalender Singh
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited