Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry


Just bought my ticket, two more days till Serenity. I'm quite glad I'm not Jayne though:
You scored as Kaylee Frye. The Mechanic. You are a natural mechanic, and you are far too sweet and cheerful to live out here. How you can see the good in everyone around you boggles the mind occationally. Still you don't seem to be any crazier than that, and it is a nice kinda crazy.


Kaylee Frye


River Tam


Inara Serra


The Operative


Zoe Alleyne Washburne


Shepherd Derrial Book


Capt. Mal Reynolds


Hoban 'Wash' Washburne


Simon Tam


Jayne Cobb


Which Serenity character are you?
created with QuizFarm.com

This week I've been trying to read this paper on Tachyon Condensation and Black Strings, to figure out if I want to work on this "bubble of nothing" this quarter... a bubble where no spacetime exists which, if it got started, would theoretically eat all of spacetime around it until nothing is left except void... not even empty space itself! Reminds me a lot of the Neverending Story, but that doesn't mean it will necessarily be a good project to work on. The other stuff we've been discussing are The Power of the Pentagon and quantifying fine tuning in Eternal Inflation. The Power of the Pentagon refers to a paper Tom Banks (away this quarter at Rutgers) is currently writing... a new way to break supersymmetry (among other things) using SU(5)xSU(5)xSU(5)... fits into his whole Cosmological SUSY Breaking (CSB) mechanism, although Michael Dine is talking about trying to make a standalone version which is more Landscape-friendly. There's a section of the draft paper called "The beast whose number is 555" as well as a footnote that indicates he would have named the paper "The Power of the Pentagram" were it not for the current funding climate. :) Speaking of cute names for stuff, Cumrun Vafa just named the murky realm beyond the Landscape of string theory The Swampland which totally cracks me up!

I'm trying to figure out who the heck Michal Fabinger is... his picture on his website doesn't look a day over 15, and yet he appears to be Eva Silverstein's student at Stanford, and has already published (or at least submitted) 8 papers, all far beyond my level of comprehension. This kid makes me feel so dumb! Either that or his picture on his website is a joke. Wouldn't be surprised, since his papers include Clean Time-Dependent String Backgrounds from Bubble Baths, Deconstructing Noncommutativity with a Giant Fuzzy Moose, and Virtual Reality in the World of Holograms which involve seriously ridiculous puns that I wouldn't expect someone without tenure to have the balls to pull off. Kid genius punk? Or slightly older prankster? Either way I'll have what he's having!


( 6 comments — Leave a comment )
(Deleted comment)
Sep. 29th, 2005 08:47 am (UTC)

where do I sign up to be him?
it took me far too long to be smart.


your link is mispelled. needs to be swamp not swap :)

oops, don't know how I didn't notice that. thanks!

(and I couldn't help but notice you misspelled misspelled... fortunately, it's ironic enough to pass for intentional)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
Sep. 30th, 2005 08:33 pm (UTC)
Well, it would be easier to tell you more if you can ask specific questions. But I can guess what some of the philosophical issues surrounding it might be that you're referring to.

First, let me say that I regard apperception as just plain ignorant when he makes the claim that space (or time) is a priori. I don't think anyone who knows enough math or physics as it's understood today could make that claim with a straight face. It may be hard for him to imagine multiple spaces at once, or the lack of space, but that doesn't mean it's impossible for the rest of us. And there are many good reasons to be skeptical about space or time existing at all, except as an emergent property of something much more bizarre.

Spacetime is not nothing, it's something because it has properties (curvature, rate of expansion, genus, etc.) all of which we can measure. If one of these "bubbles of nothing" were to appear (which at this point are entirely theoretical and will in all likelihood never actually be observed) then it would be a place where you can't get to from within our spacetime. If you try to go towards it you would just go around it... it's outside of space and time and it has no coordinates or properties to itself... it is the absence of something rather than something. Space is made of quantum foam... there would be no quantum foam in the bubble, nor would there be any sense of which direction is which... up, down, left, right, all are concepts which only exist with space not outside of it in this bubble of nothing. The only way to realize it's there is to look at the topological properties of the space surrounding the bubble... in other words, how it's connected to itself.

Does that help with some of the philosophical issues?
Sep. 30th, 2005 08:38 pm (UTC)

up, down, left, right, all are concepts which only exist with space not outside of it in this bubble of nothing.

meant to type "all are concepts which only exist within space, not outside of it in this bubble of nothing."
Sep. 30th, 2005 02:42 am (UTC)
So, even without even remotely knowing what the seriously riciulous puns involved are, I STILL think that those are great titles for a paper. Nice.
( 6 comments — Leave a comment )


domino plural

Latest Month

May 2017


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lizzy Enger