OK I'm gonna give my void inquiry another go cause i think it relates to the resolution of string theory?

Question

The void of space that contains no familiar molecules... are there any recorded signs thus far of substance as the imperfect vacuum. To say, is the blackness without hydrogen present or any other familiar thing, deffinatly empty... or possibly filled with somthing very hard to detect with the familiarity of nature we are given on this planet? Have we not the intruments devised to map the structure of what seems as mysterious dark matter... or are there pieces that just haven't been put together to show evidence of the void unifying all things in the known and white unknown universe saying nothing in either isn't touching something from both being that all things are connected as far as is extending between dimensions?

Answer 1

Actually I believe your question of "void" is very important and relates to the mathematical awareness of geometrical Space-Time. Note that I don't mention the String Theory philosophy as that is perhaps completely wrong in it's assumptions.

Disregard please whatever has been preached from the pulpit of hallowed String Papistical Dogma. It is wrong be assured, partly due to an influence from an educational institution which I will refrain from mentioning aside from the fact that perhaps their greatest call to fame has actually been members of the band "Pink Floyd". (One good thing anyhow)lol. At any rate what I am getting at is the bias that has been applied to the mathematics of string theory over the Standard Model, and that is right from the beginning of most discourses on String. Check the first paragraph of the Wikipedia Entry on String and you will see what I am talking about.The twisting of String has been applied there and carried on to infect every entry of the Standard Model as well. They apply the mathematics of String as though it actually has a dimensional aspect, while it is the "String"itself that has the dimensional aspect, and yet turn it 360 degrees around and claim the actual particle in the standard model has no dimension and apply mathematical non dimensional standards to the Actual Particle itself without explaining that the Point particle is only a mathematical construct and not the actual particle that is eventually described in the Standard Model (with Spin) that is more viable in it's potentials than the String hopes to be. I am not just argueing the mathematics here, I am argueing the falsified bias that is implied by proponents of string Theory and the minor alterations that are happening concerning what other theories have actually said all along,and are being criminally changed in papers online, just to keep certain funds rolling in on what would otherwise be recognized for what it is.

Well enough for that, for now, I am sorry for the side-step as it were, but knew that reconsideration of dimensional considerations from a mathematical viewpoint, would need a wider perspective than being trapped by the tangle of string. A 3d concept of a particle as in the Standard Model is better than those shown by String in understanding the void, although the Standard Model has a long way to go. There are more realistic models of math itself than what most in physics use today, but they are not widely in use, and have legal restrictions on their use in pubic discussion, as do many computer programs worldwide, but eventually they will become known.

At any rate to consider the vacuum of space or the void as being applied here, there are mathematical descriptions that are needed to be used. This doesn't matter if you are describing an area a few molecules wide or an expanse of perhaps a cubic meter or cubic lightyear.in dimension. You are no doubt familiar with the Tesseract, if I can find it, I will include an interactive geometrical model link that helps with it's consideration, but it is fully interative (important) which means you will need to actually need to start clicking on it and building a multidimensional construct in order to picture mentally it's features. This also points out that long before String came along there were quite a few dimensions beyond the obvious that were being investigated by mathematicians.

Again back to the void however, as exploring dimensions is beyond the "space" allowed here.Advise further searches involving Tesseract and associated multi-dimensional theories none the less. A point beyond nothingless that. Being that there is never nothing.Lovely english.But true - Naught is not.The only failure in finding nothing is the quest. A cubic anywhere, named void or vacuum, is non existant. There is always a geometrical contruct of space-time full of literally trillions of bits of warpness everywhere, at least in the smallest sections, larger areas have more of the heavily involved warpedness in multiple dimensions than smaller ones of course (Not describing the really busy areas of High G).

In simplest terms, if you were in a spacecraft well beyond any local G source perhaps a hundred LY from even a small planet, and your craft had an amazing ability to somehow not disturb local spacetime in the least, and you had the ability to mathematically isolate a square cm of local spacetime and began orienting your craft from all directions surrounding your test cm, you would find that that small cm of space was so twisted up in warpedness as to be an entire study unto itself. Of course first off with your multispectrum analyzer you would find the full array of particle radiations flowing though that cm from every conceivable direction incredible.Every motion causing eddies in the local spacetime as the astounding flows of particles continues.Then there are the continuous collisions and near collisions that really start things stretching, oh and then you find your so called isolated cm is not so isolated at all because all of it's neighbor cm are having additional interdimensional actions and reactions and interactions that deeply influence the space time that you selected for your study. Ah, therefore perhaps the universe cannot be fragmented, as you wish, but the study becomes one of the whole.And your hope of study of minor trillions of actions within a small segment of spacetime is dashed, it is part of a glorious whole.Nothing is void, Nothing is Nothing. Please note there are different meanings for the word Nothing, and I am using one definition to define another. Also less you think I have ignored the plurality of particle manifestations, body vs wave, it's actually not that vital, math works out the same, the space gets warped, especially since it's such a busy train station.

Hopefully that does help a little with the familiar "objects", while not quite molecules, there are some stray brave molecules out there that from time to time that really upset the applecart within square cms in fact. But as far as your wondering whether all is indeed unified (whether we have a valid theory that says so or not) yes all, including the dimensions are well adhered to one another and interacting all the "time". they are rather inseparable. First beauty in physics, now love. Isn't the universe just Grand.

Mystery

Answer 2

First, I have included the official web site on string theory (link below). Second, the book "The Elegant Universe" by Brian Greene (he is a string physicist) is an excellent introduction to string theory for the non scientist. Einstein did not create string theory and in fact it was attempting to explain some flaws or wholes in his explanations of the universe that led to string theory. No one person (as that three particle physicist noticed the same problem at the same time and then quickly there were five different theories of strings (now combined in super string or M-theory by yet another person) created string theory. To address your question probably not. Einstein couldn't even accept the findings of his own work that particles were entangled (a basic of quantum mechanics) because it was not explainable in traditional terms of physics. Also, the dimensions (at least 11 have to exist for super string theory to be true) that are theorized are all on the sub atomic (no instrument known to man can measure anything as small as they are said to be) level. So, in theory when you wave your hand every time you are passing through 11 dimensions but you don't notice it because of the tiny effect. So, other dimensions are not like parallel worlds where everything exist on the same level but just out of phase with us. If you are confused you have started to grasp super string theory if you think you understand or can comprehend it almost every physicist working in the field will tell you that is a sure sign that you don't get it. Edit: but keeping thinking and asking questions. I always find your questions stimulating and they lead to further questions that could be researched. Psi

Answer 3

Apparently empty space is not exactly empty.

In the vast spaces between the clumps of galaxies of the universe, where you would expect there to be absolute nothingness, there seems to be something going on there.
What appears to be happening is that this volume of the universe is accelerating in its expansion. Acceleration requires a force of some kind, so it is now postulated that there is an invisable "dark energy" filling the empty universe that is accelerating the expansion. This dark energy seems to be an intrinsic property of empty space.

Now on a bit smaller scale, there appears to be more mass in our galaxy (and all galaxys) than can be accounted for by the the stars present. So now it is postulated that within each galaxy is dark mass, mass that emits no light or heat and can't be seen, It might be small particles left over from the Big Bang (called WIMPS) or it maybe something else.

So empty space doesn't seem to be so empty at the moment.

Answer 4

Void is a fanciful notion. It depends on a subjective view of what is meant by empty.

Outer space is a very good vacuum - only about 1 atom per cubic metre, far better than we can acheive on Earth. But even then empty space is permeated by the various fields of physics, and it has a non zero ground state energy. This ground state energy can indeed be measured as an effect called the Casimir effect.

Answer 5

11 dimensional string theory, (and 26 dimensional M theory), has not produced anything.

It is possible that the extra 7 dimensions of space in string theory, (that are not perceived), are mathematical deception that first appeared with 5 dimensional Kaluza-Klein Theory.

String theory is possibly deception derived from adding dimensions of space to the already existing 3 dimensions of space one dimension at a time at 90 degree angles to the previous dimension.

That string theory is possibly invalid is stated at the end of the wikipedia article on string theory.

Answer 6

You are asking I think, "Is outer space really empty?"

The answer is a definite maybe. Here's what we know...or think we know.

Space bends under enormous gravity, like from super galaxies. We've seen that predicted bend as so-called gravity lenses. [See source.]

String theory speculates that the fabric of space consists of infinitely thin, vibrating strings about 1 Plank length long (10^-33 cm). These strings exist in our known universe, but also in dimensions higher than the 4D we know. [See source.]

Dark matter/energy makes up about 96% of the mass/energy in our universe. It is no longer a theory because it was observed in 2006 as it was lit up by the energy of two colliding galaxies. [See source.]

Bottom line...outer space is not empty. It can be bent by gravity, like gravity attracts matter. It may consist of infinitely thin strings that may exist across universes. And 96% of its energy/matter cannot be observed except under special circumstances...like the collision of galaxies.

Answer 7

Look up dark matter, dark energy, zero point energy, and the Higgs Field. These are all independent of string theory.

Answer 8

The blackness is the absence of particles that reflect light.
There is matter, and there is anti-matter.
Matter reflects light, anti-matter is the lack of particles to reflect light.