M Theory and the paranormal

maccored

I was watching a Horizon documentary last night on M theory and it has me thinking - can this 'theory of everything' explain the paranormal and/or religion?

I'll keep this short - M theory initially meant 'membrane theory', with the idea that in this 11th dimension, everything in the universe is connected to a membrane. Now, they never went into detail as far as explaining what that membrane actually is, but I am going to assume that it is an active thing, probably powered in some way by consciousness. Granted, there are many more things in the universe than ourselves, so if it was controlled by consciousness, it wouldnt be just our own ... but I havent tried thinking about that bit yet.

Anyway. Ive always wondered if god is nothing more than the collective power of whatever energy we use to live. Lets for the craic, call that energy our soul (you can call it what you like). Maybe the membrane in the 11th dimension is actually the soul/energy whatever of everything in our universe. Since its part of us we can kinda influence it a tad (a bit like praying), but since theres more to the universe than just us, thats not always very reliable - but I think it could go some way to explaining religion. Including the idea of omni presence, since this 11th dimension apparently is only 10 to the power of a thousandth of a mm away from us at any time.

Then you could go a bit further and take the idea of good and bad in religion. we're taught to be as good as possible. i suppose this could cover positive thought as well, but imagine if this membrane, which is made up of the consciousness of the universe, is made up of more good 'vibes' than bad, then things will go smoothly. when this vibe is more bad than good, then things dont go smoothly. the point of religion is to try and encourage us to be as 'good' as possible, since its better for everyone (obviously religion hasnt worked out that way though).

what if what we view of as spirits and ghosts are actually energy from this 11th dimension? ... which is only 10 to the power of a thousandth of a mm away from us at any given time. I could go on, but I keep losing track of myself.

whats anyone else think?

Standman

Well from what I know of this 11th dimensional stuff is that it is very theoretical. It seems to have come from the complex mathematics at the quantum level, but has no way of being tested. I don't see how you can infer anything that you have stated in your post from the theory itself. It seems more like you are starting with the conclusion and adjusting the theory to fit your ideas.

This area of physics is extremely complex to the layman and maybe its fine to imagine what may be possible in its realms, but we simply don't have enough info about it yet.

Also given that paranormal and religion are unscientific, I think it's a bit like comparing apples with oranges.

maccored

obvisouly we dont know enough about this stuff, and obviously its very theoretical. What 'conclusion' are you referring to btw?

I don't see how you can infer anything that you have stated in your post from the theory itself. It seems more like you are starting with the conclusion and adjusting the theory to fit your ideas.

terribly condescending post there considering you think its apples and oranges. Arent we meant to think and discuss these kinds of things, or is it easier just to ignore it all? Is it a better idea in your mind to just not bother thinking about these things at all?

personally I completely disagree with " It seems more like you are starting with the conclusion and adjusting the theory to fit your ideas". the theory itself is pretty slim on details for a start.

Standman wrote: »

Well from what I know of this 11th dimensional stuff is that it is very theoretical. It seems to have come from the complex mathematics at the quantum level, but has no way of being tested. I don't see how you can infer anything that you have stated in your post from the theory itself. It seems more like you are starting with the conclusion and adjusting the theory to fit your ideas.

This area of physics is extremely complex to the layman and maybe its fine to imagine what may be possible in its realms, but we simply don't have enough info about it yet.

Also given that paranormal and religion are unscientific, I think it's a bit like comparing apples with oranges.

maccored

plus they have tested the theory btw. its the first theory that can explain away the holes in the big bang theory, as well as consolidating the 5 different string theories.

seamus

He's referring to your assumption that this dimension is somehow related to consciousness and can be actively manipulated by it.

From your post, it sounds like you're describing The Force and then jumping to way out ideas about how M-theory provides an explanation for "God". But it can only do so if you assumption about a link with consciousness is correct.

What basis do you have for this assumption?

Standman

maccored wrote: »

obvisouly we dont know enough about this stuff, and obviously its very theoretical. What 'conclusion' are you referring to btw?



terribly condescending post there considering you think its apples and oranges. Arent we meant to think and discuss these kinds of things, or is it easier just to ignore it all? Is it a better idea in your mind to just not bother thinking about these things at all?

personally I completely disagree with " It seems more like you are starting with the conclusion and adjusting the theory to fit your ideas". the theory itself is pretty slim on details for a start.

Well sorry if i sounded condescending I didn't mean it that way. I was just trying to say that since we know so little about this stuff it's impossible to draw any conclusions from it. I realise that's not what you were doing and it's fine to discuss things but when you invoke complex scientific theories in connection to the paranormal and religion, we are moving away from science and into the more philosophical realm.

maccored

for what its worth, i completely agree that these things are more theoretical than anything else ... but if this 11th dimension does exist, its a good candidate for explaining the whole god notion. i do honestly believe that between things like this and the idea that time may have more than one dimension, could explain most of the 'paranormal' - especially when added to theories about natural radiation, as well as wireless radiation etc, causing people to believe they are having paranormal experiences.

Its important though to think about and discuss these ideas i think.

maccored

seamus wrote: »

He's referring to your assumption that this dimension is somehow related to consciousness and can be actively manipulated by it.

From your post, it sounds like you're describing The Force and then jumping to way out ideas about how M-theory provides an explanation for "God". But it can only do so if you assumption about a link with consciousness is correct.

What basis do you have for this assumption?

logic is my basis. We are all sentient, conscious beings. If we are linked to this membrane, then would it be more than likely that it too is the same, or at least somewhere along those lines.

Whats the big issue against thinking? Again, are people afraid to think a bit about stuff rather than passing suggestions off as 'way out ideas'?

Major Lovechild

M Theory - like String Theory - has so far not been able to make testable experimental predictions thus rendering itself a supposition.

maccored

M theory IS string theory modified, and yes, it has been used resolving other theories (like String Theory) - which is the nearest thing to a "testable experimental prediction" you'll get at present.

I respectfully suggest you brush up on the current scientific discoveries and theories. String theory has virtually been replaced by the M theory concept.

Standman

maccored wrote: »

M theory IS string theory modified, and yes, it has been used resolving other theories (like String Theory) - which is the nearest thing to a "testable experimental prediction" you'll get at present.

I respectfully suggest you brush up on the current scientific discoveries and theories. String theory has virtually been replaced by the M theory concept.

The physicist Garret Lisi (you might recognize him from the series "Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman"), has come up with a theory of his own which is completely different to string theory. I'm no expert on the subject of course, but it at least shows string theory is not the only attempt at gaining a unified field theory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Gk_Ddhr0M

Antikythera

maccored wrote: »

what if what we view of as spirits and ghosts are actually energy from this 11th dimension?

What's all this "we"?

Your attempts to link science with superstition are quite tedious.

maccored

Standman wrote: »

The physicist Garret Lisi (you might recognize him from the series "Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman"), has come up with a theory of his own which is completely different to string theory. I'm no expert on the subject of course, but it at least shows string theory is not the only attempt at gaining a unified field theory.

Im all for theories. the more the better. All im saying is that its important to remember that sometimes its good to use the imagination.

maccored

Antikythera wrote: »

What's all this "we"?

Your attempts to link science with superstition are quite tedious.

Yeah. I am soooooooooooo put in my place there. good job, well done etc etc. Dont worry though, the 'we' doesnt include your fine self.

Antikythera

maccored wrote: »

Dont worry though, the 'we' doesnt include your fine self.

Well then I'd appreciate it if you didn't include me in your lunatic scribblings.

maccored

Well then I'd appreciate it if you didn't include me in your lunatic scribblings.

ah, resorting to insults eh? Good tactic. Besides, theres a much more informative and interesting version of this same thread on another forum ..... and theres no insults on that one. I think I'll hang round there instead since theres *that* forum has a refreshing lack of condescension. Still, you might one day open your eyes and realise that science and physics researchers commonly engage in "lunatic scribblings" as thats how we learn and progress. Now, dont you waste your energy thinking ... stay snug in your internet armchair.

Antikythera

maccored wrote: »

I keep losing track of myself.

That's ok, I understand.

viadah

Don't make me come back there you kids or I swear I'll turn this pooternet around and drive straight home.

maccored

i still think theres a lot of paranormal related things that science could well explain in the next 30 years. M Theory is quite interesting in this regard. I just find its a pity there very little debate on these threads - instead its just insults.

mcmoustache

maccored wrote: »

i still think theres a lot of paranormal related things that science could well explain in the next 30 years. M Theory is quite interesting in this regard. I just find its a pity there very little debate on these threads - instead its just insults.

That has been happening for a few hundred years. Stuff that was paranormal getting a scientific explanation, I mean.

Magnets would be a good example. It was thought that they worked by magic and then it was all explained by Maxwell and others.

In the same way, ghosts and afterlife stuff has been pretty well explained by neuro-science. This is pretty cutting edge stuff. NDEs can now be induced and I think it's only a matter of time before we can make people see ghosts of all sorts of objects.

maccored

I dont quite agree that "ghosts and afterlife stuff has been pretty well explained by neuro-science" in all honesty. Not yet anyway. Any links about inducing NDEs? I wasnt aware its possible to do that (excluding drugs like Ketamine etc).

mcmoustache wrote: »

That has been happening for a few hundred years. Stuff that was paranormal getting a scientific explanation, I mean.

Magnets would be a good example. It was thought that they worked by magic and then it was all explained by Maxwell and others.

In the same way, ghosts and afterlife stuff has been pretty well explained by neuro-science. This is pretty cutting edge stuff. NDEs can now be induced and I think it's only a matter of time before we can make people see ghosts of all sorts of objects.

Oryx

Somewhere in the recesses of my brain I seem to recall that NDEs were induced in military trainees when they were subjected to high g force in a centrifuge. I would normally look this up but can't on this phone

maccored

I wouldnt deny that - but most people who claim NDEs normally arent subjected to high g forces - though lets not forget, this thread is about m theory and its relation to apparent paranormal activity rather than NDEs.

Oryx wrote: »

Somewhere in the recesses of my brain I seem to recall that NDEs were induced in military trainees when they were subjected to high g force in a centrifuge. I would normally look this up but can't on this phone

Zombrex

maccored wrote: »

I'll keep this short - M theory initially meant 'membrane theory', with the idea that in this 11th dimension, everything in the universe is connected to a membrane. Now, they never went into detail as far as explaining what that membrane actually is, but I am going to assume that it is an active thing, probably powered in some way by consciousness.

That isn't what the membrane is in M-theory. The membrane is an expansion of the string in string theory, which is itself a 1 dimensional object rather than a 0 dimensional point like a particle.

A string is simply a way of modelling fundamental particles that is more successful than treating them purely as points in space (I think one thing that string theory allows is to model the spin of a particle which wouldn't have spin if it was just a 0 dimensional point). It allows for the measurement of spin of a particle that was originally considered just a point in space (and thus cannot spin). In string theory you can have an open string (a line) or a closed string (a loop)

In M-theory the open strings start and end on a membrane. It is some what inaccurate but you can sort of think of a 2 dimensional membrane as the piece of paper you might draw a 1 dimensional string on. Obviously visualising a 3 dimensional membrane is harder. Closed strings are not attached to membranes and can thus move through 11 dimensional space, where as open strings are attached to membranes and are thus confined to the dimensions of the membrane (ie our observed universe is a 4 dimensional membrane, or 4-brane).

It is not something to do with consciousness, this isn't something supernatural it is an attempt to model ordinary matter and space time that is already all around us.

maccored wrote: »

Anyway. Ive always wondered if god is nothing more than the collective power of whatever energy we use to live. Lets for the craic, call that energy our soul (you can call it what you like).

The energy we use to live is chemical energy, ie the energy released by molecules when they under go chemical reactions. Through respiration and burning of food we produce enough energy to live.

maccored wrote: »

Maybe the membrane in the 11th dimension is actually the soul/energy whatever of everything in our universe.

If M-theory is correct we are not on a membrane in the 11th dimension we are in a membrane of 4 dimensions which is why we experience 4 dimensions and are unaware of any other possible branes in other dimensions. Cause the strings that make up our particles are open strings on a 4 dimensional membrane they cannot move into other dimensions and thus we never experience them.

maccored wrote: »

Since its part of us we can kinda influence it a tad (a bit like praying), but since theres more to the universe than just us, thats not always very reliable - but I think it could go some way to explaining religion.

We cannot influence the 4-brane (4 dimensional membrane) in the manner you describe. Or more accurately you cannot influence it any more than you already do by simply existing in space, since all matter warps space time.

maccored wrote: »

what if what we view of as spirits and ghosts are actually energy from this 11th dimension?

The only energy that is supposed to be able to cross branes is gravitational energy, since gravitons are supposed to be made of closed strings, strings that are not attached to a membrane.

This would explain why gravity is much weaker than the other fundamental forces in nature, it is because the gravity is spread out into multiple dimensions with only a proportion of it influencing things in our 4 dimensional brane.

Genghiz Cohen

/brane 'splode

mcmoustache

maccored wrote: »

I dont quite agree that "ghosts and afterlife stuff has been pretty well explained by neuro-science" in all honesty. Not yet anyway. Any links about inducing NDEs? I wasnt aware its possible to do that (excluding drugs like Ketamine etc).

Wikipedia has info on it but it's not great.

Drugs are the main way to test this because they are safer. For example, trying to induce one by hitting someone on the head with a frying pan lacks the necessary precision required to bring the subject back safely. This is quite a limitation, unfortunately so I'd expect most future research to be based on pumping volunteers full of psychedelic drugs.

My guess is that testing with g-forces would be risky too but since the g-forces can be turned up gradually and since the subject's vital signs can be monitored closely, this may also be a viable way to study NDEs.

The problem is, these are examples of only two ways to test it and since the mechanism is unknown, it's hard to say if the same thing that causes g-force NDEs is the same thing that causes frying-pan-to-head NDEs or car crash NDEs - there is still room for people to say "Well, what you've tested there is not what happened to my Aunt Mary after she crashed her car. She never took drugs or went on a centrefuge".

While those gaps exist, it will always be tempting to fill them with some superstition such as Christian Heaven or whatever. Scientific experimentation has a good record for reducing the gaps and I'm confident that there is a lot to be learned about NDE's and that they will be found not to be spiritual or magical or anything.

And in reference to the original post, I'm always a bit sceptical when people try to connect advanced mathematics with spirituality, religion, the occult or magic. The proponents of these idea are usually new-agers with a poor grasp of the mathematics who are adept at spinning bs which sounds like science to the untrained ear. Depak Chopra, for example.

Trying to connect M-Theory with ghosts could seem like a smart approach but only if you already believe in ghosts and are searching for a subject that might allow for them. If all the information that you have on M-Theory comes from popular science books, then the analogies and simplifications used in the books will seem applicable to ghosts. It's a flawed starting point.

To really know the answer, you'd have to ask a proper String Theorist but then again, if you ask the right "is it possible..." questions and seek reasons to connect m-theory with ghosts, you'll find them.

Zombrex

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

/brane 'splode

... sorry, couldn't help myself :P

maccored

I thought the string theorists poopahed the whole 11th dimension M theory idea. My understanding is that string theory was looking at it the wrong way and after a decade, the 11th dimensional idea that m theory took after, supplanted string theory (to a degree).

Besides - I dont understand any of it. What I was trying to do though is think around it a bit.

It is not something to do with consciousness, this isn't something supernatural it is an attempt to model ordinary matter and space time that is already all around us.

Im not claiming it is - but considering its something we know we little about, I am guessing conciousness might at some stage come into the equation. Please, really - lets not pretend any of us actually understand any of this, as none of us do.

Zombrex wrote: »

That isn't what the membrane is in M-theory. The membrane is an expansion of the string in string theory, which is itself a 1 dimensional object rather than a 0 dimensional point like a particle.

A string is simply a way of modelling fundamental particles that is more successful than treating them purely as points in space (I think one thing that string theory allows is to model the spin of a particle which wouldn't have spin if it was just a 0 dimensional point). It allows for the measurement of spin of a particle that was originally considered just a point in space (and thus cannot spin). In string theory you can have an open string (a line) or a closed string (a loop)

In M-theory the open strings start and end on a membrane. It is some what inaccurate but you can sort of think of a 2 dimensional membrane as the piece of paper you might draw a 1 dimensional string on. Obviously visualising a 3 dimensional membrane is harder. Closed strings are not attached to membranes and can thus move through 11 dimensional space, where as open strings are attached to membranes and are thus confined to the dimensions of the membrane (ie our observed universe is a 4 dimensional membrane, or 4-brane).

It is not something to do with consciousness, this isn't something supernatural it is an attempt to model ordinary matter and space time that is already all around us.



The energy we use to live is chemical energy, ie the energy released by molecules when they under go chemical reactions. Through respiration and burning of food we produce enough energy to live.



If M-theory is correct we are not on a membrane in the 11th dimension we are in a membrane of 4 dimensions which is why we experience 4 dimensions and are unaware of any other possible branes in other dimensions. Cause the strings that make up our particles are open strings on a 4 dimensional membrane they cannot move into other dimensions and thus we never experience them.



We cannot influence the 4-brane (4 dimensional membrane) in the manner you describe. Or more accurately you cannot influence it any more than you already do by simply existing in space, since all matter warps space time.



The only energy that is supposed to be able to cross branes is gravitational energy, since gravitons are supposed to be made of closed strings, strings that are not attached to a membrane.

This would explain why gravity is much weaker than the other fundamental forces in nature, it is because the gravity is spread out into multiple dimensions with only a proportion of it influencing things in our 4 dimensional brane.

maccored

Trying to connect M-Theory with ghosts could seem like a smart approach but only if you already believe in ghosts

Personally i think thats a flawed argument right there. You dont need to 'believe' in ghosts to look at the possibility. Besides if you actively either believe or do not believe in ghosts you're starting off with a bias.

mcmoustache wrote: »

Wikipedia has info on it but it's not great.

Drugs are the main way to test this because they are safer. For example, trying to induce one by hitting someone on the head with a frying pan lacks the necessary precision required to bring the subject back safely. This is quite a limitation, unfortunately so I'd expect most future research to be based on pumping volunteers full of psychedelic drugs.

My guess is that testing with g-forces would be risky too but since the g-forces can be turned up gradually and since the subject's vital signs can be monitored closely, this may also be a viable way to study NDEs.

The problem is, these are examples of only two ways to test it and since the mechanism is unknown, it's hard to say if the same thing that causes g-force NDEs is the same thing that causes frying-pan-to-head NDEs or car crash NDEs - there is still room for people to say "Well, what you've tested there is not what happened to my Aunt Mary after she crashed her car. She never took drugs or went on a centrefuge".

While those gaps exist, it will always be tempting to fill them with some superstition such as Christian Heaven or whatever. Scientific experimentation has a good record for reducing the gaps and I'm confident that there is a lot to be learned about NDE's and that they will be found not to be spiritual or magical or anything.

And in reference to the original post, I'm always a bit sceptical when people try to connect advanced mathematics with spirituality, religion, the occult or magic. The proponents of these idea are usually new-agers with a poor grasp of the mathematics who are adept at spinning bs which sounds like science to the untrained ear. Depak Chopra, for example.

Trying to connect M-Theory with ghosts could seem like a smart approach but only if you already believe in ghosts and are searching for a subject that might allow for them. If all the information that you have on M-Theory comes from popular science books, then the analogies and simplifications used in the books will seem applicable to ghosts. It's a flawed starting point.

To really know the answer, you'd have to ask a proper String Theorist but then again, if you ask the right "is it possible..." questions and seek reasons to connect m-theory with ghosts, you'll find them.

Major Lovechild

I did try to tell you but you kept going on about "dem damn apples".

Zombrex

maccored wrote: »

I thought the string theorists poopahed the whole 11th dimension M theory idea. My understanding is that string theory was looking at it the wrong way and after a decade, the 11th dimensional idea that m theory took after, supplanted string theory (to a degree).

There were 5 or so different versions of String theory, they all proposed different dimensions beyond 4, but not all the same (the most popular version of string theory proposed 10 dimensions). M-theory is a unification of the different theories that proposes 11 dimensions, it doesn't replace string theory but provides a framework of viewing all 5 different theories as the same theory looking at the problem in a different way (like one theory that looks at the speed of a particle and one theory that looks at the spin of a particle being replaced by a theory that looks at both the spin and the speed of a particle)

maccored wrote: »

Besides - I dont understand any of it. What I was trying to do though is think around it a bit.

Difficult if you don't understand it though.

maccored wrote: »

Please, really - lets not pretend any of us actually understand any of this, as none of us do.

Perhaps but that doesn't give carte blanch to just start supposing it is connected to everything you are proposing (as satirized by Futurama)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqcaaUtPdAo

I don't know where my socks keep disappearing to, but I'm not going to suppose M-theory is responsable.

Standman

"But as Deepak Chopra taught us, quantum physics means anything can happen at any time for no reason." .. so so true.

maccored

this is a show we done last night with David M Rountree - very very interesting. His interview starts about 45 mins in. I didnt realise he was thinking along the same lines as I've been, so Im not the only one.

Seriously suggest you give it a listen:

http://tapsfamilyradio.net/?p=366

maccored

and to be honest Zombrex, trying and failing to be a smartarse about quantum physics doesnt really do you any good. One would imagine you believe you actually know what you are talking about when iut comes to m theory and QP. You'd be in a very very small club if you did.

Seriously, this skeptics forum could do with less smart arses and more thinkers.

Zombrex wrote: »

There were 5 or so different versions of String theory, they all proposed different dimensions beyond 4, but not all the same (the most popular version of string theory proposed 10 dimensions). M-theory is a unification of the different theories that proposes 11 dimensions, it doesn't replace string theory but provides a framework of viewing all 5 different theories as the same theory looking at the problem in a different way (like one theory that looks at the speed of a particle and one theory that looks at the spin of a particle being replaced by a theory that looks at both the spin and the speed of a particle)



Difficult if you don't understand it though.



Perhaps but that doesn't give carte blanch to just start supposing it is connected to everything you are proposing (as satirized by Futurama)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqcaaUtPdAo

I don't know where my socks keep disappearing to, but I'm not going to suppose M-theory is responsable.

Zombrex

maccored wrote: »

and to be honest Zombrex, trying and failing to be a smartarse about quantum physics doesnt really do you any good.

Actually it does a great deal of good. You were simultaneously supposing that M-theory has something to do with consciousness while also stating that no one understands the first thing about it.

Pointing out that this is a bit silly is most certainly with in the remit of scepticism, and you can never have too many Futurama references. :pac:

maccored wrote: »

One would imagine you believe you actually know what you are talking about when iut comes to m theory and QP. You'd be in a very very small club if you did.

I wouldn't pretend for a minute that I understand the finer workings of M-theory. I do though know what M-theory is, enough to say that it is not a theory supposing the physical world is shaped by consciousness.

maccored wrote: »

Seriously, this skeptics forum could do with less smart arses and more thinkers.

Well I imagine you are holding yourself up as an example of a "thinker", so I'm afraid I would have to disagree with you there. The sceptics forum needs more grounding and less unsupported flights of fancy because people are trying to find some way to explain the more exciting claims of the paranormal with non-mundane answers.

mister gullible

Seriously, this skeptics forum could do with less smart arses and more thinkers.[/QUOTE]

.....and more skeptics

KNOM

In an attempt to get back on track, the 11th dimension stuff is very interesting even if it is theoretical. The membrane idea would give credence to the idea of a butterfly flapping its wings in China and having an effect elsewhere since the flapping would impart energy to the membrane.

Zombrex

KNOM wrote: »

In an attempt to get back on track, the 11th dimension stuff is very interesting even if it is theoretical. The membrane idea would give credence to the idea of a butterfly flapping its wings in China and having an effect elsewhere since the flapping would impart energy to the membrane.

The butterfly theory is a comment on the chaotic nature of fluid dynamics in the Earth's atmosphere (simple changes here can have dramatic effects as they are amplified through the system), it isn't really anything to do with M-theory nor does M-theory give it any more credence.

The membrane in M-theory is space itself.