Timeline for The size of extra dimensions
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Nov 11, 2015 at 19:11 | history | suggested | Robohawk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited display math formatting
|
| Nov 11, 2015 at 19:04 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Nov 11, 2015 at 19:11 | |||||
| Nov 11, 2015 at 16:46 | comment | added | Neuneck | I understood the OP's question (2) as referring not to the measurement scale, which indeed is simply defined, but instead talking about the actual physical scale, which should be independent of man-made systems of measurement. The question reads just as fine if you replace cm and m with light-years and GPc! | |
| Nov 11, 2015 at 16:43 | comment | added | anna v | @Neuneck well, the OP is asking "why the meter". We just decide on a length and call it meter. Look at the link, it is connected to a specific wavelength | |
| Nov 11, 2015 at 16:40 | comment | added | Neuneck | "So it cannot be proven, it is assumed." - There are definite consequences of a finite universe, most notably quantization of photon wavelengths. Tests of Lorentz invariance thereby also test the scale of the universe, should it be compact. | |
| Nov 11, 2015 at 16:39 | comment | added | Neuneck | Note that String theory might as well work in less than 10 Dimensions, if one allows a CFT with non-trivial central charge on the world-sheet. Since we have no clue whatsoever how to extract information about this CFT, we just usually assume the central charge comes purely from geometry. This way, we have at least an idea on how to relate observables to what's going on. | |
| Nov 11, 2015 at 16:12 | history | answered | anna v | CC BY-SA 3.0 |