science and art

[fritchie]

I just watched an hour-long program on String Theory, on the U. S. public TV network PBS. The theory made headlines on the BBC web site yesterday, too, so something about it must be hot with the public. This is the current version of science’s “Theory of Everything”, the successor to both Einstein’ Theory of Relativity and Planck, Heisenberg, Schrodinger, et al’s Theory of Quantum Mechanics.

I have seen it written that Einstein’s Relativity Theory was an originating stimulus for Cubism. The connection is that treating time as a fourth dimension suggested the possibility of looking an an object from multiple directions “at once” or at the same “time”. The program did a reasonable job of creating imagery to suggest the concepts underlying String Theory, in which the universe has not 4 dimensions but 11, and the smallest objects are not points or extremely tiny spatial objects, but vibrating multidimensional strings or vibrating multidimensional membranes.

What these concepts might suggest to creative “fine artists”, instead of the PBS graphic designers has yet to be seen. (No reflection of the PBS artists. They did a great job.) Any starts?

[drthulium]

I watched the first part of the string theory Nova on PBS last week, and I am planning on watching part two tonight (it comes on shortly on the west coast)

I did become interested in the idea of how ants view a power cable while walking on it, as the show described. To the ant walking on the cable the world has three spacial dimensions, up-down, forward-backwards, and clockwise-counterclockwise. It made me think about how we view the world, and how we could view it differently. Can emotions be thought of as a dimension of sorts? We talk to emotional change through time with great regularity, how could this be related in the form of a sculpture that does not fall in to the performance art area?
oh...the elegant universe is starting now...gotta run...

Nate

[fritchie]

Yes, probably emotions could be viewed as a dimension, or as several. More or less anything that can be spread out along a line can be treated as a dimension. Emotions run from sad to happy, and that can be thought of as one line or as one dimension. The spread from anger to forgiveness or acceptance can be thought of as a second dimension. And so on. Emotion clearly is a complex topic, so how many dimensions it would represent, I can’t say right off.

But, good idea! This is how the game works.

[ALH]

I also saw that program, well about 8-12 minutes of it. While they laid out the possible beginnings and ends of our universe and the very fabric of our existence I sat on a couch with my face screwed up in an attempt to actually hear the thing.

My kids tag teamed with my wife, who was headed out the door at the time to control my attention and I missed the meaning of life the universe and everything.

In the end it was funny because while I sensed the truth was just within reach I wasn't able to actually get past that sense to actually touch it (I could see their lips moving but the message was periodically a hopeless garble) and that was the feeling I got from most of the people interviewed in the series who struggled with the BIG questions.

[fritchie]

ALH - You probably got most of it. These things are fun for physicists and mathematicians to play with, and to them generally, it IS play. Much as with sculptors doing sculpture. You are serious about it and give it your best, but in the end it all is esthetic. And, with these theories, unlike with sculpture in general, really big things can flow from the work, if you are right. Things like atomic energy (Einstein) or space travel (Newton).

But that doesn’t necessarily mean it is more significant than sculpture. What did the Greeks, or Michelangelo, do for the human spirit? And I’ll add Picasso and Noguchi, to stick with some who no longer are here.

[jwebb]

ALH,
Great e-mail.