Unimportant, but are there two Belthasars?

[Kebrel]

Pet Peeve sorry

[Thought]

I don't want to sound like a broken record, but accuracy is relative to the math and, unfortunately, opinion or otherwise taken as zealotism.
As for the Chronoverse, it may very well be possible by toying with initial conditions (Big Bang) and timelines. Obviously, I'm not assuming that is possible, but it *would* be cool, wouldn't it...

Problem with math is that it doesn't necessarily reflect reality, just the suppositions. Math is a malleable tool, not a perfect judge. It is quite possible to construct a mathematical system that would support a geocentric universe (the old theory of the spheres), but just because the math could be accurate in such a system doesn't mean such a system is valid. Thus, experimentation is needed. Unfortunately, String Theory is barely a scientific theory at all; make a falsifiable prediction that can be put to experimentation! As it stands now, String Theorists are closer to String Theologists. Standard Theory does provide falsifiable predictions, it can be tested. Thus, math as a tool helps confirm one and does naught for the other.

And yes, toying with the initial conditions of the universe would be thrilling. It is fascinating to ponder the concept that the universe could have been formed in a way that pi actually would equal 3, or 2, or moose.

The only reason why the theories are separate, though, is that there is inconsistencies/paradoxes (which is bad, I'm afraid...) that severely implies that someone/something is wrong. So thats why I am intrigued by string theory, because it's actually *trying* to solve some of the fundamental problems with physics. And it may be that this theory seems so radical that I am drawn to it.

Unfortunately String Theory is the Lemuria of the sciences. To illustrate; back in the second half of the 19th century it was noted that Lemurs only exist on Madagascar but their biogeography extends to mainland Asia and Malaysia yet specifically excludes Africa. Thus, science was presented with a bit of a problem much like the problems with Standard Model; existing knowledge couldn't account for this discrepancy. Philip Sclater (the Leonard Susskind of his time)  came along and, in the absence of evidence but in order to "try" to solve some of the fundamental problems with existing knowledge of biogeography, proposed the (somewhat) radical idea that there might have been an overarching structure that connect all these separate locations; a continent/land-bridge which he named Lemuria.

Like String Theory, Lemuria would have solved the existing problems in the contemporary model.

Unfortunately Lemuria didn't stop there. It was shown to be wrong by the development of evidence-based science; continental drift solved the very problem Lemuria was trying to solve. Well, it didn't die there. Madame Blavatsky got a hold of the idea and expanded it (like turning String Theory into Superstring Theory or M-Theory), making it explain more and more things, all the while in the utter void of experimental evidence.

So gives some evidence that String Theory is not just the newest Lemuria, give some indication that in 120ish years we wont have people claiming that "Stringians" are living in Mt. Hood or some such. It is a very interesting theory, but in the words or Treebeard, “Do not be hasty.”

String theory is about as useful to any discussion as postmodernism.

Aww, man that's just cold. 

You're right, sorry, that was far too mean of me.

But seriously, to recant what I said, String Theory actually can have a very powerful roll in discussions... but only when such discussions occur with the understanding that String Theory is assumed. String is no more valid (and a bit less) than Standard, and the two don't get along well. Discussion between the two standpoints can be interesting, perhaps even mildly productive (particularly in determining which model is better suited to the Chronoverse), but it can also be distracting and detracting.

[BROJ]

Problem with math is that it doesn't necessarily reflect reality, just the suppositions.

I believe that is mu (by the way that was a pun, which its significance is identified later and in the previous post; for those who don't know: Mu is an answer to counter expected answer(s) which are both right and wrong, or in other words where the original question is based off of false assumptions. Also Mu is the name of a hypothetical vanished continent. It is thought to once been located in the Pacific Ocean but is now, like Atlantis and Lemuria, with which it is sometimes identified, believed to have sunk beneath the waters.), as it wasn't the basis of my argument:

Well there is the problem; the multidimensional theory that your interpretation is based on may or may not accurately reflect this universe, much less the Cronoverse.

I was under the presumption that we were talking about accuracy purely relating to this universe or the chronoverse. And since we don't know what's under the proverbial "hood", I meant any of the theories could be correct. However, since reality is such a subjective experience, we see only what our existence allows us to see, so currently every theory is more or less supposed. 
But, that brings up another interesting discussion: "Do our theories represent, if not ours, another valid reality?"   

And yes, toying with the initial conditions of the universe would be thrilling. It is fascinating to ponder the concept that the universe could have been formed in a way that pi actually would equal 3, or 2, or moose.

or even 1337... nah, I'd rather avoid *that* universe. 

Like String Theory, Lemuria would have solved the existing problems in the contemporary model.

wow... the last time I heard anything about Lemuria, it scored a cameo in Golden Sun I/II. Oh well not every one can win. Unfortunately, thats the harsh price to pay for truth

So gives some evidence that String Theory is not just the newest Lemuria, give some indication that in 120ish years we wont have people claiming that "Stringians" are living in Mt. Hood or some such. It is a very interesting theory, but in the words or Treebeard, “Do not be hasty.”

If we hadn't been ambitious or hasty in the past, I'd seriously doubt we'd be discussing string theory or standard model, let alone discussing it over the internet.

String is no more valid (and a bit less) than Standard, and the two don't get along well.

I noticed...   

[Thought]

I've been thinking, which means it might be time to resurrect this thread.

However, instead of asking if there are two Belthasars, I think there might be three/four.

In 1010 the dimensions split when Serge was saved, probably resulting in a Belthasar in 2300 in Home World and Another World.

However, before the dimensions split, Belthasar in the saved future traveled into the past (that is, we know he disappeared before the Time Crash). It would seem, then, that not only would the dimensional split cause there to be a 2300 Belthasar in both home and another world but also another "two" Belthasars originating from the saved future.

Let us say that leaving 2300, Belthasar immediately went to 1020 to direct Serge. As long as he left 2300 before the time crash, he must have also appeared somewhere else in time before the dimensional split. So when the dimensions split, it would have also presumably split the Belthasar who was in 1020.

The end result would be a Belthasar in Home World 2300, a Belthasar in Another World 2300, and a Belthasar in both Home and Another world 1020 (which came from the Another World 2300 Belthasar, so taking time travel into account, there are two unrelated Belthasars in Home World while the two in Another World are the same Belthasar at different time error points).

[Boo the Gentleman Caller]

I have to scratch my head and wrap my mind around this one.  Let me think on it.

[BROJ]

Perfectly logical; I see no faults with your logic, but I must say that the aspects of the model extend past simple analysis─meaning we should open up a new thread somewhere else(*nudge**nudge* )...