-=> PAUL ROGERS wrote to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE <=-

 WC> You caught it?
 WC> I thought it was great.

 PR> I was less satisfied.  They seemed to be enamoured of their squiggley
 PR> little lines graphics.

Well of course, I was less than satisfied as well.
We are talking PBS here and not to an auditorium full
of quantum physicists however.

Tht squiggly lines reminded me of what I'v heard
called wave functions which can not be predicted as to outcome
though limited to only one of two outcomes equally likely.

 PR> For example, if gravitons can radiate and interact with the parallel
 PR> universe membranes, why haven't they all attracted each other?

Perhaps they oppose one another across dimensional planes?
WAG here as I've not read a solid book on quantum theory in many a year.

 PR> Why don't we detect gravitic fields from a neighboring parallel
 PR> universe where we don't see matter in our universe?

Because it's parallel but perhaps not intersecting?
Another WAG.

 PR> OK, so gravitons are just as strong as the carriers of the EM, Strong,
 PR> & Weak forces, but they react weakly in our universe because they can
 PR> radiate to parallel universes.  If a mass in a parallel universe emits
 PR> gravitons which penetrate our universe's membrane, hence causing a
 PR> gravitic field which attracts matter in our universe (creating
 PR> "condensation nuclei" so to speak) then all the stars,
galaxies, etc.,
 PR> would be in identical spots in all the nearby parallel universes.  So
 PR> our gravitons escape, theirs are detected, summed up we should see
 PR> STRONG gravitic fields around astronomic bodies.  It's similar to
 PR> Gamov's Paradox.

You've lost me.

 PR> They left too much unexplained!

No argument there.

 WC> Quantum physics _always_ gives me a headache but I love it
 WC> none the less.

 PR> My degree is in Chemistry so I learned about that in college.

 WC> The mysteries of the universe are a marvel to behold!


 
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45