'compactification' as proposed by modern physics, seems to correlate Ill with concepts of ❋ Supri1278 (2010)
Now, in an open or flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker cosmological model with no cosmological constant, whilst the past 'Big-Bang' singularity corresponds to a spacelike hypersurface in the boundary of the conformal compactification, the future timelike infinity corresponds to a single point. ❋ Gordon McCabe (2009)
Penrose's cyclic cosmological model is a particular application of his conformal compactification construction, which takes any space-time, whether or not it contains singularities, and whether or not it is infinite in time or space, and constructs a finite (compactified) space-time with boundary, whose metric is related to the original metric of space-time by a locally variable scale factor & #937, called the conformal factor. ❋ Gordon McCabe (2009)
The boundary of the conformal compactification contains components which correspond to singularities, and components which correspond to spacelike infinity, timelike infinity, (and null infinity). ❋ Gordon McCabe (2009)
There then exist on a scale larger than the string length regions of D-brane compactification which define 4 dimensional spacetimes. ❋ Unknown (2010)
Of course your right, but “taking something big and making it smaller” is how one might describe compactification to a layman. ❋ Unknown (2008)
This is a mechanism of dynamical compactification. ❋ Sean (2009)
Are you implying that susy is somehow badly broken at some high scale even before you get compactification? ❋ Sean (2009)
Dynamical compactification will be happening all over the place in the D-dimensional de Sitter space, realizing all of these possibilities in different spacetime regions, and yielding what is referred to as a “multiverse.” ❋ Sean (2009)
When 260 physicists gathered for a recent conference at the University of Michigan, they chatted in their usual vocab: compactification, tachyon condensation, flop transition. ❋ Unknown (2008)
Even after this, it require lots of care, knowledge about the how the SM is embedded in the compactification, etc. ❋ Sean (2007)
“In this case, the gaugino mass ratios can be determined only when one can reliably compute the values of the highly UV sensitive \Gamma_\phi and \Omega_ {a\phi}, which is not available with our present understanding of M theory compactification.” ❋ Sean (2007)
If you write down a compactification and claim that it is a unified model of particle physics and gravity, compute the CC and it is 120 orders of magnitude off, you have the wrong compactification. ❋ Sean (2007)
Maybe if all scales in the compactification are Planck-scale you can get almost anything. ❋ Sean (2007)
(In string theory, if we knew full details of a compactification that reproduces the Standard Model, we could in principle predict scattering amplitudes at superplanckian energies.) ❋ Sean (2007)
However it also seems that, supposing a string compactification does describe the real world, that the question of computing e.g. the Yukawa couplings will be isomorphic in difficulty to the problem of explicitly solving the Dirac equation on a full-blown Calabi-Yau and computing the resulting wavefunction overlap. ❋ Sean (2007)
The only distinguishing characteristic of the string compactification unification scheme at the present time is that it has received vastly more attention, a much greater amount of work has gone into it, and its problems (the landscape ..) are now rather well understood. ❋ Sean (2007)
