Im confused

[Mickyboy]

Hi Ladies and gents.
Im not a scientist, but just an ordinary guy, and judging by some of the topics and posts on here, i think im way out of my depth with you guys, but i do have a passion to learn even at the age of 47, and quantum physics fascinates me, so hopefully you will all be gentle and tolerant with me lol.

I saw the elegant universe tv documentary today, and im rather confused, because David Greene said that the universe is powered by and held together with cosmic string, but apparently its so small nobody has ever seen it so there,s no proof that it exists, but when i saw a programme about the LHC, it was said that the universe is held together by something called dark matter, so my question is.
Which theory is right, or do they both work together, if indeed they do both exist.

[interception]

I hope I am not offending anybody here, but this is not the best place to learn about real quantum physics.

The various string theories and dark matter/energy are theoretical models used to try and explain observed phenomena in the universe. Which theory is right? Nobody knows that yet I don't think or else those theories would be called laws now.

[Mickyboy]

I hope I am not offending anybody here, but this is not the best place to learn about real quantum physics.

The various string theories and dark matter/energy are theoretical models used to try and explain observed phenomena in the universe. Which theory is right? Nobody knows that yet I don't think or else those theories would be called laws now.

Hi mate. ive only really just scratched the surface of quantum physics, because all the mathmatics and equations go straight over my heads, but i obviously understand written text, so i do have loads of questions, and one is that ive read about the elusive theory of everything, but surely there cant be such a theory if it cant be decided what holds the universe together i.e. cosmic string or dark matter, but if as you say, this is not really the best place to find out, would you be kind enough to point me in the right direction, or do you have a theory of you,re own.

[interception]

This is no doubt a great place for idle  speculation, but if you are serious for hard science that is based on actual theories with the occasional poster who seems to know what they are talking about - then try science oriented forums like www.scienceforums.net or www.physicsforums.com

Get a good book or two about QP too so you don't ask stoopid questions on the forum. 

The math goes over my head too dude, and I don't think one can truly grasp the intricacies of this stuff without understanding the math bits. 

[Mickyboy]

This is no doubt a great place for idle  speculation, but if you are serious for hard science that is based on actual theories with the occasional poster who seems to know what they are talking about - then try science oriented forums like www.scienceforums.net or www.physicsforums.com

Get a good book or two about QP too so you don't ask stoopid questions on the forum. 

The math goes over my head too dude, and I don't think one can truly grasp the intricacies of this stuff without understanding the math bits. 

Im not sure that i want to get involved with all the intricacies of QP, i just like to discuss all the relevant theories behind the maths and equations, and one person i love to read and listen to, is Dr.Michio Kaku, because ive seen him on discovery before, and he makes a very complex subject very easy to understand, and he,s easy to listen to, and he makes the subject, which some folk might consider boring, really fascinating, and thanks very much for the links.

[interception]

Michio Kaku is okay. He sometimes uses really silly analogies that seem almost like he is talking down to you. He does have a nack for making a subject be more interesting and alive though.