You're confusing a
lot of things.
Well you see, the string theory is actually a complete theoretical model of the universe which basically sums all other theories into one...
No, not quite. It's a way of unifying the four elemental forces. (The three on the atomic scale (electromagnetism, weak, and strong) and that other one that operates on the galactic scale (gravity)). Assuming for a moment that such a theory is possible and we had it in hand, it wouldn't really help biologists, sociologists, economists, anthropologists, etc. The theories these "soft" sciences deal with are emergent, and understanding the extremely fundamental rules that give rise to that emergence isn't really helpful in understanding the end behavior. Oh, and It would be of extremely limited use to chemists, too, which is one of the "hard" sciences. N-body gravity (ie: non uniform gravitational fields) doesn't really come in to play in chemistry very often My point here is that assuming you had the completed string theory in your hand, you still couldn't make predictions about
all the sort of events that interest humans: ie: phenomena that's measured using seconds, meters, dollar signs, etc. etc.
Energy and mass are the exact same thing in the laws of physics. The rife device (not as a medicinal cure) is just one example of why the US government has been experimenting in high frequency emmitting devices (currently I beleive ISrael possesses anti-ballistics lasers which work on similar principles).
You're confusing two issues here. Energy/mass equivelance
only really matters on the atomic level. Like accelerating a proton to .999 the speed of light or splitting a uranium atom. It would also come in to play at the macroscopic level if you had a large object moving at relativistic speeds, but that doesn't happen terribly often.
Now, high frequency lasers do not rely on energy/mass equivelance at all. They rely on something known as the photoelectric effect, which is far more pedestrian. Basically when a substance absorbs light it spits out excited electrons (electricity). This is the process that lets plants produce chemical energy from sunlight. If the light has a high enough frequency (a light's frequency describes its energy level), it can cause biochemical molecules to break their bonds, causing a cell to basically cook. Or in the case of an anti-missile laser, it causes the missile to prematurely detonate by "cooking" the innards of the missile.
Actually, now that I think of it, I wonder how temperature gains (kinetic energy of atoms) are caused by the photoelectric effect, since the excited electrons that are created have mass that is way less than the mass of their atoms' nucleuses... Maybe there's just a lot of 'em?
I have done this experiment already, I took a random sampling of bacterial cultures from my town and let them propigate in a lab condition. I set 10% of them aside as a control and submitted the others to sound waves and light at vhl and vhf (very high and very low) and did a count everytime, no other conditions were altered. Some times the bacteria seemed to melt into a puddle when under sound wave radiation, and when under extreme frequencies even at low levels of brightness (I cant remember that word or care to google it.. candle?) the bacteria went into an accelerate enzymatic cellular break down.
lumens is the word you're looking for...
I brought up Rife not for discussion as a medical practice, but as a demenstration that Energy at Mass at any scale are = with an error of 10%.
Destroying cells with energy doesn't destroy the matter. It just rearranges it. If you isolated the cells in a closed system (pitri dish with a lid), weighed it, killed the cells with energy (ie: light), then weighed it again, the two masses will be within measurable tolerance of exactly equal. The law of
conservation of mass still holds for non-relativistic situations.
Proton is light, so I alraedy knew that but I thank Peter for clarifying it;
Peter was quoting you, not clarifying. A proton is the nucleus of a hydrogen atom. The word you want is photon. They're quite different.
With some final facts I believe the connection between neural nets and radiation can be made, since electricity is mass.
No, electricity is not mass. Electricity is made of electrons, which have mass (very, very, tiny mass). Electricity itself is energy, though (or more accurately, a flow of energy).
Lets say you have a battery you just bought from the store. You use it for a solid week in a flashlight, until it's dead. If you weigh that battery, its mass will not have changed*. How can this be if the battery has used all of its electricity and electricity is mass? It's because all the electrons are right back where they started from (inside the battery). The only difference is that they have a different energy potential than they did before.
* It will actually have changed, but the amount of change is something on the order of the mass of an electron. For practical purposes 0.
And even supposing that electricity
did have mass, how would that relate to neural nets? Neural nets built in software or in the brains of creatures operate according to an abstract, mathematically definable base. It's that case of the airplane made out of aluminum again. You can learn all you want about aluminum, but it won't help you understand how an airpline flies, because the airplane's built from aluminum, not defined by it.