The more certain we are about an event the more uncertain it is and vice versa. Programmatically it could be thought of as an infinite loop with no exit point till the wave function collapses and the loop is exited. Maybe it could be thought of as a closed loop string that collapses to a point or an open loop string keeping string theory in mind.

The more certain we are about an event the more uncertain it is and vice versa.

This doesn't make any sense. Your very first statement is self-contradictory. Uncertainty can be quantified mathematically without invoking wave functions and string theory. It's usually covered at least to some level in an introductory statistics class.

I am referring to quantum uncertainty and how it could be extrapolated in string theory.

I am referring to quantum uncertainty and how it could be extrapolated in string theory.

And how exactly was I supposed to know that? You didn't define any terms you were using here. Perhaps in the future you'll do well to provide at least some context about what you're talking about.

 

Also, I don't think you're interpreting it correctly. It appears you are thinking of the Uncertainly Principle, wherein you can't know both the position and the momentum as accurately as you want. This isn't just 'an event'. What that means is that if you try to measure one (say position) accurately, you will be more uncertain about the other (momentum in this case). But this relationship comes in pairs, not 'events'.

 

Your first statement, 'The more certain we are about an event the more uncertain it is and vice versa.' is still self-contradictory. You can't be both certain and uncertain about a single event.

Edited January 21, 201412 yr by Bignose