What is string theory?

Can someone with great detail explain to me what exactly string theory is. Im reading a book called the Elegant Universe and it is very interestin but I only read the first two chapters. Can some one please explain to me what is is in good detail? Thankyou.

the elegant universe book does a pretty well job of explaining it. you could also watch the nova elegant universe series at www.pbs.org...

other than that book and that series i really can't think of anything that wouldn't be too technical for someone new to the topic.

Originally posted by SpaceAlienatic88
Can someone with great detail explain to me what exactly string theory is.

No

can someone please explain to me what is is in good detail?

No.


All kidding aside, string theory is a very new set of ideas. There isn't one overall string theory and there are dozens of variations on the original ideas that people were having. Suffice it to say that string theory in general posits the existence of 'strings' deep below the level of extremely small subatomic particles, and its supposed to be interactions of these strings, vibrations, looping, and I suppose intersecting and the like that give rise to 'fundamental particles' (like leptons and others) out of which the universe is made. There are also 'branes' in some string theories, which are supposed to be something like 'membranes' (hence the name) compared to ''strings'. I think that most string and brane theories are associated with the existence of several other dimensions, sometimes a total of 7 or even 11 or more. But the thing is that, below the level of atoms and even at that level, normal human intiution and understand is quite uselss. THings like strings and spatial dimensions that curl up in on themselves and are smaller than atoms just can't be talked about in normal human language and have to reference higher level maths.

in short, the string theory proposes that all matter is made up of constantly vibrating strings. these are reported to be smaller than atoms and strings are way too small to see by current or expected particle physics technology. basically a theory of gravity.

Is there anything suspected to be smaller than astring wich I dbout after hearing that is an atom was the size of a solar system, a string would be as small as a tree.

Watch the movies if you have the time (I believe it is the first response to your question).


Imagine this. You have a piece of paper. The piece of paper has little loops of yarn glued to it, sticking out perpendicular (orthogonal) towards you (think in 3D). Those pieces of yarn sway when the wind passes... also, they may collide. The patterns of the swaying yarn and collisions form simple units which eventually create logical patterns for larger units.

The paper is called a Brane or Membrane. The yarn makes up the strings that are vibrating pertrusions of that membrane. The strings create subatomic quarks and leptons (and strange quantum phenomena). Quarks and Leptons make up the pieces of an atom and atoms make up molecules, which make up cells, which make up you, which makes up the world, which makes up the universe, which makes up the multiverse, which makes up my ice cream sundae. Ok, maybe not all that, but I think you get the picture.

Strings are the next step down and help mathematicians who are pulling their hair out to make some sense of bizarre scientific results.

Originally posted by SpaceAlienatic88
Can someone with great detail explain to me what exactly string theory is.

Well, it is a widely held belief that aliens already know the secrets of the universe, but here on Earth (or Urantia, if you prefer), we recommend a Google search when seeking answers to the enigmatic.

String Theory is a little like faith in God right now. since the sizes are so small we will never be able to see a string and thus we can never disprove string theory or prove it.

Well I shouldnt say never I hate when people say, that but not in the near future will we be able to see a string. Maybe in a thousand years

String theory is very interesting. You should check out the official website: www.superstringtheory.com... They have explained it in great details.
Another related theory that's worth checking out is big-tube theory: www.mu6.com... (link originally given by kangaxx in another thread)

Can it just be said that physicists are afraid to get to the point and say that God is behind all this. Maybe they just don't want to take that simple answer to the whole universe and say it was God. What's your opinion?

Originally posted by SpaceAlienatic88
Can it just be said that physicists are afraid to get to the point and say that God is behind all this. Maybe they just don't want to take that simple answer to the whole universe and say it was God. What's your opinion?

I always find this and other philosophical arguments for the existance of god a bit strange. You see, my definition of god is an eternal intelligent omnipotent entity external of this world. But saying that there are natural laws we'll never understand that must have been created by a external entity doesn't prove the eternity, intelligence and omnipotence required for the christian god.

The first site jp1111 posted is a good one, because it also has explanations using mathematics. I usually like that because it gives me a better idea of what's happening, although you do have to know the mathematics and physics involved at least somewhat.

Originally posted by SpaceAlienatic88
Can it just be said that physicists are afraid to get to the point and say that God is behind all this.

In His infinite wisdom, God has rendered Himself empirically unavailable.

[edit on 04/8/18 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by SpaceAlienatic88
Maybe they just don't want to take that simple answer to the whole universe and say it was God.

Why would they say such a thing if there is no evidence supporting that idea? How could there even be evidence supporting itone way or another? In order to do so, there would have ot be some way to test for the non-existence of god, or rather, some way to show that god doesn't exist (ie a way for a test for the existence of god to be falsifiable). Do you think an omnipotent being can be trapped in a test?

Its possible. You never know what kind of forces can be out there, but for a god of all powers to be in a test, he has the power not to be enveloped in it.

From the armchair, I see string theory as another way of trying to visualize and understand the effects of the n-dimensional waveforms that do, in fact, compose matter, gravity and what we perceive as energy.

It's a symptom of the inadequacy of current quantum physical models as we approach their limits.

Then again, I could be completely and utterly wrong.

Originally posted by Majic
It's a symptom of the inadequacy of current quantum physical models as we approach their limits.

I think you're completely correct in this assessment.

Originally posted by Majic

It's a symptom of the inadequacy of current quantum physical models as we approach their limits.

It's just one of the models. It's quantum.

Is super string theory different from string theory? I started to read about higher dimensional spaces and got loss along the way dam that stuff weird.

String theory is short for super string theory. That was in the book.

I wish someone like John Titor would come in here and explain how string theory works lol.

Who doesn't love string theory? Please forgive the next few comments, I'm trying to be cryptic and jump starting my memory at the same time. In 2036, string theory still dominates physics due to its continued "effect" of encompassing other physical properties from unrelated fields.

A great deal of the theoretical mathematics behind time travel was discovered by testing various ideas in string theory and eliminating the anomalies. As I recall, it was this original work that led to the final proof that six dimensions do indeed curl up to give us our observable universe. This in turn supported more of the theoretical math behind time travel.

It's ironic that the beauty of string theory gives future engineers the confidence to create the distortion unit even though the final proof is still unknown. You're a physics student, have you ever heard the Princeton String Quartet play?

The measurement for worldline divergence is an observation variable isolated to the distortion unit. An effective analogy would be a "gravity radar". The unit's sensors take a "snapshot" of the local gravity around the unit before a flight. During travel, this baseline is periodically checked to make sure there are no major changes in the environment that would cause a catastrophic mass failure (brick wall appearing from nowhere). The percentage of VGL divergence from one worldline to another is a calculated guess by the three computers that control the unit based on its starting point. It is useless in describing characteristics of individual worldlines.

There is a bit of folklore about the first distortion driver who reaches a destination with a zero divergence. This would mean they had traveled on a space-like trip to their own worldline of origin. This paradox is quite possible although highly unlikely. I wonder if anyone out there can take current string theory and make that one work on paper?

You said 6 curled up dimensions. The current string theory suggests that there should be at least 7.

I may be mistaken but I thought it was pretty well established now that (N-10) was on track.



John Titor