Staredit Network

Now I know that a couple of you, if not all of you, know about string theory. You probably also know that in one year, the Large Hadron Collider will be online and running. I make this topic in dedication to that event, when aspects of the most important theory of all time (if true) are tested. Unfortunately I do not know very much about the experiment and would like some insight on it.

Some things that I would like to discuss are:
•What are the implications of the theory being right/wrong?
•How will the results that they come up with prove string theory or parts of it?
•Could string theory be proven true with this experiment alone?
•What kind of technological advancements will we achieve from what we learn from this experiment?
•What other experiments may be done for string theory in the future and what will be their purpose?

As you can see, I have a lot of questions that you probably would like the answers to also. I'd greatly appreciate it if you reply.

It would be nice if I knew what the string theory was.

I've never heard of the string theory but this topic sounds interesting. I'm going to do some research on this.
Added http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

I don't know much about it, but from what I can tell it's a theory that says quarks (the particles that make up things like protons and electrons) are actually miniature string-like constructs, which take on different states (such as charge) depending on how they are vibrating. This vibration involves at least eight dimensions above our own, all of them probably very small.

Mp)Blu's link will probably have more on it.

These vibrating strings of energy are also responsible for the four known forces and possibly some undiscovered ones too.
I thought some of you understood string theory to a high degree...I guess I'll get my information from another forum site

People like Beer and CaptainWill know this theory, I'm sure. But so far, our physics teacher doesn't deem us worthy enough to enlighten us.

String Theory, from my point of view, is extremely hard to explain if you can't make a mental picture and graph that picture of what is happening.

Also, don't ask me to explain in mathematical fashion, I saw the equations once and they weren't pretty in the least bit.

Alright, we all know that atoms are made out protons, neutrons and electrons. Protons and Neutrons are then made up of smaller particles, called quarks. These particles, along photons and a few others, were thought to be point particles. Zero dimensional objects with their own quantum properties. Zero dimension meaning that it is just a point in space. Remember that not 1 particle in an atom has the same quantum properties as another particle in the same atom.

Now string theory determines that particles are not zero dimensional, but instead 1 dimensional, a line. Now zero dimensional particles are perfect by theory. All particles are always trying to minimize their energy and thus they are always contracted to their equilibrium point. Now with particles being a line, they would contract or compressed like a slinky. Now the problem is that these one dimensional particles cannot contract completely in order to minimize their potential energy. Now this contraction has a momentum, once the contraction reaches a certain point, it'll expand back outwards only to repeat a cycle. This cycle are then graphed as vibrations or oscillations.

These vibrations are what gives particles their properties. Each particle has different quantum properties and thus different vibrations. No longer are particles attracted by gravity, electromagnetism or nuclear forces. These vibrations come into play here, I'm not entirely knowledgeable in this area.

Now with particles being very close together, these vibrations will eventually start to interact. This is where protons and neutrons start to be created.

Now about the 10, 11 or 26 dimensions that the different variations of the theory may provide. It is impossible for me to explain this as I can only think in 6 dimensions(X, Y, Z, Time and the Euler Angles which are rotations of XYZ), along with pretty much everyone. These are only complex mathematical results from equations.

Every idea ever proposed in the scientific community is wrong, only because that which supersedes it is closer to the truth. (Which will probably always continue as such.)

String theory itself has already been somewhat replaced by other ideas; M-Theory for one, although even that is probably not the most updated concept. The entire difference between string theory and M-Theory is one dimension, which happens to be the 11th dimension. After the first four dimensions, (Sorry beer I don't think Euler angles apply in real life, so much as mathematics.) The others are wrapped up in small bundles. This is a rather difficult aspect to think of, as we normally think of dimensions as varying directions things can travel along, but we must think differently because at this level of physics, we are not talking about things. The items being discussed are smaller than "things".

Now the key point in this entire theory is that these particles experience oscillation. Meaning that they do not have a defined point. Think of it as being like the oscillation experienced by an electron around a nucleus. The electron seems to be a point, but there is no way for us to tell where it is or how fast its moving with any accuracy. What we do know is that as it gains electronegative energy, the confinement of the electron changes to form differing arrangements. These arrangements, or orbitals, are 3 dimensional oscillation. The electron becomes less important to find, and the formation of where the electron is becomes the primary concern. The truth is is that the electron could be anything, but all we can detect is the fuzzy range of the forces it gives off. Now think of the things that make up these small particles. We could see even less of what they actually could be, and all that we have to go off is the form of energy they give off. This leaves us with what oscillation they produce. Which appear rather intangible to us, so we have decided to make them one dimensional. M-Theory, with its added dimension, says that the strings are two dimensional, actually planes, or p-branes, as they are called. The key point still being that they oscillate. Although the addition of this extra dimension also opened the door to rather strange theories about why the forces expressed by these branes differ from force to force, creating a slue of rather crackpot ideas about multiple universes and such.

I hope this helped, but I don't think the explanation I gave actually fits what happens.

Nova made a pretty good String Theory for dummies documentry

So what does this all mean Basil?!

Like are humans going to be able to fly now with out an aircraft or what?

wtf?
It's a theory on how subatomic particles behave. Not a way to make people fly...

(Although, if M-Theory is correct, teleportation (of large things) could be a reality someday. (Not to mention the ability to create your own universe.)

But that's playing god! [/sarcasm]

Sounds fun, I hope it's true.

String theary is some trippy stuff, it makes it so 2 laws that for a long time thought to coupletly deny each other work very well together. Those two laws being the laws of gravity for the big stuff and laws of quantum physics for the super tiny stuff.

The law of Gravity demands that space must be nice and smooth and all pretty.
But the law of quantum physics is random and speratic uncontrolable and unpredictable in any and everyway almost like there is no law.
String theary unites these two laws.
String theory for it to work I dont remember all it requires but If I recall corectly is demands 11 other dimensions (trippy huh?) we can only see 3 dimensions thus 3D Up down Left Right forward backward kinda stuff.

If you really want to learn about string theory, which is really cool stuff. Go look up nova's documentry called the eligant universe. Great Stuff!!

As far as I remember it's only eight more dimensions, for 11 dimensions total. The other eight being way smaller than the three we're used to.

I have heard about the string theory, and that is just a bunch of bullcrap, for one thing if there was a basic unit of mass or w/e (strings) it would not be in the forme of flexible strings that vibrate around or w/e but instead it would be more likely that it would be in the form of spheres, since everything has gravity, and it would put it into the center and form a sphere, just like everything else is made up or spheres, (planets, atoms, electrons, particles) Though they are not perfect spheres, they are still in the form of a sphere...and how the freak would you prove that the base unit of everything is a string?

As I've said before, a sphere would not be able to contract in order to minimize their potential energy, they would reach a point of equilibrium and would no longer oscillate. Strings, on the other hand, will contract until the force keeping it from collapsing upon itself is far too great and it'll expand only to repeat the process. This cycle is the oscillation is the graphical description of the vibrations.

How to prove that the basic particle is not a sphere? How can you prove that they are spheres? It is nearly impossible to prove so by experiments, the only way is by pure mathematics. String Theory isn't some radical idea, it is proven by formulas and mathematics. The question is whether or not what can happen in paper happens in our universe.

Your conception of spheres and gravity is false. An objects' gravity is not concentrated into one point in space, as suggested by Isaac Newton. Gravity is now defined as the curvature of space-time that an object has. If you were to take a human being, space would not bend as if it were a sphere, it would bend in accordance to the mass and volume. You would see our arms and legs bending space in a different value than our torso.

To add onto Beers Post.
These strings are so small too that they basicly dont weigh anything, so the laws of gravity have no affect on them since they are so tiny. And the laws of gravity is what forms things into a sphere. (Stop me if Im wrong)

well I can see that "some" of you are quite intelligent, and I'm sorry i'm not as smart as Beer_keg but can you explain to me how having the strings contract would minimize their potential energy? but i do agree that they must reach an equilibrium. But can you explain why gravity wouldn't cause things to collapse
into a spear when the force of gravity becomes too great, like a star collapsing into a blackhole? Yes i realise that I was wrong about the precise definition of gravity

Im gona let Beer answer that one, im no physics major. I failed math twice actaully

Yes I'm not a physics major either, thought about it actually but I'm going to college next year as a math major, I understand a good amount of physics but I just didn't study physics to a great extent, However, since im a math major I do know some aspects of physics fairly well, like position, velocity, acceleration, and jerk (like velocity is the rate of change in position, acceleration is the rate of change in velocity, and jerk is the rate of change in acceleration) and applications for this (total distance, finding position knowing acceleration and velocity at a point and w/e...im sure beer_keg would know all this stuff in basic calculus, that is also in physics ) but sad to say that this is the extent of my physics other then just taking 1 year of basic physics

It was a joke and a quote from Austin Powers.

What Im asking is that if the string theory proves to be correct. What does this mean for humanity? What can we do with it?

Just because it could work, doesn't mean that's how it is.

Gravity is one of the weakest forces in the universe. It there was another force acting upon it, it might not collapse as you expect.

Actually we aren't sure where an object center of gravity truly is, because as you get smaller and smaller particles gravity becomes nearly invisible. The only reason we say gravitational pull happens at a point is because at the scales in which gravity actually starts to become noticable, most of the objects have formed spherical parameters. (It's rare to find a giant body in space thats not a sphere.) Not to mention the differences in the gravitational pull of extremities become less and less noticeable the farther away you get from the object.

First of all, string theory is not proven by anything, currently, what string theory is, is basically an accidental discovery in theoretical mathematics which showed that if there were more than four dimensions, it became theoretically much simpler to unite the four fundamental forces (gravitation, electromagnetism, the weak interaction, and the strong interaction).

From here on can we change the theory being discussed to "M-theory" instead of string theory?

•What are the implications of the theory being right/wrong?

The theory is currently absolutely not proven. There is vehement disagreement on whether it is true or not, and the only "proof" for the theory as yet is that it is the first to allow for the unification of the four fundamental forces. If it is not proved outright by the experiment it may not necessarily be disproved. However if it is disproved physicists will once again face the unassailable edifice of the disparity between the fundamental forces. If it is "proved" it will mark a fantastic discovery in theoretical physics. You'll probably all start teaching yourselves about loop quantum gravity then.

•How will the results that they come up with prove string theory or parts of it?

The particle collider apparently has the potential to generate reactions that would allow physicists to "see" the extra dimensions by their interaction with the experiment.

•Could string theory be proven true with this experiment alone?

Probably not. At least in my opinion it seems unlikely that the disparity between the magnitude of gravity in relation to the other forces will be explained, and though great, the energy does not seem like enough to illuminate higher dimensions. There are areas of string theory, and even broader areas of M-theory that are as yet undefined.

•What kind of technological advancements will we achieve from what we learn from this experiment?

Well, there are plenty of other physicists who want to get a crack at the collider for other reasons. It could advance several areas of physics, but as for technological advancements, Playstation 4 is still up to Sony.

•What other experiments may be done for string theory in the future and what will be their purpose?

They are already proposing upgrades to this accelerator, the problem many people have with these theories, however is that they can't yet make predictions and are not yet really falsifiable.


So far my favorite part about the collider is the theoretical earth-destroying or even universe-destroying catastrophes it could create such as:

Creation of a stable black hole
Creation of strange matter that is more stable than ordinary matter
Creation of magnetic monopoles that could catalyze proton decay
Triggering a transition into a different quantum mechanical vacuum

Apocalypse: sweet.