But various scientists don't take that view - they think that it lacks substance, and since it cannot be proved, it is more like a theory of anything - especially by Lawrence Krauss, a professor of physics at Case Western.
Here is an interesting excerpt from one of the above articles...
String theory proposes a solution that reconciles relativity and quantum mechanics. To get there, it requires two radical changes in our view of the universe. The first is easy: What we've presumed are subatomic particles are actually tiny vibrating strings of energy, each 100 billion billion times smaller than the protons at the nucleus of an atom.
That's easy to accept. But for the math to work, there also must be more physical dimensions to reality than the three of space and one of time that we can perceive. The most popular string models require 10 or 11 dimensions. What we perceive as solid matter is mathematically explainable as the three-dimensional manifestation of "strings" of elementary particles vibrating and dancing through multiple dimensions of reality, like shadows on a wall. In theory, these extra dimensions surround us and contain myriad parallel universes.
Well, what's the problem then ? Does this explain everything ? Apprently, no one has been able to prove anything experimentally, and only mathematical proofs have been put forward. As the article mentions...
compared to E=mc2, string theory equations look like spaghetti. And unfortunately for the aspirations of its proponents, the ideas are just as hard to explain in words.
And not only have they not been able to prove anything, they haven't even been able to devise an experiment to even try to prove it ! Ask any nobel prize winning theoretical physicist about how to prove it and his response starts with...
"Let's say we had a particle accelerator the size of the Milky Way …"
Hmmm....
No comments:
Post a Comment