Well, today I came across a bit of news on a science blog which makes it a very real possibility that String Theory indeed may not be the answer to life, the universe, and everything. So, for now, we might have to fall back on the next best answer which is, of course, 42.
The reason for this sudden casting of aspersions is very difficult to understand, but it has something to do with super-symmetry and how it is becoming irrelevant; and as super-symmetry goes, so does String Theory. You may have also heard that the LHC detected the Higgs Boson some time ago and scientists there were actually able to weigh it. It weighed pretty much exactly what it was predicted that it should weigh, and this is also a nail in the stringy coffin, since it seems that with the Higgs boson the Standard Model is now complete.
I like to try and keep tabs on what those wacky scientists are coming up with on the frontiers of particle physics, but I am at a loss for words when it comes to explaining it. So if you're interested here are some links that I found reasonably understandable:
Is there any particle physics beyond the standard model?
Have we reached the end of particle physics?
String Theory on life support
I also found this from way back in 2005:
David Gross admits string theory is in trouble
I've always been at a loss with stuff like string theory or the extra six dimensions bundled up around each other or whatever... how do you test it? How, at its farthest reaches, does it differ from a guy in an Onion TED talk just making stuff up?
ReplyDeleteHaha, I know. No matter how many times I hear it explained, I can't for the life of me visualize extra dimensions. I guess the difference between Onion Talks and String Theory is that there is apparently some sophisticated math to back up the latter, though I take that on authority.
ReplyDeleteThis is my favourite Onions Talks episode, by the way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tom6_ceTu9s
In truth I obviously don't have the maths to understand any of this stuff. My understanding of the situation in physics extends about as far as broadly grasping that the large-scale stuff behaves very differently from the minute-scale stuff, and nobody is totally sure what unifies the whole lot (to the extent that it matters, since the quantum world seems to have absolutely no bearing on the middle-scale world of human activity).
ReplyDeleteI'll have to check out that one, the Onion link.
I think the key to the extra-dimensional models is not our ability to actually see them, but the way that the math that they represent allows the scientists and mathematicians that use them make incredibly accurate predictions about real world phenomenon. I will be the first to admit I don't understand it, but I always saw string theory as a kind of new age π (pi). A perfect circle may not actually exist, but postulating that it does allows us to calculate other phenomenon with dumbfounding accuracy.
ReplyDeleteTo me, sometimes, it feels like the Standard Model is a little like the plumb pudding model of the atom - maybe right for it's time and current understanding, but it's explanation might be a little too quaint the deeper we go. Either way, I believe it's with an understanding of these theories that we can even check-out what other phenomenon exist in the world. These theories seem less like end points and more like routes to further wonderful ideas.
ReplyDelete