Why the need for background independence in String

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Sam Owen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Independence String
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of background independence in string theory, exploring its necessity and implications. Participants examine the philosophical and theoretical underpinnings of background dependence versus independence, as well as the implications for understanding the origins of the universe.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the necessity of background independence, suggesting that having a background against which nature operates is not inherently problematic.
  • Another participant argues that all assumptions should be scrutinized, emphasizing the difficulty in selecting a self-organizing background and the challenges of modeling a universe without a beginning.
  • A different viewpoint proposes that sub-solar mass black holes might exist at the Planck scale, suggesting they could be transient phenomena that interact with other particles or dimensions.
  • Further, a participant introduces the idea that rather than deriving existence from nothing, something could emerge from a "background" of everything, hinting at a metaphysical perspective aligned with the string landscape approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and implications of background independence, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of defining backgrounds and the implications for cosmological models, particularly regarding the nature of beginnings and the existence of structures like black holes.

Sam Owen
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Why the "need" for background independence in String

It seems to me in any theory the first cause is still missing regardless of whether it is background dependent or independent so what does it matter ?

What is wrong with having a background against which nature is acted out ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All assumptions are suspect. It is not fair to cherry pick a background that happens to fit your model. It is hard to find a background that is self organizing, and very hard to have a universe with no beginning that fits any such model. The alternative is a universe that is infinitely old... and there is a preponderance of evidence that suggests otherwise. For example, where are all the sub-solar mass black holes?
 
maybe the sub solar mass black holes are at Planck scale in the electron clouds but they only exist for an instant, long enough for a photon to pass through, an electron to exchange or a manifold to blip between dimensions
 
Chronos said:
It is hard to find a background that is self organizing, and very hard to have a universe with no beginning that fits any such model. The alternative is a universe that is infinitely old...

There are other ways to think about the issue of first causes. Rather than getting something out of nothing you can get your something out of a "background" of everything. Out of a vagueness, or a generalised potential.

This is certainly the metaphysics suggested by the string landscape approach. Every kind of mathematical "vibration" is possible, but self-stable resonances only begin to emerge as you move from a vague infinity of dimensions towards crisper systems with very limited dimensionality.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
10K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K