How does string theory describe the wave/particle duality of matter?

In summary: But as far as I can tell String Theory has nothing at all to say about the quantum measurement problem. All the hoopla about string theory seems to be about the fact that it promises to possibly incorporate GR with QM. And from what I can tell about that, the only reason that it incoporates GR is because strings have dimension, and therefore we simply can't apply the equations of GR below a certain size. So rather than truly melding the two, string theory just explains why GR and QM can't be melded together. Isn't that correct?
  • #1
QuantumDefect
64
0
As the title implies, how does string theory describe the wave/particle duality of matter and the forces? How does it describe the double slit expirement? Thanks for the replies.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
String Theory and The Quantum Measurement Problem?

I was going to start a new thread myself to basically ask the same question. But since you've already asked it I'll just add my question to yours.

Does String Theory address the "instantaneous" collapse of the wavefunction?

From what I can tell so far it doesn't. I've read Brian Greene's "Elegant Universe", I saw his video, and I am currently reading his book "The Fabric of the Cosmos". I haven't quite finished this most recent book yet.

But as far as I can tell String Theory has nothing at all to say about the quantum measurement problem. All the hoopla about string theory seems to be about the fact that it promises to possibly incorporate GR with QM.

And from what I can tell about that, the only reason that it incoporates GR is because strings have dimension, and therefore we simply can't apply the equations of GR below a certain size. So rather than truly melding the two, string theory just explains why GR and QM can't be melded together. Isn't that correct?

That certainly appears to be what Brian Greene is saying in his lastest book.
 
  • #3
Reply

From the book Quantum Evolution by McFadden it can be read that wave-particle duality (quantum superposition/uncertainty principle) are "fundamental to quantum mechanics, yet remain one of science's strangest aspects." One has to wonder how particles that have a discrete size and shape can "unwrap" themselves to travel through space as a diffuse wave passing through different points simultaneously. It seems to me that what strings imply is a connection between the mysteries of being in two places at one time and string theory. With strings there is the chance that we could be living on an isolated membrane that prevents us from seeing the "other slices of the loaf of bread." (Like Brian Greene talked about) But, there is also the fact that through gravity (a proposed non-contained force) we could connect to distant parts of space. I would say that there is a connection between the string theory and particle-wave duality because it implies the possibility that particles (eg photons) traveling say for example from the sun (8 minutes away) have the ability to change their trajectory based on a human observer because of the fact that they are harnessing the power of strings. This is a total assumption.. but I've been thinking about it for sometime.. I too haven't found much info on the connection of the two ideas.. but I'm thinking it has something to do with the supersymmetry involved in string theory and the way quantum mechanics is seemingly chaotic (like the example of the double slit experiment) absent of string theory.

as for the second question.. I have no clue on that one. However the further one gets from a string the more it looks like strings are the exchange of vector bosons between particles.. so maybe what string theory is predicting is the fact that because a closed loop string has no mass it looks similar to a spin 2 vector boson.. or what was once theorized as being a "graviton." This is how it connects quantum mechanics to relatvity... but... I'm not sure on that.. it seems to me that even a closed loop string could become an open ended one... but where would it gain it's light speed endpoints (quarks?) I don't know.
 
  • #5
You don't have to go all the way to Bohm to believe that the "wave function" and the whole Hilbert space/operator formalism is a useful model, but not a fundamental assertion of quantum mechanics.

"Particles" in string theory are wavelike excitations of strings. They seem particle-like only because the strings are so small. So there's the SST take on "particle-wave duality". As for the wave function, strings are quantized according to the same kind of operator/Hilbert space formalism that's used in other parts of quantum mechanics, and presumably have the same difficulties with the measuremnt problem.
 
  • #6
The point is that it is widely accepted that string theory does not say anything NEW about the interpretation/measurement in QM. In contrast, in the paper above I suggest that it might.
 
  • #7
NeutronStar said:
From what I can tell so far it doesn't. I've read Brian Greene's "Elegant Universe", I saw his video, and I am currently reading his book "The Fabric of the Cosmos". I haven't quite finished this most recent book yet.


As anti-dote, I would suggest you also read Lee Smolin's The Trouble with Physics, or Peter Woit's Not Even Wrong. Otherwise you'll get a Yin-Yang imbalance :biggrin:
 
  • #8
selfAdjoint said:
You don't have to go all the way to Bohm to believe that the "wave function" and the whole Hilbert space/operator formalism is a useful model, but not a fundamental assertion of quantum mechanics.

Then what is a fundamental assertion of quantum mechanics ?
 
  • #9
If string theory is really the theory of everything, then it must also say what the fundamental assertion of quantum mechanics is.
 

1. What is string theory?

String theory is a theoretical framework in physics that attempts to reconcile the principles of general relativity and quantum mechanics. It proposes that the fundamental building blocks of the universe are not point-like particles, but rather tiny, vibrating strings.

2. How does string theory explain the wave/particle duality of matter?

According to string theory, the vibrations of these tiny strings determine the properties of particles. The different modes of vibration give rise to different particle properties, such as mass and charge. This duality arises because the strings can behave like particles in some situations and waves in others.

3. How does string theory differ from other theories that attempt to explain the wave/particle duality?

Unlike other theories, string theory does not attempt to explain the duality by considering particles and waves as separate entities. Instead, it proposes that all particles are made of strings, which naturally exhibit both particle-like and wave-like behavior.

4. Does string theory offer any experimental evidence for its claims about the wave/particle duality?

Currently, there is no experimental evidence for string theory's predictions about the wave/particle duality. However, it is an active area of research, and scientists are working on ways to test the theory's predictions through experiments and observations.

5. What are the implications of string theory for our understanding of the nature of matter?

If string theory is confirmed, it would have significant implications for our understanding of the fundamental nature of matter. It would suggest that all particles are ultimately made of the same underlying substance - strings - and that the different properties of particles arise from the vibrations of these strings. It would also potentially provide a framework for unifying all of the fundamental forces of nature.

Similar threads

  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
26
Views
497
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
6
Views
584
Replies
47
Views
4K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
14
Views
3K
Back
Top