Why Are Vibrating Strings the Fundamental Building Blocks of the Universe?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Curious6
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interesting
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of fundamental building blocks in the universe, specifically focusing on string theory and its implications for matter and energy. Participants explore the reasons why strings are considered fundamental, the challenges associated with point particles, and the potential role of higher-dimensional objects in this framework.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why strings are considered the fundamental building blocks, asking if there are equations that predict strings as the only option.
  • Another participant notes that strings avoid self-energy infinities that plague point particles, which contributes to their appeal in theoretical physics.
  • It is mentioned that strings predict a spin-2 particle resembling a graviton, which has been a significant factor in the development of string theory.
  • Some participants discuss the role of higher-dimensional objects (branes) in M-theory, suggesting they may also predict a graviton.
  • One participant proposes the idea of a closed surface vibrating in multiple dimensions, questioning if such a surface could also incorporate a graviton.
  • There is a mention of the graviton being the only particle allowed to propagate in a higher-dimensional space, which may explain the weakness of gravity in our universe.
  • Another participant reflects on the unification principle and its implications across dimensions, hinting at the historical development of gravitational wave detection technologies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the nature of strings and higher-dimensional objects, indicating that multiple competing views remain without a clear consensus on the fundamental building blocks of the universe.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the definitions of terms like "bulk" and the implications of higher-dimensional objects in string theory. The discussion also touches on the limitations of current theoretical frameworks and the lack of checkable results in string physics.

Curious6
Messages
204
Reaction score
0
This is a question I came about while thinking about the nature of matter and energy. According to string theory, the very fundamental building blocks of matter and energy are tiny vibrating strings. I was thinking to myself then: why are these the fundamental building blocks of the Universe, why is it not some other thing? Is there are any equation that would naturally predict strings to be the only possible option for building blocks? Also, would the TOE have something to say about strings being the only possible option for the building blocks of matter and energy? I'm sorry if this question sounds confusing, but I was just wondering about this!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The reason strings became so interesting is that point particles have inevitable problems with self energy infinities as the space (with its interacting quantum vacuum) shrinks to zero around them, but strings are automatically free of that problem. Also one of the earliest discoveries from strings was that they predict a spin-2 particle with all the properties of a graviton. This was enough to get string physics off the ground, and since then it has been a mine of theoretical "sweetness" that keeps physicists motivated, although no new checkable results have turned up.

If a real TOE ever turns up, one of its characteristics should be that it accounts for its predictions as necessary. That is just my predjudice, and it means I distinguish the term TOE from the term unification of forces.
 
selfAdjoint said:
The reason strings became so interesting is that point particles have inevitable problems with self energy infinities as the space (with its interacting quantum vacuum) shrinks to zero around them, but strings are automatically free of that problem. Also one of the earliest discoveries from strings was that they predict a spin-2 particle with all the properties of a graviton. This was enough to get string physics off the ground, and since then it has been a mine of theoretical "sweetness" that keeps physicists motivated, although no new checkable results have turned up.
Don't the higher dimensional objects (branes) of M-theory also give a spin-2 graviton?
 
Mike2
I'm not sure how to answer your question... the basic picture though is that higher dimensional objects (D-Branes, 5-Branes, etc) are situated in a putative higher dimensional space, known around the physics community as "the bulk" and the standard model particles and fields are confined to these membranes. The graviton, as one of the basic prediction of String theory is the only particle (at least relying upon the current depictin) that is allowed to propagate in the bulk and supposedly, is the sole reason why gravity is felt so weakly in our universe.
 
alexsok said:
Mike2
I'm not sure how to answer your question... the basic picture though is that higher dimensional objects (D-Branes, 5-Branes, etc) are situated in a putative higher dimensional space, known around the physics community as "the bulk" and the standard model particles and fields are confined to these membranes. The graviton, as one of the basic prediction of String theory is the only particle (at least relying upon the current depictin) that is allowed to propagate in the bulk and supposedly, is the sole reason why gravity is felt so weakly in our universe.

For example, could we not have a closed surface that vibrates in latitudonally, like many string stacked one a-top the other? Since every cross section is vibrating like a string, cannot one of those vibrational modes also be a graviton?

Or now that a surface has one more dimension to vibrate in, cannot a surface just as easily "incorporate" a graviton as a string? For surely, you can pick out a line (string) on a surface.
 
alexsok said:
Mike2
The graviton, as one of the basic prediction of String theory is the only particle (at least relying upon the current depictin) that is allowed to propagate in the bulk and supposedly, is the sole reason why gravity is felt so weakly in our universe.

We are also then talking about something that can be felt strongly? This is the unification principal that speak to all dimensions? :smile: I think sometimes we forget how we got there, and how the consistency of this action is defined?

We understand gravitation waves are not impeded like em waves are.

Learning to understand Webber bars and then the graduation to Ligo makes this a very interesting revelation in terms of Kip Thornes window on the universe?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K