Register to reply 
String theory vs. Relativity 
Share this thread: 
#1
Feb2310, 08:54 PM

P: 22

I saw a show about string theory on TV, and I don't understand why this hasn't already been ruled out. My thought is this:
If there is a dimension that is curled up, wouldn't this violate relativity because moving would cause it to length contract? This seems to violate relativity since there is a preferred frame in which the curled dimensions have a maximum length. But we know relativity is correct! And if you don't have curled dimensions, then string theory can be ruled out since we don't see 10 dimensions. Either way, there seems to be a problem. How can string theory with curled dimensions match the amazingly precise relativity experiments? EDIT: I see now that there was a thread on 'preferred frames in a closed universe' http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=375432 and the concensus was YES there is a preferred frame in curled dimensions. In that example an experiment would have to go all the way around the universe to be able to detect it, but in String Theory's case ... "all the way around" is just a planck length or something. Strings themselves can go all the way around a curled dimension. So reality built from these curled dimensions would obviously have a preferred frame for experiments at lengths greater than the distance around such a dimension. So why isn't string theory ruled out already? 


#2
Feb2410, 01:04 AM

Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 5,597

This seems like an interesting question to me. My general impression is that string theory is seen as having SR built in, but there is some controversy over whether string theory is backgroundindependent as required by GR.
I doubt that the length of the curledup dimensions in string theory is really a distance that you can measure, in the sense that you can measure cosmological dimensions with macroscopic measuring techniques. My guess is that if this was moved to the Beyond the Standard Model forum, you'd get more helpful answers. 


#3
Feb2410, 01:19 AM

P: 22

If the answer is: if it wasn't for quantum mechanics, curled dimensions couldn't fit with precise measurements showing there is no preferred frame ... then fine, I'd be interested in seeing how quantum mechanics saves this. However, I have a feeling adding QM into the bunch is not useful here. I expect that the punch line can be discussed completely classically since the symmetries of relativity are classical as well as the "background metric + topology" of string theory describing the curled dimensions (at least appears to be classical). 


#4
Feb2810, 01:47 PM

P: 22

String theory vs. Relativity
No one?
If not, can someone move this to the "Beyond the Standard Model" forum as bcrowell suggested? Again, since this was approaching it from a classical / nonquantum question viewpoint, I was hoping the relativity forum would be more suited. Maybe someone here knew a "loophole" that this global preferred frame can be ignored. The only loophole I know of is: if experiments don't involve information going around the full dimension, it can be ignored. That loophole can't apply here. So I really don't see how String Theory can get around this. 


#5
Feb2810, 05:47 PM

Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,415

You say that "we know relativity is correct". I would object to any claim that a theory is "correct". There's no such thing as a correct theory. All theories that have been found so far, and probably all that will ever be found, are wrong. The ones that we consider "good" are just less wrong than others. But your claim has two problems that are far more serious than that. (The second one is what really kills your argument). 1. What we know is just that SR (which is a theory about 3+1 spacetime dimensions) makes very accurate predictions about results of experiments. This doesn't in any way imply that a 9+1dimensional version of the theory would be accurate. 2. If I was asked to try to write down a version of SR for 9+1 dimensions with six of the spatial dimensions "curled up", I would choose the appropriate underlying manifold and see if it makes logical sense to try to define a 9+1dimensional version of the Minkowski metric on it. I don't expect such a theory to be consistent with a 9+1dimensional version of Einstein's "postulates", but you clearly do. Why would it be? Einstein's "postulates" are just guesses about what a good theory of space, time and motion should look like, which are based on our experiences in 3+1 dimensions, and on the earlier theories that describe those experiences pretty well. (I'm talking about the role of inertial frames in Newtonian mechanics/Galilean spacetime, and the invariance properties of Maxwell's equations). There's certainly no reason to demand that a theory of 9+1 dimensions of space and time, with six of them curled up, would be consistent with that. 


#6
Feb2810, 09:54 PM

P: 22

Relativity shows there will be a preferred frame for spacetimes with curled dimensions. WHAT!? How is that not agreeing with the point? 


#7
Feb2810, 11:27 PM

Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,415

You seem to have the wrong idea about what "special relativity" means. It's defined by Minkowski spacetime, not by Einstein's "postulates". If you're going to generalize SR to 9+1 dimensions with 6 spatial dimensions curled up, you need to forget about the postulates. The appropriate generalization is a 10dimensional manifold with a Lorentzian metric that induces the Minkowski metric on some of its 4dimensional submanifolds.
This doesn't mean that string theory is inconsistent with special relativity. It means that special relativity with curled up dimensions is inconsistent with Einstein's postulates. 


#8
Mar110, 07:56 PM

Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 5,597

I agree with CuriousKid that this is a nontrivial issue, and I haven't seen anything so far in this thread that would resolve it.



#10
Mar110, 10:40 PM

HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 1,961




#11
Mar210, 12:52 AM

Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 9,415

I don't think there's an issue here that needs to be resolved. A theory of 9+1 spatial dimensions with six of them curled up that in any way resembles special relativity will say that different observers will measure different lengths if they move with different speeds along one of the extra dimensions. This doesn't contradict anything that's at all relevant. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
General relativity Theory, spacetime and string theory question.. Please Help  Introductory Physics Homework  2  
Dispute between Relativity and String Theory?  Beyond the Standard Model  10  
String theory verses Special Relativity  General Physics  3 