Is 11-Dimensional Chirality a Fatal Flaw in Superstring Theory?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter m_brain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chirality
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the implications of 11-dimensional spacetime in superstring theory, particularly focusing on the concept of chirality and whether the existence of 11 dimensions presents a fundamental flaw in the theory. Participants explore theoretical, philosophical, and practical aspects of dimensionality in physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant cites Davies and Brown's argument that 11-dimensional theory fails due to the requirement of chirality, which they claim can only exist in spaces with an odd number of dimensions.
  • Another participant argues against the validity of 11 dimensions, suggesting that scientific theories are not inherently "correct" but rather serve to organize observations, implying that 11 dimensions may not effectively explain the universe.
  • Repeated assertions from participants emphasize that the notion of 11 dimensions raises more questions than it answers, questioning its explanatory power.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity and utility of 11-dimensional spacetime, with no consensus reached on whether it is a fatal flaw in superstring theory or a viable theoretical framework.

Contextual Notes

Participants do not fully explore the implications of chirality or the philosophical underpinnings of scientific theories, leaving these aspects open to interpretation and further discussion.

m_brain
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I just read a book by Davies and Brown entitled "Superstrings: A Theory of Everything?"

They dismiss 11D theory as having a fatal flaw: "A distinctive element of the weak interaction is that it breaks left-right mirror symmetry. This implies that elementary particles must be endowed with a definite handedness, or 'chirality'...It turns out that definite chirality only exists in spaces with an odd number of dimensions. This means that space must have an odd number of dimensions, and hence spacetime must have an even number of dimensions, otherwise there would be no chirality in the laws of nature. In short, eleven spacetime dimensions won't work."

Any thoughts?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are better reasons for why 11 dimensional spacetime is rediculous.

Sure Einstein overthrew classical space and time single handedly, but he was guided by evidence and physical principles.

Remember that scientific theories are not "correct", they only serve to organize our observations (according to organizational principles.) Therefore, its not that the universe has 11 dimensions, its that the best way to explain the universe is using 11 dimensions. And to me, 11 dimensions is not a very good way to explain anything (begs more questions than it resolves).
 
What are some of the better reasons?

Crosson said:
There are better reasons for why 11 dimensional spacetime is rediculous.

Sure Einstein overthrew classical space and time single handedly, but he was guided by evidence and physical principles.

Remember that scientific theories are not "correct", they only serve to organize our observations (according to organizational principles.) Therefore, its not that the universe has 11 dimensions, its that the best way to explain the universe is using 11 dimensions. And to me, 11 dimensions is not a very good way to explain anything (begs more questions than it resolves).
 
There are better reasons for why 11 dimensional spacetime is rediculous.

[Moderator's note: The word should be spelled "ridiculous". But strictly
speaking, it is not impossible that someone learns how to judge ideas
about quantum gravity before he learns how to write. LM]

Sure Einstein overthrew classical space and time single handedly, but
he was guided by evidence and physical principles.

Remember that scientific theories are not "correct", they only serve to
organize our observations (according to organizational principles.)
Therefore, its not that the universe has 11 dimensions, its that the
best way to explain the universe is using 11 dimensions. And to me, 11
dimensions is not a very good way to explain anything (begs more
questions than it resolves).--
Crosson
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crosson's Profile: https://www.physicsforums.com/forums/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=21862
View this thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=66834
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
6K
  • · Replies 70 ·
3
Replies
70
Views
11K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K