Does Verlinde argument imply 3 spatial dimensions and rules out String theory?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Erik Verlinde's proposal regarding the thermodynamic origin of gravity suggests that higher spatial dimensions beyond three may be ruled out, contrasting with string theory's requirement of nine dimensions and M-theory's ten. Liu Zhao's commentary emphasizes the emergence of relativity through hidden symmetries in thermodynamics, which includes the Poincare group. While Verlinde's arguments present a compelling alternative to traditional string theory approaches, the discussion indicates that definitive conclusions are premature, as further rigorous analysis is needed.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thermodynamics and its relation to gravity
  • Familiarity with string theory and M-theory dimensions
  • Knowledge of the Poincare group and its significance in spacetime
  • Awareness of emergent phenomena in theoretical physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Verlinde's thermodynamic gravity model
  • Explore Liu Zhao's paper on hidden symmetries in thermodynamics
  • Study the role of open and closed strings in string theory
  • Investigate the concept of emergent spacetime and its impact on quantum gravity theories
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, cosmologists, and researchers exploring alternative theories of gravity, particularly those interested in the intersections of thermodynamics and quantum gravity.

ensabah6
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
String theory requires 9 spatial dimensions, M-theory 10.

One followup to Verlinde's paper is this:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.0488

Hidden symmetries for thermodynamics and emergence of relativity

Liu Zhao
(Submitted on 2 Feb 2010)
Verlinde recently proposed an idea about the thermodynamic origin of gravity. Though this is a beautiful idea which may resolve many long standing problems in the theories of gravity, it also raises many other problems. In this article I will comment on some of the problems of Verlinde's proposal with special emphasis on the thermodynamical origin of the principle of relativity. It is found that there is a large group of hidden symmetries of thermodynamics which contains the Poincare group of the spacetime for which space is emergent. This explains the thermodynamic origin of the principle of relativity.

One claim is that Verlinde's line of argument rules out higher spatial dimensions than 3, and just as string theory uniquely singles out 10 dimensions, via anomly cancellations, so Verlinde argument picks out 3, consistent with known observation.

Does it also rprovide an alternative string theory's approach to gravity via spin-2 gravitons?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Ensebah,

I'm studying the Verlinde paper as well - quite interesting.

The questions posed by Liu Zhao are relevant, but it is very early days for this new point of view, and I'd say that it is hard at this stage to offer definite answers. Verlinde's paper http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.0785" is just a first step, mainly based on general heuristic arguments. As far as I know (I've attended a talk by him), there will be a much more rigorous treatment later.

However, the current paper does offer some hints:

section 6.2 - Implications for string theory [...] contains pointers towards the use of open strings (on the 'inside' of the screen) dual with closed strings on the other side - described as 'emergent' and macroscopic as well. However, closed strings might be a very efficient tool as a stepping stone between the microscopic and macroscopic theory.

Erik Verlinde's explanatory notes at http://staff.science.uva.nl/~erikv/page20/page18/page18.html" says under 13/03 - Essential points of the paper:
If the previous papers had made the emergence of gravity so clear, why are people still regarding string theory as the final theory of quantum gravity? Somehow, not everyone was convinced that these similarities mean something, or at least, people had no clear idea of what they mean.

Some people may think that when we develop string theory further that eventually we will learn about this. I am not sure that string theory will necessarily take us in the right direction, if we keep regarding the definition in terms of closed strings as being microscopically defined, or may be equivalent to some other formulation. And not if we keep our eyes closed for emergent phenomena. Gravitons can not be fundamental particles in a theory of emergent space time and gravity.


... which also points to a role for open strings certainly. Also I'm wondering how the degrees of freedom on the 'screen' will be implemented - it might need need multiple dimensions after all.

So, NO, it does NOT imply 3 spatial dimensions necessarily - at least not at this stage!

Cheers!

ensabah6 said:
String theory requires 9 spatial dimensions, M-theory 10.

One followup to Verlinde's paper is this:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.0488

Hidden symmetries for thermodynamics and emergence of relativity

Liu Zhao
(Submitted on 2 Feb 2010)
Verlinde recently proposed an idea about the thermodynamic origin of gravity. Though this is a beautiful idea which may resolve many long standing problems in the theories of gravity, it also raises many other problems. In this article I will comment on some of the problems of Verlinde's proposal with special emphasis on the thermodynamical origin of the principle of relativity. It is found that there is a large group of hidden symmetries of thermodynamics which contains the Poincare group of the spacetime for which space is emergent. This explains the thermodynamic origin of the principle of relativity.

One claim is that Verlinde's line of argument rules out higher spatial dimensions than 3, and just as string theory uniquely singles out 10 dimensions, via anomly cancellations, so Verlinde argument picks out 3, consistent with known observation.

Does it also rprovide an alternative string theory's approach to gravity via spin-2 gravitons?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
10K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K