As I understand it Strings are preferred as a discription of particles because the various vibrational modes can be (or is hoped to be) correlated to the various masses and charges, etc. But I am beginning to wonder if strings are a natural choice to describe particles. Why not higher dimensional objects like surfaces? These can have vibrational modes as well, right? I can certainly visualize how a 3D field can converge on a 2D object; it just stops there. But I'm not sure how a 3D field would converge on a 1D object. It would seem as though one of the dimensions of 3D would have to shrink to zero to fit on a string. Wouldn't that give the same troubles as 3D converging to a point? I would think that if something (particle) actually "exists" inside at least 3D, then you'd have to bump into it no matter which way you approach it. If it exists for all observers, then there can be no possible observer that could not preceive it. But with a 1D string, with no width, it cannot be precieved when viewed on its side. So I think this means that particle must have a 2D surface. Any thoughts? Thanks.