Is 11-Dimensional Spacetime a Valid Explanation of the Universe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter m_brain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chirality
m_brain
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?

[Moderator's note: While it's true that M-theory on smooth spaces gives
left-right symmetric physics, M-theory compactified on singular spaces
generically leads to asymmetric, chiral theories. This is why M-theory
on singular G_2 manifolds offers realistic backgrounds that may match
reality. Another way how chiral, asymmetric theories can occur from
M-theory is in the context of M-theory on two-torus which is not a
9-dimensional symmetric theory but a 10-dimensional asymmetric one. LM]

--
m_brain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
m_brain's Profile: https://www.physicsforums.com/forums/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=24458
View this thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=66834
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
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:
What are some of the better reasons?

Crosson Wrote:

> 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).[/color]--
m_brain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
m_brain's Profile: https://www.physicsforums.com/forums/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=24458
View this thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=66834
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'LQG Legend Writes Paper Claiming GR Explains Dark Matter Phenomena'
A new group of investigators are attempting something similar to Deur's work, which seeks to explain dark matter phenomena with general relativity corrections to Newtonian gravity is systems like galaxies. Deur's most similar publication to this one along these lines was: One thing that makes this new paper notable is that the corresponding author is Giorgio Immirzi, the person after whom the somewhat mysterious Immirzi parameter of Loop Quantum Gravity is named. I will be reviewing the...
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...

Similar threads

Back
Top