Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is it possible that strings are higher dimensional branes?

  1. Jul 16, 2015 #1

    Nav

    User Avatar

    Are strings really just one dimensional? Is it possible that strings are 3 dimensional? Or even 10 dimensional?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 16, 2015 #2

    andrewkirk

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    If they had more than one dimension, they would not be called strings.

    There is something called 'brane theory' (brane is short for membrane) that has big membranes wobbling around in a many-dimensional manifold, with exciting things happening when they touch. In common language, a membrane is two-dimensional. So I imagine Branes have two dimensions, although it could be 'two or more'.
     
  4. Jul 16, 2015 #3

    Nav

    User Avatar

    but what if they are like a string like a string on a guitar which has 3 dimensions
     
  5. Jul 16, 2015 #4
    Strings as is are really one dimensional. By definition. The same as point particles being zero dimensional (point particles ##\neq## atoms/nuclei although we often approximate those as points) by definition
    In string theory there are several objects of higher dimensions. The ones you encounter quite soon in modern treatments are D-branes.
    And a first idea about why they exist (that I've encountered so far) have to do with 'fixing' the endpoints of the string.
     
  6. Jul 16, 2015 #5

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    A "string" on a guitar is not a string in that sense, BECAUSE it is 3D. It is a tube with length, breath, and height, not a string
     
  7. Jul 16, 2015 #6

    Nav

    User Avatar

    Is it possible that strings are higher dimensional branes but are just more compacted to seem like they are one dimensional when in reality they are more?
     
  8. Jul 16, 2015 #7
    It's the other way around, branes are like higher dimensional strings.
     
  9. Jul 16, 2015 #8
    Or even 24 dimensional, that works too.
    Have to remember that string theory is not as yet supported by evidence, though a lot of people like the idea.
     
  10. Jul 16, 2015 #9

    fzero

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    There are models where higher-dimensional membranes can wrap a compact surface to give a string-like object in the noncompact dimensions. When the wrapped object is a so-called D-brane, these are sometimes called D-strings to distinguish them from the fundamental string. Also, in one version of M-theory, starting from 11D spacetime, a membrane (two-dimensional object) is wrapped on a circle to form the fundamental string of the so-called IIA string theory in 10D spacetime. There is some discussion at a very basic level at http://superstringtheory.com/basics/basic7.html
     
  11. Jul 16, 2015 #10
    I think you may be thinking of 26-D bosonic string theory, it is not the strings that are 26-D that is the space they live in.
     
  12. Jul 17, 2015 #11

    haushofer

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    You end up with branes, and as far as I know the action of such a brane is not renormalizable, and we don't know how to write a Polyakov-like action like we know for strings. I'm also not sure how you could quantize such an action.
     
  13. Jul 21, 2015 #12

    samalkhaiat

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    The Polyakov action of a p-brane (in D-dimensional spacetime) is just the (p+1)-dimensional Sigma model: [tex]S[X] \sim \int d^{p+1} \sigma \ \sqrt{-\gamma} \ \gamma^{ij}(\sigma) \ \partial_{i}X^{\mu}(\sigma) \ \partial_{j}X^{\nu}(\sigma) \ g_{\mu \nu}(X) ,[/tex] where [itex]\sigma = (\sigma^{0} , \sigma^{1} , \cdots , \sigma^{p})[/itex] are the world-volume coordinates and [itex]X^{\mu}, \ \mu = 0, 1, \cdots , D-1[/itex] are the spacetime coordinates of the brane: mapping of the (p+1)-dimensional parameter space of the p-brane into spacetime.
    Notice that for [itex]p = 0[/itex], the above action becomes that of a point particle, i.e. 0-brane is point particle. For [itex]p=1[/itex], you get the Polyakov action for string, i.e. 1-brane is string, and 2-brane is a membrane, etc.
    When a p-dimensional object moves in spacetime, it sweeps out a (p+1)-dimensional tube. This fact can be used to write a Polyakov-type action for any value of p.

    Sam
     
  14. Oct 30, 2015 #13
    I think if lower dimensional object can exist in higher dimensional space, then yes there is no reason (to me) that something can exists and have length but no height or width. Which any number of 1d objects and exist in a 2d space. So is a brane a 2d object composed of 1d strings? Our Universe is a 3d object in 4d space? Could those universes be separated by the 4th dimension?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Is it possible that strings are higher dimensional branes?
Loading...