Pam asked about the future of strings?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sol2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Future Strings
sol2
Messages
908
Reaction score
2
Pam Crouch said:
I'm curious; assuming string theory can be reconciled with existing physics
theories, what could cause it to be discarded in the future?

In other words, how could string theory be disproven (if it's not to be
representative of reality)?

--Pam

String theory needs the graviton.

But guess what. They would have to freely admit to gravity waves having not be proven, yet theorectially they have moved past this with the gravitons introduction. It would seem premature,:) yet this is the way of it that the mathematics have gone down this route, and boldly gone, where no one else has gone? Does not mean it is real, its just that with what Einstein has given us we have to agree on some assumptions being made and act accordingly.

LISA and LIGO have been introduced to the measurement issue. If these fail to record simuatneous events hapening within the cosmo, through all its detectors, guess what?

Yep it can prove really unsettling to a lot of people. But from Webber, the road had to be proven, so the quest is still on. LIsa be space mounted, would be used in accordance with LIGO detectors(earth based) for validation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Hi Pam,

That's a great question. It's true that string theory is currently one of the leading contenders for a theory that can reconcile quantum mechanics and general relativity. However, as with any scientific theory, it is always subject to change and potential falsification.

One possible way for string theory to be disproven is if experimental evidence were to contradict its predictions. For example, if the Large Hadron Collider were to find no evidence of supersymmetric particles, which are a key prediction of string theory, then that would be a major blow to the theory.

Another way that string theory could be discarded in the future is if a better, more comprehensive theory were to come along that can explain all the same phenomena as string theory, but with simpler and more elegant mathematics. This is a common way for scientific theories to be replaced - for example, Newtonian mechanics was replaced by Einstein's theory of general relativity because it provided a more complete and accurate understanding of gravity.

Ultimately, the future of string theory is uncertain and it will continue to be tested and refined through experiments and theoretical developments. The important thing is to keep an open mind and be willing to adapt our understanding of the universe based on new evidence and discoveries.
 
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...
I'm trying to understand the relationship between the Higgs mechanism and the concept of inertia. The Higgs field gives fundamental particles their rest mass, but it doesn't seem to directly explain why a massive object resists acceleration (inertia). My question is: How does the Standard Model account for inertia? Is it simply taken as a given property of mass, or is there a deeper connection to the vacuum structure? Furthermore, how does the Higgs mechanism relate to broader concepts like...
Back
Top