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

Spacetime in subatomic level

  1. Oct 10, 2008 #1
    hey boys i was watching a video the other day about string theory and the guy presenting said that space and time dont function properly at the subatomic level.. for instance there is not left and right , no up and down, no forward and backward, no before and after , not here and there..

    is this correct?

    thanks in advance :D
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 10, 2008 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Consider that string theory and so on are up this point entirely speculative theories, or conceptual frames to develop theories, which don't have yet any connection with observable reality - but could one day turn out to make correct predictions - or could turn out to be entirely misguided.
    What is true is that we know that our currently experimentally validated theories are prone to run into conflict at scales which are for the moment still beyond experimental access. So most probably "something will have to give in". And it is the theorist's job to think of ways in which it could give in, and string theory is one of these possibilities.

    "subatomic" on this level is really really much smaller than what is usually called "subatomic".
    Up to the Tevatron energies, in any case, space and time still behave as Einstein had foreseen more than 100 years ago. Whether the LHC will start hinting at deviations is to be seen.
  4. Oct 10, 2008 #3


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    As I've asked in this thread


    where did you hear something like that? What "video" is this?

    If this is true, then the CPT symmetry that is so fundamental, and the "broken symmetry" in elementary particles that just got awarded with this year's Nobel Prize would be completely meaningless.

  5. Oct 10, 2008 #4
    its the first video in the second column
    did i get it right?
    is that what he means? :S

    vanesch, i think you mean that it hasnt been proofed yet?

    i am a newbie as you see :D

    edt: i am only 14 simple words please :S
  6. Oct 11, 2008 #5
    hey can someone reply if its really true?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook