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

Two Landscape Questions

  1. Sep 23, 2004 #1
    Just two questions that come to mind when thinking about the string landscape proposed by Susskind and others:

    1. When talking about the string landscape, do people refer to the supersymmetric string vacua or the non-supersymmetric string vacua? Is it only the supersymmetric string vacua whose number is estimated to be 10^100?

    2. Are all the string vacua different solutions to one theory (M-theory for example) or do they all represent different theories just related by dualities and no underlying grand theory?

    Thanks to anyone who is willing to answer any of these points.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 23, 2004 #2

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    this may help for starters:

    Mike Douglas just posted this:
    Basic results in Vacuum Statistics
    http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0409207

    Peter Woit's comment on Douglas paper appeared shortly afterwards:
    http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/blog/archives/000082.html

    Douglas is AFAIK the world's chief authority on the statistics of string vacua
    and he talks about both SUSY and non-SUSY in his paper.

    Peter Woit's comment is helpful because he boils down to a few words the overall conclusion that he gets from Douglas paper, which is a survey and kind of a "status report" on the string vacua business. However you have to check Woit's comment against the original and not automatically take it at face value.
     
  4. Sep 23, 2004 #3
    Interesting some of the comments made by Douglas, but is he then saying that string theory now DOESN'T predict supersymmetry? I thought one of the basic pillars on which this theory was constructed was supersymmetry! I'm sorry if it sounds stupid, but I don't really understand all these papers yet (I've just graduated from high school) and was wondering what it would mean for the finding of superpartners at the LHC?
     
  5. Sep 23, 2004 #4

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    apparently theorists have been waffling about what to expect.
    It is really a test of theory.
    A theory should make unequivocal predictions so that the experiment can either agree or disagree with theory. this one of the main reasons you bother doing experiments

    but if theorists will not sign off on a prediction before the experiment is run, then the chance to test something is lost.

    I can't tell for sure if Douglas is betting on SUSY or no-SUSY at LHC energies. If we follow Woit's reading of Douglas paper then Douglas (a prominent string theorist) is betting on no-SUSY.

    If you find this unsatisfactory all I can do is sympathise.
    I offer the Douglas link only because it is the most recent authoritative string word on this that I know of (not because it will set anyone's mind at rest)
     
  6. Sep 23, 2004 #5

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe some people are looking toward getting much that is in the superstring theories to be represented in bosonic (non-supersymmetric) string theory, via new discoveries about the supporting math. Sorry, I don't have any links for this. It's just an impression I got from reading things here and there.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Two Landscape Questions
  1. The Landscape? (Replies: 5)

  2. Nice Landscape Paper (Replies: 3)

Loading...