Vibrating strings and string theory

math_04
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
The fundamental part of string theory is that particles are in fact made up of vibrating strings. So this means that the lowest form of unit is a vibrating string?

It goes like this

Human - made up of atoms - atoms made up of subatoms (electrons, protons and neutrons)- quarks. And then come the other smaller units until we finally arrive at a vibrating string. Am I right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
it's like how nucleons (protons etc) don't exist themselves, it's the up & down quarks that exist. in the same way the subatomic particles aren't themselves structures which are then composed of strings. instead the notion of a subatomic particle is replaced by that of a vibrating string.
sorry that was a long way of saying it.
make sense? :-]
 
chris_183 said:
make sense? :-]
To me it's not really wrong but awkward. You can not say a fruit salad is made of fruit so there is no salad. The concept of salad is relevant by itself. The concept of nucleon is relevant although it is true that nucleons are made up of quarks. The concept of molecule is relevant although it is made up of atom. I can continue for a long list :smile: At every scale there is an interesting structure which deserves its own study, and saying "it does not exist" must be taken with this grain of salt.
 
math_04 said:
The fundamental part of string theory is that particles are in fact made up of vibrating strings. So this means that the lowest form of unit is a vibrating string?

It goes like this

Human - made up of atoms - atoms made up of subatoms (electrons, protons and neutrons)- quarks. And then come the other smaller units until we finally arrive at a vibrating string. Am I right?
Yes. That is the basic idea.

The vibrations of the string manifest in the form of properties such as charge and mass.
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
33
Views
7K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top