What Could Einstein Have Thought About String Theory?

[alvarogz]

Dears,

What do you think, hypothetically, Einstein should think about String Theory?. Obviously, if he was here to study it.

 

[phinds]

Dears,

What do you think, hypothetically, Einstein should think about String Theory?. Obviously, if he was here to study it.

Just out of curiosuity, what possible difference do you think it can it make to anything what people who are not Einstein think that he MIGHT have thought about string theory? I just always find this kind of meaningless hypothetical SUCH a waste of time and I wonder what is your motivation in asking it?

 

[alvarogz]

Just out of curiosuity, what possible difference do you think it can it make to anything what people who are not Einstein think that he MIGHT have thought about string theory? I just always find this kind of meaningless hypothetical SUCH a waste of time and I wonder what is your motivation in asking it?

I think there's a lot of difference, taking in account the dissagreement of AE with QM, which has been validated over the time since his death.
I would like to know if he would be disagreed with this theory, or not, based in current research of ST.
Don't waste your time replying if you don't want to do this mental exercise.
Thank you.

 

[Vagn]

Have you read this article from the American Physical Society?

 

[phinds]

I think there's a lot of difference ...

First, let me emphasize that I am not trying to give you a hard time here. I am genuinely interested in why it is that I do not understand the reasons behind such questions. Yours is certainly not the only one. They crop up here fairly often and that is why they interest me. The quote fragment above gives no answer whatsoever to my question. I know that you think it makes some kind of difference to something, else you would not have asked the question. I just can't figure out WHAT it would make a difference to. As far as I can tell, it will have no impact on anything and since any answer you get will be pure conjecture, I don't see how it will promote your own knowledge. So clearly I'm missing something in your motivation for asking the question and I'm asking if you can help me understand what that is.

Don't waste your time replying if you don't want to do this mental exercise.
Thank you.

You misunderstand. I AM doing a mental exercise in that I, like you, am attempting to find the answer to a question that interests me. The answer to my question is why does your question interest you.

 

[alvarogz]

First, let me emphasize that I am not trying to give you a hard time here. I am genuinely interested in why it is that I do not understand the reasons behind such questions. Yours is certainly not the only one. They crop up here fairly often and that is why they interest me. The quote fragment above gives no answer whatsoever to my question. I know that you think it makes some kind of difference to something, else you would not have asked the question. I just can't figure out WHAT it would make a difference to. As far as I can tell, it will have no impact on anything and since any answer you get will be pure conjecture, I don't see how it will promote your own knowledge. So clearly I'm missing something in your motivation for asking the question and I'm asking if you can help me understand what that is.

You misunderstand. I AM doing a mental exercise in that I, like you, am attempting to find the answer to a question that interests me. The answer to my question is why does your question interest you.

Ok. Let's put this in perspective.
Einstein was the precursor of GR and he wasn't agreed with QM. String Theory basically relies on both, QM and GR.
What would he think about this theory, that is mathematically beautiful, but experimentally impossible to test?
What would he think about those 10 or 11 dimensions?.
I'm not seeking any impact or make any difference. I'm not persuing something in concrete. I just want to read your conjectures.
You can replace the subject if you want. I'm using Einstein example because of his critical position on QM.
I hope I was clear enough

 

[phinds]

Ok. Let's put this in perspective.
Einstein was the precursor of GR and he wasn't agreed with QM. String Theory basically relies on both, QM and GR.
What would he think about this theory, that is mathematically beautiful, but experimentally impossible to test?
What would he think about those 10 or 11 dimensions?.
I'm not seeking any impact or make any difference. I'm not persuing something in concrete. I just want to read your conjectures.
You can replace the subject if you want. I'm using Einstein example because of his critical position on QM.
I hope I was clear enough

Thanks for that attempt to answer my question. I still don't get it, but don't worry about it. Guess it's just me.

In case I'm not clear by the way, I DO get what you are asking I just don't get what you hope to gain by an answer.

 

[mathman]

Einstein spent much of his time in the latter part of his career trying to unify gravity and electromagnetism (the nuclear forces hadn't been discovered yet). I believe he would look favorably on any attempt to unify all forces.

 

[Nugatory]

Ok. Let's put this in perspective.
Einstein was the precursor of GR and he wasn't agreed with QM. String Theory basically relies on both, QM and GR.
What would he think about this theory, that is mathematically beautiful, but experimentally impossible to test?
What would he think about those 10 or 11 dimensions?.

Who knows? There were at least two major advances in the interpretation of quantum mechanics between Einstein's death and the birth of string theory. To even speculate creatively and productively on this topic we'd first need to successfully speculate about how Einstein would have reacted to the Bell/Aspect experiments and then the discovery of decoherence.

That's getting to be random enough to close the thread. We can reopen it for genuine new insights (as opposed to speculation) and links to valuable references along the lines of the one that vagn posted.