What Powers the Vibration of Strings in a Unified Theory of Light and Energy?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of strings in theoretical physics, particularly in relation to their vibrations, energy, and implications for a unified theory of light and energy. Participants explore concepts from special relativity, quantum mechanics, and string theory, raising questions about the fundamental properties of strings and their interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions what provides the energy for strings to vibrate, suggesting that this is a critical aspect of understanding their nature.
  • Another participant challenges the interpretation of energy in the context of special relativity, arguing that a particle traveling at the speed of light can have energy but no mass, and that classical concepts of energy do not apply to quantum objects like strings.
  • There is a discussion about the concept of vacuum states and how strings might gain or lose energy through interactions governed by quantum field theory.
  • A participant raises a question about virtual particles and vacuum fluctuations, inquiring if matter can be created from "nothing."
  • Another participant speculates on the visibility of string energy, questioning if it could be detected by instruments such as cameras.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the nature of strings, suggesting that while they are described as vibrational modes of energy, their fundamental essence remains unknown.
  • A claim is made that strings can obtain mass if vibrating at the speed of light, with a specific formula provided, though this is later corrected to account for vibrations in multiple dimensions.
  • A correction is made regarding the dimensionality of string vibrations, indicating that mass should be calculated as a sum across all frequencies of vibration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of strings, energy, and mass, with no consensus reached on the fundamental questions posed. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing interpretations and hypotheses presented.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the reliance on various interpretations of energy in quantum mechanics and special relativity, as well as the ambiguity surrounding the definitions of strings and their properties.

flotsam
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
In special relativity we say that a particle traveling at the speed of light uses all its energy to do so and thus has no energy for anything else. ie (movement through time) This begs the question; what is giving the string the energy to vibrate? Or does its maximum vibration equate the speed of light? If we could find a unified theory that proves the existence of strings would these questions be valid? I may be stupid, but one can always learn.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In special relativity we say that a particle traveling at the speed of light uses all its energy to do so
Where did you hear this? A particle traveling at c can have any energy, but can have no mass. (E=pc)

ie (movement through time)
I think that this is a bad interpretation of the physics involved. One can not assign a co-moving reference frame to a particle at c, as c must always be c from every frame. Hence, no proper time can be defined (proper time is time as seen from a certain reference frame). This is not due to lack of energy.

This begs the question; what is giving the string the energy to vibrate?
Strings are quantum objects, and as such classical physical concepts of energy don't apply to them. Energy becomes an operator (as does anything we can observe*), which is applied to a quantum state. It's corresponding so-called eigenvalues are what we measure as energy, which are quantisized. This means that they can only appear as products with integers. (e.g, you could have an energy of 123.3 Mev and 154.13 MeV but not anything in between). An interesting consequence of this is that a quantum system has a minimum non-zero energy. So strings have some 'vacuum state'. (EDIT: Not to be confused with the ground state, which is the minimum energy in typical quantum mechanics). They can also gain and lose energy through various interactions. These interactions are governed by the laws of quantum field theory.

*A very important concept in quantum physics :smile:

Or does its maximum vibration equate the speed of light?
I don't think I understand the question. Vibration is not a physical quantity, by itself. We could define frequency, for instance. But not compare it to speed. If your question really means "does the speed of light 'barrier' apply to strings", then the answer is yes.
 
Last edited:
I had a question about vritual paticles or vacuum fluctuation.
if this means that matter ( paticle and anti-particle pairs) is created from " nothing" ?
 
Is it possible that string energy could ever be visible. Not by the naked eye, but by a camera
 
This begs the question; what is giving the string the energy to vibrate?

or... why is a string composed of energy?

Nobody knows...nobody knows what a string is...we just say it's vibrational modes of energy. Nobody knows what "mass" nor gravity nor "time" is either...the best we can do is describe some of their observed behaviors and hopefully make some testable predictions.
 
Have I misunderstood something?

A string is a line along which a particle can vibrate. No particle has rest mass, but the string as a whole can obtain mass if the particle is vibrating at the speed of light, given by hf/c^2 where h=planck length, f=frequency, c=speed of light. The string for a photon does not have mass, therefore vibrations on the photon string are slower than light.
 
Correction: Strings vibrate in more than one dimension, therefore the mass should be the sum of hf/c^2 for all frequencies f for vibration in each dimension.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K