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

Why did scientist just assume?

  1. May 17, 2004 #1
    How come scientist assummed that fundamental particles were point particles, that space was flat, that molecules were two-dimensional, and so on? If modern string theroy assumes string and branes have no thickness, why does it assume so? Doesn't it make more sence for particles to have volume, for molecules to be 3D like everything else around us, etc.?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 17, 2004 #2

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Every now and then someone has tried to build a theory with particles that are little spheres. They quickly found that they couldn't make those theories work, and abandoned them. This was part of the cachet of string physics; it concerned elementary things that were extended, but didn't have the problems of solid particles.
     
  4. May 20, 2004 #3

    Stingray

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    What sorts of problems did they run into?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?