Why strings and not zero dimensional fundumental particles?

In summary, point particle calculations for gravity were difficult to reconcile with quantum field theory, leading to the development of string theory which explains gravity and has several advantages such as including gravity in a consistent theory of quantum gravity, predicting grand unification and supersymmetry, and having no free parameters. String theory suggests that particles are actually tiny strings vibrating at different frequencies, with each particle corresponding to a different harmonic of the fundamental string. While it is difficult to test, there is evidence to support the idea that particles are made up of strings in a higher dimensional space.
  • #1
snackster17
27
0
Im aware that there has been some difficulties in zero dimensional particle calculations, which I suppose gave way to string theory which explains gravity. But i would like to have some more input on the exact problems when dealing with zero dimensional particles and why strings were added. Are there not two types of strings?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This is from Polchinski's book stating the attributes of having a Superstring Theory to having a point particle Quantum Field Theory - SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) which doesn't include gravity:

"1. Gravity. Every consistent String Theory must contain a masless spin-2 [vibrational] state, whose interactions reduce at low energy to general relativity.

2. A consistent theory of quantum gravity, at least in perturbation theory. As we have noted, this is in contrast to all known quantum field theories of gravity.

3. Grand unification. String theories lead to gauge groups large enough to include the Standard Model. Some of the simplest string theories lead to the same gauge groups an fermion representations that arise in the unification of the Standard Model.

4. Extra dimensions. String theory requires a definite number of space-time dimensions, ten [or 11 in M-Theory]. The field equations have solutions with four large flat and six small curved dimensions, with four dimensional physics that resembles the Standard Model.

5. Supersymmetry. Consistent String Theories require space-time supersymmetry, as either a manifest or a spontaneously broken symmetry

6. Chiral gauge couplings. The gauge interactions in nature are parity asymmetric (chiral). This has been a stumbling block for a number of previous unifying ideas: they required parity symmetric gauge couplings. String theory allows chiral gauge couplings.

7. No free parameters. String theory has no adjustable constants.

8. Uniqueness. Not only are there no continuous parameters, but there is no discrete freedom analogous to the choice of gauge group and representations in field theory: there is a unique string theory." - (String Theory, Volume 1: An Introduction to Bosonic String, Polchinski)

Hope this helps, Kevin
 
Last edited:
  • #3
The main difficulty with using point particles (ie. quantum field theory) to describe gravity is that it perturbatively nonrenormalizable.

There is some chance that a quantum field theory of gravity might be nonperturbatively renormalizable, in which case one could potentially use point particles to describe gravity. This line of research is called Asymptotic Safety.

Whether Asymptotic Safety can work is unknown, and the perturbative nonrenormalizability of gravity suggests that gravity is not a fundamental field, but is made up of more fundamental things. There is a theorem by Weinberg and Witten stating that if gravity is made up of more fundamental things, these things cannot be special relativistic quantum field theories in 4 dimensions.

The idea that gravity is made of strings evades the Weinberg-Witten theorem, as does the idea that gravity is made of a relativistic quantum field theory in 3D. Amazingly, there is much evidence to support the idea that some 10D string theories are relativistic quantum field theories (ie. point particles) in a lower dimension (4D)! This is called AdS/CFT or gauge/gravity duality.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Thanks for the replies. String theory seems to work well but its not accepted because its impossible to test, correct?
Do strings and point particles have any attributes such as spin and charge such as other particles? I once read that point particles appear and disappear instantly which makes me think that there formulation was more of a mathematical concept than a actual physical process.

Thats pretty crazy 10 dimensional strings effecting gravity. Can i have a link if possible? Once again thanks for the replies
 
  • #5
It's not impossible to test, just the primary ideas in superstring theory are very difficult. For instance, supersymmetry is a direct prediction of superstring theory and is testable at the LHC. Also the permeation of a graviton into a higher dimension is possible but is extremely unlikely because gravitons don't interact strongly. Yes the vibrational states of fundamental strings are what give the particles their charge, mass, spin - all of their properties.
 
  • #6
snackster17 said:
String theory seems to work well but its not accepted because its impossible to test, correct?
It's not just that string theory makes predictions, but those predictions can't be tested; the theory is not yet able to make predictions at all.
 
  • #8
Despite all of this particles still do exist though in string theory correct? the strings are what gives them there properties though.
 
  • #9
The strings are the particles, for instance if you had a string that was one centimeter in circumference, up close it would appear to be topologically the same as a circle. Now if you move backward by 100 meters the string is topologically the same as the point. Essentially strings are so small that the current energies or distances we can see with the LHC isn't small enough to distinguish them from points.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
i think i see it now. all of the particles of the standard models are just part of the string, you can't see the rest.
 
  • #11
Every particle is a different harmonic of a fundamental string, there is a fundamental frequency and the more harmonic partials you have the more energy it has hence more mass, other properties are determined similarly. Look at this: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/resonance.html.
 

Related to Why strings and not zero dimensional fundumental particles?

1. What is the concept behind strings as fundamental particles?

The concept of strings as fundamental particles comes from the theory of string theory, which suggests that instead of point-like particles, all fundamental particles are actually tiny, vibrating strings. These strings are incredibly small, with a length of about 10^-33 centimeters, and are thought to be the building blocks of the universe.

2. Why are strings considered to be more fundamental than zero dimensional particles?

Strings are considered to be more fundamental than zero dimensional particles because they offer a way to unify all of the fundamental forces of the universe, including gravity, electromagnetic, strong, and weak forces. Zero dimensional particles do not have this ability, and therefore cannot fully explain the interactions between these forces.

3. How do strings differ from traditional particles?

Strings differ from traditional particles in several ways. Firstly, they have a length, whereas point-like particles do not. Additionally, strings vibrate at different frequencies, which determines their properties such as mass and charge. Traditional particles do not have this feature. Lastly, strings are thought to exist in more than the traditional three dimensions of space, which allows for more complex interactions.

4. What evidence supports the existence of strings?

Currently, there is no direct evidence for the existence of strings. However, many scientists believe in the theory of string theory because it offers a way to reconcile quantum mechanics and general relativity, which are two of the most successful theories in physics. String theory also provides a possible explanation for the existence of dark matter and dark energy, which are still mysteries in the scientific community.

5. Are there any potential challenges to the concept of strings as fundamental particles?

Yes, there are several potential challenges to the concept of strings as fundamental particles. One major challenge is the lack of direct experimental evidence for strings. Additionally, string theory requires extra dimensions, which have not been observed. There are also multiple versions of string theory, making it difficult to determine which version, if any, accurately describes our universe.

Similar threads

  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
14
Views
3K
Back
Top