Last December (’05), physicists held the 23rd Solvay Conference in Brussels, Belgium. Amongst the many topics covered in the conference was the subject of string theory. This theory combines the apparently irreconcilable domains of quantum physics and relativity. David Gross, a Nobel Laureate, made some startling statements about the state of physics, including: "We don’t know what we are talking about" whilst referring to string theory, as well as "The state of physics today is like it was when we were mystified by radioactivity."
The Nobel Laureate is a heavyweight in this field, having earned a prize for work on the strong nuclear force, and he indicated that what is happening today is very similar to what happened at the 1911 Solvay meeting. Back then, radioactivity had recently been discovered, and mass energy conservation was under assault because of its discovery. Quantum theory would be needed to solve these problems. Gross further commented that in 1911, "They were missing something absolutely fundamental," as well as "we are missing perhaps something as profound as what they were back then."
Coming from a scientist with establishment credentials, this is a damning statement about the state of current theoretical models, most notably string theory. This theoretical model is a means by which physicists replace the more commonly known particles of particle physics with one-dimensional objects known as strings. These bizarre objects were first detected in 1968 through the insight and work of Gabriele Veneziano, who was trying to comprehend the strong nuclear force.
Whilst meditating on the strong nuclear force, Veneziano detected a similarity between the Euler Beta Function, named for the famed mathematician Leonard Euler, and the strong force. Applying the aforementioned Beta Function to the strong force, he was able to validate a direct correlation between the two. Interestingly enough, no one knew why Euler’s Beta worked so well in mapping the strong nuclear force data. A proposed solution to this dilemma would follow a few years later.
Almost two years later (1970), the scientists Nam Bu, Nielsen, and Susskind provided a mathematical description which described the physical phenomena of why Euler’s Beta served as a graphical outline for the strong nuclear force. By modelling the strong nuclear forces as one-dimensional strings, they were able to show why it all seemed to work so well. However, several troubling inconsistencies were immediately seen on the horizon. The new theory had many implications that were in direct violation of empirical analysis. In other words, routine experimentation did not back up the new theory.
Needless to say, physicists' romantic fascination with string theory ended almost as fast as it had begun, only to be resuscitated a few years later by another "discovery." The graviton was the worker of the miraculous salvation of modern physicists' sweet dreams.This elementary particle allegedly communicates gravitational forces throughout the universe.
The graviton is, of course, a "hypothetical" particle that appears in what are known as quantum gravity systems. Unfortunately, the graviton has never ever been detected; it is, as previously indicated, a "mythical" particle that fills the mind of the theorist with dreams of golden Nobel Prizes and perhaps his or her name on the periodic table of elements.
But back to the historical record. In 1974, the scientists Schwarz, Scherk, and Yoneya reexamined strings so that the textures or patterns of strings and their associated vibrational properties were connected to the aforementioned "graviton." As a result of these investigations, what is now known as "bosonic string theory," the "in vogue" version of this theory, was born.Having both open and closed strings poses many new and important problems, which give rise to unforeseen instabilities.
These problematical instabilities lead to many new difficulties which render the previous thinking as confused as when we started this discussion. Of course, this all started from undetectable gravitons, which arise from other theories equally untenable and inexplicable. So on. Thus was born string theory, which it was hoped would provide a complete picture of the basic fundamental principles of the universe.
Scientists believed that once the shortcomings of particle physics had been left behind by the adoption of the exotic string theory, a grand unified theory of everything would be an easily ascertainable goal. However, what they could not anticipate is that the theory that they hoped would produce a theory of everything would leave them more confused and frustrated than they were before they departed from particle physics.
The end result of string theory is that we know less and less and are becoming more and more confused. Of course, the argument could be made that further investigations will yield more relevant data whereby we will tweak the model and eventually perfect our understanding of it. Or perhaps, "We don’t know what we are talking about."
You must be logged in to post a comment.