 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| English__---> | Espanol____/ | Deutsch____/ | Francais____/ | Italiano____/ | Portuguese |
String Theory, Quantum Mechanics, and theoretical physics today
Homepage .
Albert Einstein .
Isaac Newton .
Rene Descartes .
William Gilbert ........
Blackbox Einstein ........
General Image Theory
|
Below is a good article on the development of String Theory and on the general state of theoretical physics today. It is one general and non-technical view, and there are of course other views around, but it is overall reasonable. Following the article is a consideration of Quantum Mechanics, Uncertainty physics and Duality. | |||
"We Don't Know What We Are Talking About" - Nobel Laureate David Gross.
Article by Michael Strauss 2006.
Science has reached an enormous impasse. From biology to
physics, astronomy to genetics, the scientific community is
reaching the limits of understanding which often presage a
complete rethinking of long-accepted theories. So
characteristic of this new apex of modern arrogance is the
inability to comprehend the obvious in physics: That we don't
know what we are talking about.
Last December ('05), physicists held the 23rd Solvay Conference
in Brussels, Belgium. Amongst the many topics covered in the
conference was the subject matter 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 they were
back then."
Coming from a scientist with establishment credentials this is
a damning statement about the state of current theoretical
models and 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
which are 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 Leonhard 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 Nambu, 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 modeling
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 attached to it many implications
that were in direct violation of empirical analyses. 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
worker of the miraculous salvation of the sweet dreams of
modern physicists was known as the graviton. 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 was born what
is now called 'bosonic string theory' which is the 'in vogue'
version of this theory. Having both open and closed strings as
well as many new important problems which gave rise to
unforeseen instabilities.
These problematical instabilities leading to many new
difficulties which render the previous thinking as confused as
we were when we started this discussion. Of course this all
started from undetectable gravitons which arise from other
theories equally untenable and inexplicable and so on. Thus was
born string theory which was hoped would provide a complete
picture of the basic fundamental principles of the universe.
Scientists had believed that once the shortcomings of particle
physics had been left behind by the adoption of the exotic
string theory, that 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 to an
eventual perfecting of our understanding of it. Or perhaps 'We
don't know what we are talking about.'
About The Author: Michael Strauss is an engineer who has an
interest in this subject matter. To contact the author visit:
RelativityCollapse.com or RelativityCollapse.net.
Quantum physics and Quantum Mechanics.
Quantum physics started basically as the application of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and probability to particle physics.
More clearly in its early day Quantum Physics was basically a form of Descartes mechanical physics, but has since become a less direct form of push physics as
modern Quantum Mechanics which has fully adopted the scary science Duality Principle and has now mostly become a wave theory.
Duality, claiming that everything is a wave and is not a wave, is so plainly self-contradicting that it clearly disproves itself. And that is without the additional modern requirement of waves that they are also now claimed to need no medium to wave.
Support for these scary science ideas has given us an Emperors Clothes physics where none wants to risk their reputation by pointing out that these things are clearly ridiculous. The peer mob rules and maintains modern scary physics. Even Einstein bought scary duality when
it was of no real use to his otherwise problematic relativity theory.
Like both Relativity theory and String theory, Quantum Mechanics is basically another form of Descartes mechanical push physics and all three of them have problems that still await satisfactory scientific solutions.
They require that A forces an effect in B, unlike Gilbert-Newton attraction theory, but have no real force/push mechanism - and especially so modern quantum mechanics which allows multiple things to occupy the same space
and so does not even have contact for a push or force mechanism. Some see duality as having increased the power of quantum physics, but some see it as having seriously disabled quantum physics.
Quantum Mechanics incorporates the Uncertainty Principle at least in relation to human observers. But the Uncertainty Principle applying to ANY observer can perhaps only fully apply to a physics like William Gilbert's
where all physical objects are observers in that they respond to gravity etcetera signals from other physical objects - ie. to a non-mechanical Gilbert Quantum Signal Physics ?
The same should also apply for Relativity theory for ANY observer as against Einstein limiting it just for human observers ?
Of course these actual physics theories have developed somewhat different mathematics, but that does not perhaps preclude some of them being developed to have similar mathematics.
And since nobody can really prove that one object can actually touch and actually push another object, mechanical physics theories are perhaps not the only physics theories possible ?
Or you may be interested in How to kiss, how to date, online love and more.
otherwise, if you have any view or suggestion on the content of this site, please contact :- New Science Theory
Vincent Wilmot 166 Freeman Street Grimsby Lincolnshire DN32 7AT.
You are welcome to link to any page on this site, eg http://www.new-science-theory.com/string-theory.html
© new-science-theory.com, 2008. - taking care with your privacy, see Privacy Policy or About Us or Sitemap.