Impossibilities of the superstring theory

In summary, the conversation discusses the flaws and contradictions of the superstring theory, which aims to unify all quantum mechanics. It proposes that everything is made of one-dimensional strings in a ten-dimensional universe, but the theory is flawed by the contradiction of the big bang and the existence of six curled-up dimensions. The speaker also mentions the problems with supersymmetry and the added dimensions in the theory, and proposes a modification that starts with two separate space-times and avoids the singularity problem.
  • #1
Einstiensqd
So far in this past century, the theory of the superstring has held most promising oppertunities for unifying all quantum mechanics. However I noticed some very imediate flaws that eliminate the purpose of the theory. The theory is that everything is made of one-dimensional strings, whose vibrations give rise to fundamental particles. This takes place in a ten-dimensional universe requiring nine dimensions of space and one dimension of time. The described universe began with a big bang. The big bang is a theory describing for some reason a singularity where six of ten dimensions curled up, ending one universe, but allowing four dimensions to unroll, beginning our universe, with three dimensions of space and one dimension of space. Now to disprove a ten-dimensional universe, let's begin with this.
The big bang theory is a contradiction of itself. If the six dimensions of an old universe curled up from a big crunch, then for that universe to have existed to have a big crunch, it needed to have a dimension of time. When our universe unravelled, it had to have three dimensions of space, and one dimension af time. It would be impossible to have that dimension of time if it belonged to the old universe, thus when our three dimensions unravelled, separated from time, they would ceace to exist in he time-space continuum.
Also, if there was a big bang and fundamental particles were made from superstrings, because of the mass and energy of the expanding universe, in accordance with Einsteins theory of general relativity, the universe would have instantly collapsed into a one dimensional cylinder with a diameter equal to that of the length of the superstring, this supercylinder relentlessly expanding upwards.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The 6 curled dimensions can be curled into strange shapes called Calabi-Yau shapes. These shapes then determine the number of particle families and other properties. The entire theory is required to explain in mathematical terms the forces that govern our universe(or seem to at least).
The fact that 6 dimensions are curled up need not be taken literally.
 
  • #3
Originally posted by Einstiensqd
So far in this past century, the theory of the superstring has held most promising oppertunities for unifying all quantum mechanics. However I noticed some very imediate flaws that eliminate the purpose of the theory. The theory is that everything is made of one-dimensional strings, whose vibrations give rise to fundamental particles. This takes place in a ten-dimensional universe requiring nine dimensions of space and one dimension of time. The described universe began with a big bang. The big bang is a theory describing for some reason a singularity where six of ten dimensions curled up, ending one universe, but allowing four dimensions to unroll, beginning our universe, with three dimensions of space and one dimension of space. Now to disprove a ten-dimensional universe, let's begin with this.
The big bang theory is a contradiction of itself. If the six dimensions of an old universe curled up from a big crunch, then for that universe to have existed to have a big crunch, it needed to have a dimension of time. When our universe unravelled, it had to have three dimensions of space, and one dimension af time. It would be impossible to have that dimension of time if it belonged to the old universe, thus when our three dimensions unravelled, separated from time, they would ceace to exist in he time-space continuum.
Also, if there was a big bang and fundamental particles were made from superstrings, because of the mass and energy of the expanding universe, in accordance with Einsteins theory of general relativity, the universe would have instantly collapsed into a one dimensional cylinder with a diameter equal to that of the length of the superstring, this supercylinder relentlessly expanding upwards.

This may help clear things up a bit.

A possible modification to M Theory.

This modification differs from the standard theory in that the universe starts with two separate space-times. One is a 2D manifold that meets the requirement for a Near-Kerr solution to Blackhole Geometrodynamics in 2D format. The other is a 6D Higgs type space-time of a size greater than 10^50th power in light years. The first starts smaller than the Plank scale by an equal amount.

But even in spite of String Theory solving a lot of problems(ie. Entrophy of Blackholes) it still in its current form commonly called M-Theory for Membrane or Magic has many problems of its own.

String Theory from it's start has always been based upon another theory called SuperSymetry. With SUSY type theories all matter particles have their counter-part in force carriers. The idea being that Fermions can transform into Bosons and back. The problem is that nature,as we know it, has no observational evidence for the Supersymetry partiners.

Another problem to some people is the added extra dimensions. These again have no direct observational evidence in nature.

The Theory that is proposed here is a modification to M-Theory that explains the problem of SUSY and those hidden dimensions. For the most part it is basic M-Theory. But its starting point is different.

Here's some basic ground work.

The original field theories of the Standard Model pictured particles as points in space-time. There are two standard field theory models, which while giving accurate data on the particles, has several problems inherent within.

The first of these is Quantum Chromodynamics. This is the theory that describes the Strong Force carrier.

The second is Quantum Electrodynamics. This deals with the combined electromagnetic and weak forces.

The problem with these theories is that not only have the two never been acurately combined, they both exclude General Relativity from their fold. Thus, at best, they are incomplete.
String Theory replaces the point particle with something that does not inscribe a point and as such avoids the singularity problem that normally generates infinities as an answer.

Also, instead of a long list of different particles one has different particles as manifestations of the same basic string vibrating in different modes.

String Theory is also the only theory where General Relativity not only can be combined with it. In fact, the basic fundamental state of the String is the Spin-2 carrier of gravity, the Graviton.
 
  • #4
The first of these is Quantum Chromodynamics. This is the theory that describes the Strong Force carrier.

What is the "Strong Force"?
 
  • #5
The force that holds atomic nuclei together even though protons will repel each other via the electromagnetic force.
 
  • #6
so its only for photons?
 
  • #7
No, it applies to particles made of quarks.
 
  • #8
Does it apply to nuclear forces? Is it the same? I remember reading about how, through nuclear fusion, particles will become thermodynamic, and their energy holds the nucleus of the atom together. Is this true?
 
  • #9
The strong force is a nuclear force. I'm not sure what you mean by "the particles will become thermodynamic."
 
  • #10
Originally posted by MajinVegeta
Does it apply to nuclear forces? Is it the same? I remember reading about how, through nuclear fusion, particles will become thermodynamic, and their energy holds the nucleus of the atom together. Is this true?
To clarify, the strong force applies only to hadrons, which are particles composed of quarks. The two standard nuclear particles, neutrons and protons, are baryons, which are particles consisting of precisely 3 quarks (not 2, which are called mesons). So all nuclear particles are affected by the strong force. Indeed at such distances it is the dominant force.
There is another nuclear force, the Weak Force. This is (pretty obviously) weak, and has been more or less unfied with EM.
 

1. What is the superstring theory and why is it considered impossible?

The superstring theory is a scientific theory that attempts to explain the fundamental nature of the universe by proposing that all particles are actually one-dimensional strings vibrating at different frequencies. It is considered impossible because it requires the existence of extra dimensions beyond the four we currently know, which have not been observed or proven to exist.

2. Why is it important to study the superstring theory despite its impossibilities?

Studying the superstring theory can still provide valuable insights and advancements in our understanding of the universe. It also has the potential to reconcile the theories of general relativity and quantum mechanics, which have been two of the most successful but conflicting theories in physics.

3. What evidence supports the existence of superstrings?

Currently, there is no direct evidence for the existence of superstrings. However, some indirect evidence, such as the unification of different physical theories and the existence of anomalies in particle physics, provide some support for the theory.

4. What are some of the challenges in studying the superstring theory?

One of the biggest challenges is the lack of experimental evidence to support the theory. It also requires complex mathematical calculations and the consideration of multiple dimensions, making it difficult to test and validate. Additionally, the theory is still not fully developed and has yet to be integrated with the known laws of physics.

5. What are some alternative theories to the superstring theory?

Some alternative theories to the superstring theory include loop quantum gravity, which attempts to reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics without the need for extra dimensions, and brane cosmology, which proposes that our universe is a three-dimensional membrane floating in a higher-dimensional space. Other alternatives include the holographic principle and the ekpyrotic universe theory.

Similar threads

  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
19
Views
589
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Back
Top