His point was this: in the quantum field theories we know, to get correct answers you have to assume all physical processes consistent with fundamental principles do happen. He therefore said (paraphrasing) "since string theory is consistent with the fundamental laws we know, so we should expect it to happen."
Let me elaborate further what he was driving at by discussing three things:
1. The Path Integral: When a particle travels from A to B it exhibits weird "quantum" behavior. Richard Feynmann showed that this can be explained if we assume the particle takes all possible paths from A to B as seen in the above image. In other words, you get the right answer if you assume every possible path a particle can travel it does travel.
2. Feynmann Diagrams: If you want to know how particles interact, again, to get the correct answer you need to assume they interact in every possible way consistent with physics. A convenient way for tracking all possible ways two particles can interact is by drawing Feynmann Diagrams like those on the right.
3. When as physicist wants to derive a relativistic field theory, he/she constructs a Legrangian containing every possible term possible consistent with underlying physics. If he/she does not, then they would not get the right equations of motion.
Okay, back to the speakers point. Because it does not violate any known laws of physics for particles, strings, branes, etc... to exists and be interacting together in some way or another, maybe we should assume they are. We make similar assumptions in 1-3 above, and maybe the remaining issues with physics lie in the fact we aren't including them. In other words, maybe string theoriests are on the right track by including them all; hence we see issues like quantum gravity going away.
Just to be clear, I've never heard this argument before and as far as I can tell it is not the mainstream view. However, it is still an interesting case for string theory.
Particle quantum shifts may have significance in material analyses, where data density exponentiates the progress. More detailed definition of particles' topologies, and their force interactions, is the best approach. This implies wavefunctions written in one consistent context of physics functions. There is a system of that sort for strings, photons, thermic bodies, and positrons.
ReplyDeleteRecent advancements in quantum science have produced the picoyoctometric, 3D, interactive video atomic model imaging function, in terms of chronons and spacons for exact, quantized, relativistic animation. This format returns clear numerical data for a full spectrum of variables. The atom's RQT (relative quantum topological) data point imaging function is built by combination of the relativistic Einstein-Lorenz transform functions for time, mass, and energy with the workon quantized electromagnetic wave equations for frequency and wavelength.
The atom labeled psi (Z) pulsates at the frequency {Nhu=e/h} by cycles of {e=m(c^2)} transformation of nuclear surface mass to forcons with joule values, followed by nuclear force absorption. This radiation process is limited only by spacetime boundaries of {Gravity-Time}, where gravity is the force binding space to psi, forming the GT integral atomic wavefunction. The expression is defined as the series expansion differential of nuclear output rates with quantum symmetry numbers assigned along the progression to give topology to the solutions.
Next, the correlation function for the manifold of internal heat capacity energy particle 3D functions is extracted by rearranging the total internal momentum function to the photon gain rule and integrating it for GT limits. This produces a series of 26 topological waveparticle functions of the five classes; {+Positron, Workon, Thermon, -Electromagneton, Magnemedon}, each the 3D data image of a type of energy intermedon of the 5/2 kT J internal energy cloud, accounting for all of them.
Those 26 energy data values intersect the sizes of the fundamental physical constants: h, h-bar, delta, nuclear magneton, beta magneton, k (series). They quantize nuclear dynamics by acting as fulcrum particles. The result is the picoyoctometric, 3D, interactive video atomic model data point imaging function, responsive to keyboard input of virtual photon gain events by relativistic, quantized shifts of electron, force, and energy field states and positions.
Images of the h-bar magnetic energy waveparticle of ~175 picoyoctometers are available online at http://www.symmecon.com with the complete RQT atomic modeling manual titled The Crystalon Door, copyright TXu1-266-788. TCD conforms to the unopposed motion of disclosure in U.S. District (NM) Court of 04/02/2001 titled The Solution to the Equation of Schrodinger.
Dale,
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting. Thanks for sharing. I will be sure to check out that site.
Dale:
ReplyDeleteOuch! My head hurts.
JS:
So can strings a branes co-exist with particles? Since they both can happen... I don't remember my "Elegant Universe" too well, but is the standard model 1 solution to the many possible solutions to String Theory? Is a point particle a degenerate string/brane? Kinda like that big wad of rubber bands in my junk drawer?
Sorry if I'm sounding like a moron.
Stan,
ReplyDeleteIn string theory, and the real string theorists can correct me, any type of "brane" is allowed in certain scenarios. A point particle is a 0-brane. A string is a 1-brane. A surface is a 2-brane, etc...
As to the standard model, many different sting solutions give rise to something that looks like the standard model. As the cliche goes "With string theory you get what you want plus a lot of stuff you didn't plan on." What I mean is you often get something resembling the standard model plus a bunch of other stuff, new particles like the dilaton that you have to figure out how to deal with.
I will try to do a post on this soon.