Phake Fizzics

[Mangrove]

Payne - I'm far from being an expert on physics, but from what I understand, Quantum Mechanics and String Theory probably shouldn't be associated together.

From what I can gather, Quantum Mechanics has been a roaring success in terms of making predictions and then backing them up with experimental data. However, String Theory has not yet had any experimentation to back it up at all. (AFAIK)

I'm not even sure if 'String' concepts deserve to be called a theory as such. When the idea of it was first proposed, many scientists said 'meh' and ignored it. Over time, more and more people got on board. The trouble was that the mathematics needed were so ridiculously complex, that they typically use simplified, short hand equations as substitutes in order to make it workable.

There were two books published this year that are casting doubt on whether Strings are worth the hassle. Can't remember the both titles, but I believe one was called 'Not Even Wrong'. The premise of these books are that a lot of time, money and brain power have been poured into an intellectual fad that so far, has not yielded anything in terms of experiemental data. I think that some physicists (rightly or wrongly...I dunno!) believe that String Theory is a blind alley and that it's time to draw a line under it and look for other explanations.

So your doubts on 'Strings' are being reflected in the scientific community, albeit on a small scale. I doubt if any of the anti-string books will receive the sales, popularity or acclaim of someone like Brian Greene whose books 'The Elegant Universe' and 'The Fabric Of The Cosmos' were both bestsellers.

I believe that the fate of Quantum mechanics is assured, but Strings may not turn out to be the holy grail of physics that people were hoping for. I'm not even sure if even all the String guys agree on the 11 dimensions thing either. Either someone is going to have an emormous experimental breakthrough that will give String some weight or 20 years from now, people will be slapping their heads going "I can't believe we pissed millions of research dollars away on an 11 dimensional mathematical hypothesis that proved dick-all."

[Cain]

I've heard similar things to Mang, but not in the same depth of detail.

[Mangrove]

When I remember, I want to check out some of the anti-string titles and see what other lines of research they are suggesting.

I read a good chunk of Elegant Universe but had to bail on it. I read most of Fabric Of The Cosmos but had to abandon it for different reasons (I kept reading it at times that were totally unsuited to digesting the material and I lost the momentum. Mang's tip: don't read books on physics in hospitals.)

[Cain]

On that line of advice, don't read "Arabic For Beginners" at airports either.

It was the only book I had with me 

[Mangrove]

Getting back to the above - I think Leonard Susskind is one of the physicists breaking rank from the String trend.

[Payne]

Oh yeah, I forgot about this thread. Brief skim over it just now. I never put quantum theory and string theory together I don't think. I only suggested that are more philosophical than other branches of physics earlier in the 20th century.

But, that said, I should take the time to read through this all before I open my trap...