Question General Relativity versus String Theory : The Final Battle

[IG2007]

The Final War of Science. The Final War for the Theory of Everything:- General Relativity vs String Theory. String Theory, the theory of everything that deals with the smallest of things, e.g. Protons, Neutrons, Electrons, Quarks, Positrons, Gluons etc. General Theory of Relativity, formulated by Albert Einstein, deals with the huge things, e.g. Gravity, blackholes, Orbits, Stars etc. The problem is that : The String Theory goes hawire when formulated to a large scale and The General Relativity goes haywire when formulated to the smallest scales.

There is a huge history behind this war. General Relativity has been questioned thousands of times by different physicists in different periods of time. It says that space can be divided infinitely and Gravity bends space and light. And this theory also tells the functioning of Gravitational Force. And, this is the best theory of Gravity we have till now.

String Theory is now battling it's own way into the mainstream of Physics. The first few battles were lost by it which were fought before the death of Einstein. But after Einstein's death, Quantum Mechanics came into light. The Physics of the Smallest. This theory tells about the functioning of the other three fundamental forces :- Electromagnetic Force, Strong Force and Weak Force. The Electromagnetic Force is the force that deals with the functioning of Electricity and Magnets. Strong Nuclear Force deals with the force that binds together quarks to make protons and electrons. Weak Nuclear Force deals with the decay of matter. String Theory also says that there are at least 10 dimensions or maybe even more than that in our universe. But, the problem with this theory is that Gravity weakens with every dimension. And, this makes everything go haywire.

My opinion is with Relativity but I want to everyone's. So, let the war begin!

 

[IG2007]

I am with General Relativity in this war. General Relativity has been proved right several times before. Just a few days ago, a star was observed moving around Sagittarius A* in a rosette which is not possible by Newtonian Physics but possible only by GR. I also believe that space can be broken infinite number of times but String Theory reduces it to ultra-small one-dimensional strings.

 

[Wolf28]

The Final War of Science. The Final War for the Theory of Everything:- General Relativity vs String Theory. String Theory, the theory of everything that deals with the smallest of things, e.g. Protons, Neutrons, Electrons, Quarks, Positrons, Gluons etc. General Theory of Relativity, formulated by Albert Einstein, deals with the huge things, e.g. Gravity, blackholes, Orbits, Stars etc. The problem is that : The String Theory goes hawire when formulated to a large scale and The General Relativity goes haywire when formulated to the smallest scales.

There is a huge history behind this war. General Relativity has been questioned thousands of times by different physicists in different periods of time. It says that space can be divided infinitely and Gravity bends space and light. And this theory also tells the functioning of Gravitational Force. And, this is the best theory of Gravity we have till now.

String Theory is now battling it's own way into the mainstream of Physics. The first few battles were lost by it which were fought before the death of Einstein. But after Einstein's death, Quantum Mechanics came into light. The Physics of the Smallest. This theory tells about the functioning of the other three fundamental forces :- Electromagnetic Force, Strong Force and Weak Force. The Electromagnetic Force is the force that deals with the functioning of Electricity and Magnets. Strong Nuclear Force deals with the force that binds together quarks to make protons and electrons. Weak Nuclear Force deals with the decay of matter. String Theory also says that there are at least 10 dimensions or maybe even more than that in our universe. But, the problem with this theory is that Gravity weakens with every dimension. And, this makes everything go haywire.

My opinion is with Relativity but I want to everyone's. So, let the war begin!

None are adequate to describe our world completely. There is no victor. We only have partial ideas. A unifying theory may be related to some modification of these others or something altogether different. My opinion is with something altogether different.

Let me create a little thought experiment: I live on a waterworld. No land, just one very very deep ocean. I'm a member of what I believe to be an intelligent sentient race of beings, but my physical attributes restrict me to the ocean depths where no sunlight could ever hope to reach. We have no eyes but have similar organs that can detect motion and temperature. My species has not yet discovered a way to reach the surface. In fact, we do not even know there is a surface nor do we know the concept of one. We have some tools; mathematics, some instruments to measure pressure, density, etc., (not sure how we got them). We know that pressure decreases as we move in one of our three dimensions of space but not others. Strangely, pressure increases in the opposite direction. But we do not have the technology yet to explore the depths of these different pressure areas of our sphere of existence. What theory would we develop to describe our "universe"? Probably one within the constraints of our own reality. One that would sound as if we're just at the edge of knowing how everything works, but at the same time, would fail to explain everything.

For all we know, we are living in the depths of another type of ocean and, like the creatures described above, can only query our local area and will never know what lies beyond. Like what our universe is expanding into? We can calculate, we can suppose, we can even detect and explore, but only what is available to us. In other words, we may be missing the forest for the trees. We could be the Whos living in Whoville on a snowflake and never even know it. Or we could be Humans living on Earth. Either way, we do not have the context within which to complete our knowledge - yet.

 

[IG2007]

Well, first of all, thanks for reviving this dead thread.

 

[Vincent Peri]

Hmm... it's deader than
string theory...