Ask a String Theorist: Update

Thanx to everyone for all the interesting questions in the previous thread. I apologize for not being able to answer every one of them. I just arrived at a workshop on Long Island, and I’m also feeling a bit under the weather. From what I’ve seen so far, I think I will do a post on what is perturbative string theory and what does it have to do with spacetime and gravity (maybe it will even lead into a post on what is background independence). Feel free to use this thread for more questions if you like.

Comments

  1. #1 Kurt Montandon
    August 20, 2007

    Thanx to everyone for all the interesting questions in the previous thread. I apologize for not being able to answer every one of them.

    You could have, if you’d limited yourself to one-word answers.

  2. #2 Ian
    August 21, 2007

    Are the questioners serious or are they just stringing you along?

  3. #3 Arun
    August 23, 2007

    How many landscape solutions have asympotically non-free low energy QFTs? (e.g., by having lots of fermions in the low energy limit).

    I’m wondering whether a study of such might either yield some insights into how to rule out part of the landscape or else might yield insight into how non-asymptotically free QFTs might fit into an overall consistent theory.

  4. #4 The Crackpot
    October 11, 2007

    Isn’t a Kerr ring singularity basically a closed string?
    I mean it spins in one direction only and is incredibly flat and thin (one dimensional). Its size is on the order of Planck’s length, like a string. Its surface is wriggling quantum foam and a string vibrates. A closed string vibrates to represent nuclear particles and the higher the frequency the more mass the particle has. Since they are one dimensional, if a google strings were crushed onto each other by gravity, then they would still look like one closed string (or ring singularity). However, the frequency of the vibration would multiply and become infinitely high, thus representing a particle of incredible mass, like a singularity. We already know that gravity can implode a star into neutrons (and perhaps quarks), so why not even smaller basic structures? It just seems to me that string theorists might like to know that GR actually predicts strings.