Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs) m Robot: Archiving 3 threads from Talk:String theory. |
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs) m Robot: Archiving 2 threads from Talk:String theory. |
||
Line 335:
<!-- End request -->
:{{ESp|d}} The resource appears to be informative so I have been [[Wikipedia:Be bold|bold]] and added the external link. Thanks for the suggestion. [[User:Michael Anon|<span style="color:#000">Michael</span>]] [[User talk:Michael Anon#top|<span style="color:#555">An</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Michael Anon|<span style="color:#555">on</span>]] 18:57, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
== Uh... ==
Isn't quantum theory just a multidimensional version of exactly this in the first place - one where the electron expands not into a string of any type, but a puffy cloud? An infinite cloud that can be bent, stretched, recompacted, etc by external influences, sure - but isn't that what string theory has happening anyways? What's the difference, other than string theory is trying to give simpler math at the end of the day? [[User:Zaphraud|Zaphraud]] ([[User talk:Zaphraud|talk]]) 21:21, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
:Not quite. Typical quantum mechanics describes an electron itself as a point particle. The trick is you can't actually pinpoint its ___location, so you have to describe it in terms of its probabilistic ___location, which is that infinite cloud you speak of. In short, point particle with a ___location determined by a wavefunction. String theory says that the particle is not a point, but rather it is continuous in (in typical string theory) one dimension. This is actually more or less equivalent to saying that one particle is an infinite number of particles connected by an infinite number of connections (like little quantum springs), and each one of those infinite particles is quantized and thus has its position determined by a wavefunction. Roughly, string theory really boils down to one simple claim - make Schrodinger's equation an integral. One more point - an electron isn't really a string. Strings are strings. The electron itself and its properties are all more or less consequences of how the string is moving and what way it wraps around spacetime and whatnot. So normal quantum mechanics say that an electron is somehow intrinsically distinct from, say, an antidownquark, but string theory says they're made of the same thing and you can transform one into the other by changing how the string vibrates.[[User:KagakuKyouju|KagakuKyouju]] ([[User talk:KagakuKyouju|talk]]) 04:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
== In layman terms, string theory is what? ==
I'm no physicist. Reading this article tells me close to nothing about what string theory is. I understand that we are at a very abstract level but nonetheless, there should at least be a section in here explaining string theory to someone who is not a particle physicist or the like. Even the Overview section, in my opinion, is too technical/complex.
[[Special:Contributions/188.61.27.214|188.61.27.214]] ([[User talk:188.61.27.214|talk]]) 20:00, 23 December 2012 (UTC) Acnicolet
:There's a small article [[Introduction to M-theory]] which is mostly about string theory. It could do with work and a possible renaming [[User:Bhny|Bhny]] ([[User talk:Bhny|talk]]) 20:20, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
| |||