- Barbara Jesline

# How about the universe is of the strings rather than point-like particles?

Yes! Today's article is gonna be about 'STRING THEORY'.

String theory proposes that the fundamental constituents of the universe are one-dimensional “strings” rather than point-like particles. What we perceive as particles are actually vibrations in loops of string, each with its own characteristic frequency.

String theory originated as an attempt to describe the interactions of particles such as protons. It has since developed into something much more ambitious: an approach to the construction of a complete unified theory of all fundamental particles and forces.

String theory is an attempt to unite the two pillars of 20th-century physics — quantum mechanics and Albert Einstein's theory of relativity — with an overarching framework that can explain all of physical reality. It tries to do so by positing that particles are actually one-dimensional, string-like entities whose vibrations determine the particles' properties, such as their mass and charge.

This counterintuitive idea was first developed in the 1960s and '70s, when strings were used to model data coming out of subatomic colliders in Europe, according to a website about string theory created by the University of Oxford and the British Royal Society. Strings provided an elegant mathematical way of describing the strong force, one of the four fundamental forces in the universe, which holds together atomic nuclei.

The topic remained marginal for many years until the "string theory revolution" in 1984, when theoreticians Michael Green and John Schwarz produced equations that showed how strings avoided certain inconsistencies plaguing models that described particles as point-like objects, according to the University of Cambridge.

One notable feature of string theories is that these theories require extra dimensions of spacetime for their mathematical consistency. In bosonic string theory, spacetime is 26-dimensional, while in superstring theory it is 10-dimensional, and in M-theory it is 11-dimensional. In order to describe real physical phenomena using string theory, one must, therefore, imagine scenarios in which these extra dimensions would not be observed in experiments. The theory explains gravity via a particular vibrating string whose properties correspond to that of the hypothetical graviton, a quantum mechanical particle that would carry the gravitational force. That the theory bizarrely requires 11 dimensions to work — rather than the three of space and one of time we normally experience — has not dissuaded physicists who advocate it. They've simply described how the extra dimensions are all curled up in an extremely tiny space, on the order of 10^-33 centimetres, which is small enough that we can't normally detect them.

Researchers have used string theory to try to answer fundamental questions about the universe, such as what goes on inside a black hole, or to simulate cosmic processes like the Big Bang. Some scientists have even attempted to use string theory to get a handle on dark energy, the mysterious force accelerating the expansion of space and time.

But string theory has lately come under greater scrutiny. Most of its predictions are untestable with current technology, and many researchers have wondered if they're going down a never-ending rabbit hole. In 2011, physicists gathered at the American Museum of Natural History for the 11th annual Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate, to discuss whether it made sense to turn to string theory as a viable description of reality.

"Are you chasing a ghost, or is the collection of you just too stupid to figure this out?" teased Neil deGrasse Tyson, director of the museum's Hayden Planetarium, who pointed out that progress on string theory had been patchy in the previous years.

The most recent challenges to string theory have come from the framework itself, which predicts the existence of a potentially huge number of unique universes, as many as 10^500 (that's the number 1 followed by 500 zeroes). This multiverse landscape seemed to provide enough possibilities that, should researchers explore them, they would come across one that corresponded to our own version of reality. But in 2018, an influential paper suggested that not a single one of these myriad hypothetical universes looked like our cosmos; specifically, each lacked a description of dark energy as we currently understand it.

Now download your favourite articles from M Pawar's Blog. Download this article from the link below.