The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

# String theory, background-independence, and supersymmetry

Is string theory background-dependent? If so, doesn't it contradict relativity and tell us something's not right with string theory?

Also, does string theory rely on supersymmetry? If so, how can you build one theory on another that hasn't been proven by experiment?

Views: 32

### Replies to This Discussion

AFAIK, string theory is supposed to be background independent, although some critics of the theory claim it is not. As I've understood it, it really depends on the formulation of the theory (is the formulation perturbative or not?), but I'm no specialist of string theory, so I'll leave the definitive answer to someone else.

Does ST rely on supersymmetry? If what you mean actually is "does ST preserve supersymmetry?", then there's a lot of debate among string theorist about it. If you can stand the jargon, I suggest you search the arXiv server for "SUSY breaking" and "KKLT model".

For what it's worth, supersymmetry isn't really a theory: I'd rather define it as a property you can apply to theoretical models (maybe someone here will provide a better definition). Also, avoid writing things like [a theory] that hasn't been proven by experiment. This will make real physicists cringe ;-). Theories never are proved by experiments, although they may be disproved by them.
Thanks for your response. I guess I should have said supported by experiment rather than proven by.

If space is made of sub-quantum points that spin in 3 directions at once and the spins are perpendicular it makes a lot of sense the energy fields and even movement is limited to 3 dimensions. Gluing the points in space together is planck time that is a sort of gravity or field between these points. It is a theory of mine that eliminates the need for strings and other dimensions. For a short video email me at physicsngod@yahoo.com

String theory is a mathematical model, it will never be provable. Any explanation of sub-quantum processes and/or use of rational numbers being substituted for imaginary numbers can ever be substantiated. I personally believe a Cartesian point can spin in three directions at once and strings of these points cause entropy resulting in a resonance projected to a quantum level. String theory is actually based on general relativity and the LHC will find both the Higgs Field and the graviton. Then mathematics will explain or prove M theory.

A recent book by by Lee Smolin "The Trouble With Physics" gives his views about how String Theory fails even by the nature of it's science. An excellent review of his argument can be found here.
http://io9.com/string-theory/

I found this compelling despite having spent much time trying to understand String-theory and its 11 dimensions. If this theory doesn't work scientifically then what other areas of research could lead potentially to a Theory of Everything? The LHC has failed to find evidence for super-symmetry. I hear about Supergravity but don't know details. Just wondering what others think and get some help understanding.

## Latest Activity

10 minutes ago
B.K. replied to B.K.'s discussion What do you do about Christmas?
14 minutes ago
B.K. replied to B.K.'s discussion What do you do about Christmas?
20 minutes ago
Idaho Spud replied to Richard Calderazzo's discussion Brother???
26 minutes ago
37 minutes ago
40 minutes ago
47 minutes ago
52 minutes ago
1 hour ago
1 hour ago
1 hour ago
1 hour ago