The Trouble with Physics

I enjoy reading layman physics books. And, I enjoy the Science vs Religion debates, especially those that cast Science as a Religion.

Superstring theory has always both intrigued and bothered me.

Intrigued as, on the surface, it has a nice visual "ah ha" about it; the universe is comprised of tiny (zero dimension) vibrating strings, which can form chords and harmonies that result in manifestations that are available to the human senses.

Bothered as, below the surface, it is a huge mess of mumbo-jumbo that has no intuitive sense to it. Relative to relativity (sic), this is a fairly easy statement to make; even a layman can get a grasp of relativity through Einstein's own writings. But, relative to quantum theory, can Superstring theory really have "no intuitive sense". What I really mean is that superstring theory has no science behind it - no way to test anything. Quantum theory, on the other hand, has been tested over and over again. [As an aside, it really bothers me that I can't Google a good answer to "how does superstring theory explain Young's double slit experiment." Maybe the question does not make sense? Or, maybe, superstring theory is too convoluted to give an answer that makes sense.]

So, is superstring theory science or religion?

I was, therefore, extremely happy to read this book by Lee Smolin. It articulates, expounds upon, and critiques Superstring theory from the perspective of Science. And, Superstring Theory comes up lacking; sorely lacking. This book is exceptionally well written, well thought out, and hard hitting.

I hope it makes the Clergy of Superstring Theory step back and think a bit.

Then again, the history of science is littered with skeptics; perhaps superstring theory simply needs more time to mature. In 25-50 years Smolin will either be right or wrong. It will be interesting to watch.

Comments

Gliese 581g

So...there is probably intelligent life out there. As the old Monty Python saying goes, "I hope so, cause there certainly isn't much here on earth." Case in point. The video for Gliese581g is on MSNBC, and works fine in IE, but crashes in Chrome [ here ].

Acsoi - Land Grab Economics

"Adjusted Consolidated Segment Operating Income" ( Acsoi ), is a measure of what a companies profits would be if they were not spending like crazy to acquire a space: in GroupOn's case, this would be retailers. To me, using Acsoi as a measure is really an admission that a company has no staying power beyond brand awareness. So, they need to grab and own as much mindshare as they can, as quickly as they can, to increase the barrier to entry for competitors. Without intellectual property to help protect them, and with the cost of switching (for a user) being effectively zero, building a global brand, and relying on brand stickiness, is the best way forward. Companies like Amazon that have been effective at this have also built in other "sticky" factors over time: recommendation engines, one-click purchasing, etc. This increases the cost for the user to switch, and allows the company to stop pouring money into marketing and acquisition costs. You also buil...

Schrodinger's Cat is still Alive...and Dead

With Borders scaling back so many of their stores, I have ended up buying more books than I normally would. One I picked up is "What is Life?" by Ed Regis. It is a good short read, although it is now 2 years old, which is a long time given the rate that "artificial life" is moving at. Since the book came out, Craig Ventor claims to have created the first artificial life . One thing I did not know was that Schrodinger wrote a book with the same title in 1944 which predicted the existence of a DNA-like molecule; Crick actually credits Schrodinger with inspiring some of his early work. Ed Regis points out that Schrodinger's book never actually defines what life is; that is left hanging. Interestingly, I felt the same about Regis's book. While he argues that life is defined by having an "embedded metabolism" that argument still seems weak. Carl Sagan pointed out, many years ago, that cars have a metabolism, which is hard to argue against....

Todd G. Simpson

Search This Blog