View Single Post
Old 10-18-2011, 09:48 AM   #489
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tar Valon
Posts: 646
My Ride: '02 330Ci Vert
Originally Posted by cowmoo32 View Post
But saying that strings are 'it' as far as we're concerned is ok with you? I know that according to Planck, anything smaller "doesn't make physical sense" but intuitively when I see something or read about something it's rational to think that increasingly smaller pieces are responsible. Hell, even the fact that an electron or photon can only be described by a purely mathematical wavefunction sits better with me than saying that a string, a physical entity, is as small as it gets and is comprised of nothing but itself. I think I would feel better about strings if I thought about them as points of vibration giving rise to particles/forces rather than an actual "thing", per se.
A point that vibrates leads me to the question: what is doing the vibrating? Even if it is posed that these strings are made of something smaller, I prefer that the smallest part, at whatever point in the search for the smallest part we are at, is still made of something. I think that while string theory complicates some things (dimensions?), it is also in a better position to combine micro and macro physics for a reason. Ultimately, that reason is having a smallest part as opposed to having a zero point.

Again: big bang could not have started at one point. Just doesn't make sense. ;-)

check out my astrophotography:
i_ween is offline   Reply With Quote