I saw a very interesting program yesterday on Nova about quantum theory, relativity, and string theory.
Seems that some scientist have finally reached a point in their study where they found something (string theory) that can reconcile all theories of matter (quantum theory, gravity, and relativity), except that, lo and behold, it's impossible to prove empirically. (Strings are tiny segments of vibrating energy; if a proton were the size of the solar system, a string would be the size of a tree.) Nonetheless intuition and mathematics tell them they exist. Others mock them for being philosophers, not physicists, because the existence of strings, they say, cannot be proven. (To me, this seems obvious; if they are the fundamental component of the universe, of course you can't see or test for them; just think of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle cranked up a few notches. Just like you can't prove the axioms of mathematics, you can't prove the existence of the fundamental building block of the universe.)
Hmmm, sounds familiar. The old science-vs.-religion debate.
What I want to know is that given that string theory has to have some practical implications, even if you can't find them on the microscopic level. In other words, if, using the equations of string theory, you can predict macroscopic behaviors that neither quantium mechanics or relativity can accurately predict, then you've proven it's correct.
It is my personal conviction that string theory is the nexus between science and religion.
Some interesting facts about strings: Somewhat like rubber bands, strings can stretch and expand and vibrate. They aren't sure whether they are loops (like rubber bands) or linear like springs. They vibrate, and the frequency at which they vibrate determines the type of particle they represent.
It was fascinating to listen to them talk about the quantum world, where all sorts of weird things can happen that are out of our ordinary experience, including walking through walls. Hmmm. Sounds a lot like miracles to me. Their description of the probability of things happening sounded a lot like prayer, in particular my experience of prayer: the more you pray, the more likely it is that your prayer will be granted (cf. the parable of the persistent widow, Luke 18:1-3).
Lord, we pray for Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Niels Bohr, and the other great scientists you gave us who set the groundwork for our understanding of the material world. Through their intercession, may scientists reconcile science and religion, and come to knowledge of You. We ask this through Christ our Lord, through the intercession of the Most Holy Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary. Amen.
Hi Eric,
I started reading your blog. You have a lot of interesting information on many subjects, so it is quite enjoyable.
I have been reading about String Theory and I also saw that Nova special a couple of times. Very interesting stuff.
I am not sure I understand the reasoning one of your statements, but it caught my eye and my curiosity. You wrote:
"It is my personal conviction that string theory is the nexus between science and religion."
Can you elaborate on this? When you say "personal conviction" are you saying "hunch" or is it deeper than that? I'd be curious to hear more details on this.
Merry Christmas!
Rick
Well let's call it a hunch. It may be more than that, may be not, but what I mean is that string theory is the first time physicists have run across something that they believe firmly by intuition is true, but which is impossible to prove. It highlights the ultimate absurdity of insisting that everything you believe to be true must be provable beyond a shadow of a doubt. I expect it is forcing scientists to confront the whole philosophy vs. science question, and ask whether it is reasonable to insist that everything be observable or repeatable, at least according to classical standards.