A Question to intelligent people?

Question

Is there any reason that we should believe the String Theory?
And also can a powerful microscope be invented ever in the near or distant future to see smaller particles than "Quarks"?

Answer 1

I am not an expert on string theory, so will leave that part of the question to others who may know more than I do. (I'm nothing if not humble) :)

As for a microscope that would let us SEE particles smaller than a quark... If you mean visibly see with the eye, that is impossible because the quark is smaller than the shortest wavelength of visible light.

It may be possible to "see" quarks some day in the sense of detecting them, like we "see" objects with radio astronomy which would otherwise be invisible. That is, we could not actually see them visibly, using normal visible light, but it may be possible to "image" them, or display an image of what they would look like if we could actually see them. But it is and always will be impossible to see them in the visible light spectrum.

One answer you received is not entirely accurate, if by "seeing" we actually mean imaging. Someone said we have never "seen" an atom, and technically that is correct if you are talking about seeing them in visible light. But atoms have actually been photographed, allowing us to see an image of them, not with visible light but using a very specialized "microscope" (called a "scanning tunneling microscope).

Take a look at the website under my sources (below) for an actual image of silicon atoms arranged on the face of a crystal.

Answer 2

string theory, yeah.

String theory is how we try and match the two parts of physics that seem to have different laws.

Astrophysics and quantum physics have different laws that can seem to contradict each other, but for the most part, don't interfere. Astrophysics deals with things the size of plants, and quantum things that are smaller than atoms.

The reason we got string theory is for the few things out there that are both, like a black hole. It's as massive (or more so) than a planet, but at a point of singularity, the size of an atom.

Atleast, that's my understanding of it...

As far as the microscope... I seriously doubt it, atleast not in the near future. The most exact that we have now (that I know of) is the electron microscope, and that uses electrons. Electrons would be too large to find a lot of sub atomic particles... even then, the biggest problem would be the random and seemingly chaotic movment of those particles. There's a law that says we can't know both the direction and position of an electron... because if we see it hit something, we know where it's at, but at that instant it's changed direction and we don't know where it's going.
Soooo first we'd have to develop a sub-atomic tracking system, then something to focus and look at what it tracks.

Answer 3

the only reason to believe is the same reason I believe anything, it is currently the best explanation that humanities best minds can come up with to explain the observed data. That doesn't mean it's absolute, but I'm willing to work with it...
As for part 2,the distant future holds a lot. the trick would be to find a medium that the particle affects. currently the scanning electron mscope has the high resolution. this is because anything bigger than an electron affects the electrons path. probably some one will find a way to project a sstream of something that is small enough to be affected by sub quark particles, and detect the variation in path.

Answer 4

1) String theory is testable, by the LHC and LISA, among others. We should be ready to do so in about 10 years. There was a good article in Discovery Magazine last summer called 'Testing String Theory', you can probably find it online.

2) We're pretty sure quarks represent the smallest things possible (unless string theory is right). We'll probably be able to see them someday, but even if we can't see them, we can infer their existance other ways.

Answer 5

No one has ever seen an atom, let alone a quark. Physicists are working feverishly to construct a Single Unified Theory of matter. String theory is but a temporary stop along the path to greater discoveries.

Answer 6

its possible that there are smaller particles than "quarks". after all, something is made up of something else most of the time. we'll sooner or later find a way.

string theory is a theory, just like the m theory. both are theories, and are wrong till proven right.

Answer 7

no, string theory is on the wrong track. The real thing is M theory. It explains everything. Our universe (and all the other ones) are contained in the 11th dimension, and the big bang occurred when our universe collided with another (or really WHERE our universe collided with another since time is a dimension as well).