What is your argument for or against string/membrane theory?

Question

Please answer as if you were talking to a layperson (which you are). I'd like your answer to be understandable by anybody with a VERY basic understanding of physics.

Answer 1

Perhaps Bekki has heard/read something I haven't. But I am of the opinion that string/M theory has not been tested...period.

And the reason for that is that no one has come up with a test that can be done given our present state of science and technology. And the reason for that, in turn, is because the unifying effects string/M theory suggests can, theorectically, be observed only at levels of energy that are currently unobtainable.

The hope is that the so-called Large Hadron Collider, at CERN, will be able to develop at least the threshold level of energy needed to test some aspects of string/M theory. [See source.] But unitl that comes on line, I don't think there will be any testing of string/M theory. So, meanwhile, string/M theory remains more a philosophy or WAG done in math than it is a theory. And that's the major argument against it.

Answer 2

The argument for it is that it is the one theory that is the closest to reconciling general relativity and quantum mechanics, which contradiction one another at high energies.

The argument against it is that every testable prediction anyone has ever made using string theory that would contradict the standard model has failed.

In the words of one clever critic, "string theory isn't a theory of everything as much as a theory of anything". Its practitioners seem to brush aside setback after setback and keep fixing the theory again and again to the point that it seems that there is no possible experimental evidence that could ever dissuade them. Maybe they are on the brink of really getting somewhere, but it's starting to seem like they are beating a dead horse.

Answer 3

String Theory in its current format is untestable. Same for M Theory (Membrane? Matrix? Mother?). The philosophy of ST suggests that each unique vibration gives rise to a particle's properties, such as color, charge, or mass. However, experiments designed to isolate the vibrations have been unsuccessful. The clearest conclusion is this rise must occur. But that is not science. It's conjecture. The means for a particle to manifest observationally is the basis for continued research. All matter derives from one plane, the quantum. How it permits detection is a separate issue.