What came first, string cheese or the string theory, and how are they related?
469686
Like so many things in physics, string theory came about by accident, and was not entirely unrelated to the fact that physicists don't get laid often enough.\n\nGaspard LaRoche was a physicist in Bonne in 1948. He was experimenting with particle deceleration, on the basis that by selectively weakening electrochemical bonds within steel molecules, you could essentially make "stretchy bridges" - bridges that wouldn't break but would only use about a third of the raw steel to make - you'd basically just have to stretch them out long enough.\n\nIt wasn't going well.\n\nGaspard made his own lunch, because like many physicists, he was a truly lonely, blinkered individual. He traditionally made himself cheese sandwiches, and ate them, miserably, in the lab.\n\nThe rest is history - the result of boredom and that dark curiosity that makes physicists wonder 'what will happen if I press this button'. Gaspard zapped his sandwich with a stream of decelerated protons, threw in a handful of deconstructed proteins just for show, and voila - cheese sandwiches that could be bounced, stretched, split and strung across the lab as a party piece.\n\nSadly, Gaspard died alone, uncelebrated for his single contribution to the world outside the laboratory. His stretchy bridges never came to anything, and it wasn't until two years after his death that string cheese was reinvented as a childhood food.\n\nIncidentally, all this pre-dated the string theory of the universe by some years. The scientists behind the theory have always fought shy of acknowledging Gaspard's work as being their inspiration...but we know the truth.
196466
In a strict sense, science is a branch of philosophy.  Where science differs is in what is called the scientific method, which basically says that a hypothesis must be testable and the results reproducible. A good hypothesis also makes predictions that can be tested as well. To answer your question, string theory tries answer the question of what matter and energy are and how they relate to one another at their core. Quantum mechanics does a good job answering part of the question but breaks down when gravity is considered.  Einsteins relativity also answers some questions but it too is unable to adequately explain gravity with concern to the other elementary forces.  String theory attempts to bring these two well tested theories, Quantum theory and Relativity together into one Grand theory.  It uses complex mathematics that are not easily understood but because the energy requirements that we would need to test this theory are currently and probably forever out of our reach it can't be tested. If it can't be tested it is not in the strict sense science but philosophy.
1095974
this is sort of trival, dimensions can be thought of as derivatives, and you can take a formula and make any number of derivatives of the original derivatives and still end up with a line that bends, indicating no limit to the number of dimensions we can really conceive..   \nModern string theory is a bunch of hoo haa,   such a sub-atomic idea makes no sense, the reality we know could not have order if there were "strings".  "strings" have no way of organizing themselves into different sub-atomic particles, the universe would just be a bunch of "strings"
91646
String theory is a model of fundamental physics whose building blocks are one-dimensional extended objects (strings) rather than the zero-dimensional points (particles) that are the basis of the Standard Model of particle physics. For this reason, string theories are able to avoid problems associated with the presence of pointlike particles in a physical theory. Studies of string theories have revealed that they require not just strings but also higher-dimensional objects.\n\nThe basic idea is that the fundamental constituents of reality are strings of energy of the Planck length (about 10-35 m) which vibrate at resonant specific frequencies[1]. Another key claim of the theory is that no measurable differences can be detected between strings that wrap around dimensions smaller than themselves and those that move along larger dimensions (i.e., effects in a dimension of size R equal those whose size is 1/R). Singularities are avoided because the observed consequences of "big crunches" never reach zero size. In fact, should the universe begin a "big crunch" sort of process, string theory dictates that the universe could never be smaller than the size of a string, at which point it would actually begin expanding.\n\nInterest in string theory is driven largely by the hope that it will prove to be a theory of everything. It is a possible solution of the quantum gravity problem, and in addition to gravity it can naturally describe interactions similar to electromagnetism and the other forces of nature. Superstring theories include fermions, the building blocks of matter, and incorporate supersymmetry. It is not yet known whether string theory is able to describe a universe with the precise collection of forces and matter that is observed, nor how much freedom to choose those details the theory will allow. String theory as a whole has not yet made falsifiable predictions that would allow it to be experimentally tested, though various special corners of the theory are accessible to planned observations and experiments.\n\nWork on string theory has led to advances in mathematics, mainly in algebraic geometry. String theory has also led to other theories, supersymmetric gauge theories, which will be tested at the new Large Hadron Collider experiment.
34046
I think M-theory stands for Mother theory and it's like a union of different string theories that differ a little among them ( I heard there are 5 theories of strings..each one is sort of complicated but there is some knowledge of them and they actually show different aspects of the same theory; the M-theory is like an attempt to join them somehow) ..anyway, string theory predicts 11 dimentions wich is a lot! ( I guess now is down to 6 ..has anyone heard of it?) so it's still a theory like Quantum gravity and some others trying to join QM with relativity ..I just hope they succeed.
18752
it basically says that there are these giant cosmic strings that stretch an infinite distance and they are very dense (as in they're so thin that they are not visible, yet a millimeter would weigh tons and tons) and their huge mass warps space-time and they help to make up the universe as we know it. there are also small vibrating strings on the sub atomic level that make up the smallest divisions of matter. String theory also describes 11 dimentions.  If you're interested in it, read "the elegant universe" by Brian Greene, it explains it a lot better than i can here.
1125292
Superstring theory is being hammered by many different new physical obervations. Proponents keep adding one fudge factor after another to try to save the theory from sinking.\nThe big bang theory has taken a beating, lately,  but not as bad as superstring theory.\nEvolution is solid and has been so for more than 100 years. But three methods of Lamarkian evolution, at a molecular biology level have recently been discovered. Especially the second one.(methylationof genes, and microsatellite r.n.a. in sperm and the massive random insertion of a jumping gene sequence in neurological cells causing random cell diversity.).\nDan the Answers-man
979727
Those favoring conventional physics say it is infinite, but seems to be expanding at a rate to high for gravity to pull back together.\nThose favoring string theory suggest that it is a finite uniiverse, but that it abuts an infinite number of parallel universes.\nJury is still out, but could lead to many scientific breakthroughs in coming years. Good field if you like physics, and math.
214408
According to string theory, the strings are the universe's \nelemental material. They vibrate in different ways and can\njoin and break apart to form different elemental particles\nthat make up the universe. The strings exist in 11\ndimensions: time, which physicists consider a dimension, and\n10 spatial dimensions. Four of those dimensions are the ones\nwe are familiar with, three spatial dimensions plus time.\nThe other dimensions may be so small they're invisible to\ncurrent detection equipment and are only known to exist because they leave a "footprint" of where they have been.
360519
String theory is the idea that everything in the universe is made out of tiny, vibrating loops of string that are far smaller than the size of an atom.\n\nIn string theory, there are currently believed to be ten dimensions (plus one for time).  A dimension is essentually just a direction:  Left-Right, Up-Down, Forward-Back.  Originally, all the dimensions were very small with little rooom for movement.\n\nAt the time of the Big Bang, the three dimensions I mentioned expanded rapidly to create the enormous universe we see today.  The other seven dimensions are still tiny.  There is not enough room in them for us to detect them directly, but they do influence the behavior of strings on very small scales.\n\nAn example of symmetry is that the rules of physics where you live are exactly the same as the rules of physics where I live.  In other words, the rules of physics are location symmetric.\n\nAnother example is that (by using the rules of general relativity developed by Einstein) the rules are symmetric for all observers, even if they are accelerating in opposite directions.  An interesting result of this symmetry is that gravity warps the fabric of space itself.\n\nSuper-symmetry is another example, like the two I just mentioned.  The details involve more math though, so I won't go into it.  It hasn't really been confirmed by experiment yet, by physicists have been using it to make predictions for years.\n\nCalculations show that the tiny strings of string theory follow the rules of super-symmetry.  That is one reason string theory is widely accepted.  Together, the two ideas predict that all particles we currently know (electrons, muons, quarks, etc.) have a matching super-symmetric particle.\n\nSince none of these have yet been found, they are thought to have much larger masses than the particles who know of.  With the next generation of particle accelerators (such as the Large Hadron Collider scheduled to start operation next year in Europe), it may be possible to test the existence of the matching super-symmetric particles.  That is one of the current ideas for providing evidence for or against string theory.
246328
String theory is still quite new in the world of physics, but it has drawn tremendous attention to all physicists around the world. \nFor the last 80 years or so physicists have been trying to find a theory that will combine the theories of quantum mechanics and general relativity. These two theories describe everything in the universe. General relativity does this on the scale of the very large e.g. planets, galaxies and so on. When it comes to subatomic scale, like protons, quarks etc. general relativity breaks down. This is where quantum mechanics is very accurate, but quantum mechanics does not work when applied to the very large objects. \nGeneral relativity basically deals with gravity and has a calm feeling to it. The predictions it makes is always sort of neat and precise.\nQuantum mechanics on the other hand deals with the uncertainty principal and has a very chaotic feel to it.\n\n\nString theory is what physicisits hope and believe might be the theory combines these two super theories. String theory predicts that every particle (even quarks) are made up of much, much smaller particles called strings. They are not really particles, they are actually vibrating strands of energy. Each of these strands vibrate in a different way. \n\nThe mathematics behind string theory works so well that many believe string theory has to be true, but unfortunately there is currently no way to prove string theory with experiment. If string theory is true, then some of our notions of the universe will have to change dramatically. We will have to accept that we actually live in an 11-dimensional universe.
1151572
Nope - String theory was created as a way to make the laws of the universe apply in all situations.  Without string theory, we use one set of laws for sub-atomic particles and another set for everything larger.  Because laws of the universe need to be true everywhere for them to really be "laws," string theory was developed as a way for everything to be governed by one set - the laws remain constant no matter what level you are looking at.
172699
Before I start, I am a Biologist with an interest in theoretical physics, not actually a physicist, so my grasp of the finer detail may be shaky in places.  \nBasically string theory is an attempt to unify the elemental forces within the universe (Weak nuclear, Strong nuclear, Electromagnetic, and Gravity).  The theory postulates that various sub atomic particles are not particles but loops of vibrating energy so small that they have an almost “point” existence.  For string theory to work it is necessary to visual up to 26 separate dimensions (the 3 we know and love as well as other "compacted dimensions").  This may be the theory's downfall as it is next to impossiable to prove the existance of these extra dimensions and without them string theory just does not work!\nString theory has given rise to m-theory (which uses vibrating membranes (or 'branes if your a cool physicist) in place of strings), which may well prove to be a more accurate (if still incomplete) model for the way the universe works on both a sub atomic and an astrological level.
669660
its actualy String-theory that proposes the existance of many other universes. the theory proposes a so called "Landscape of probabilities" with probabilities of as many as 10 to power of 500 universes, and with that many probabilities it is very likely that some of them will be similar to or just like our own universe.\n\nif you would like to know more about this facsinating subject, i would suggest this book http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0316155799/104-3626905-5554311?v=glance&n=283155\nits a great and easy to understand book.
968616
I would say that most physicists are sceptical of string theory, to say the least. many simply dismiss it as irrelevant. The basic problem is that it has given NO predictions that can be tested. None, nada. One person in the department (of physics) here worked on string theory and gave up, saying that it simply doesn't really explain anything.
150007
At the moment no one knows.\n\nString theories are one attempts to combine Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity, which is what a unified theory is. Thus far no complete theory and no testable predictions have emerged. Perhaps they will in time, or from some of the alternatives like loop gravity.
289604
String Theory is only a theory of description of elementary particles based on one-dimensional curves, or "strings," instead of point particles, given by from some theoretical Physicist.\nThe energy-scale at which the stringlike properties would become evident is so high that it is currently unclear how any of the forms of the theory could be tested.\nSo it has not been tested yet and I think it will remain a theory not reality in near future.