String particle –--> LHC –--> multi-D

[socratus]

String particle –--> LHC –--> multi-D
=.
Today some famous physicists think that “string particle”
can be a primary particle of nature and “string theory” can offer
a new description of nature. But to observe “string-particle”
would require a LHC roughly the size of the solar system.
Obviously that such solar- LHC cannot be created today, but . . . .
. . . but in the future . . . . in future . . . vivat solar-LHC.
======…

Not scientific joke.
A little boy was asked what he wants.
The boy answered: I want the Moon as big as the Sun,
then I will not afraid of darkness.

Scientific no- joke.
A young scientist was asked what he wants.
The young scientist answered: I want a LHC roughly the size
of the solar system then the „ string particle“ will be observed and then
I will exactly know in which dimension I live , in 11-D or i n 27-D
or , maybe, in the middle between them, (M-string theory).
=======...

 

[socratus]

April 7, 2016 12:00 pm JST
Superstring theory is inspiring practical applications
Superstring theory is inspiring practical applications- Nikkei Asian Review
====…

The post doesn’t have examples of “string’s” practical/experimental applications.
===...

Experiment and mathematical analysis, taken together, they are serving
as the backbone of science. Experiment without mathematical analysis
is unclear, and mathematical analysis without experimental support is
only mathematical play.
===…
“Without a direct test for string theory, skeptics argue,
it should be classified as mathematics rather than physics . . . .”
/ Dan Falk /
“I don’t think it’s physics yet. It’s beautiful mathematics,
which has a chance of becoming physics”
/ Glenn Starkman /
“String theory says nothing about the real world”
/ Sheldon Glashow”
==================..

 

[socratus]

“String” doesn’t have practical applications / observation and therefore
it is only a pure “ beautiful mathematics”. String theory has only MATHEMATICAL implications of relativity and QM.
==========...
Mathematics is a “queen of science”
But she is a “queen” only because she married the
” king of science ” – physics
Without “king” she can be a ” mad woman”
On the other hand, sometime “she” can make her “husband ” crazy
Therefore Josiah Willard Gibbs wrote:
” Mathematician may say all that he wants,
but physicist must maintain at least some spark of common sense “.
And Feynman had the same opinion:
” Since the mathematical physicists have taken over, theoretical
physics has gone to pot. The bizarre concepts generated out of
the over use and misinterpretation of mathematics would be funny
if it were not for the tragedy of the waste in time, manpower, money,
and the resulting misdirection”
======================. ..