Thoughts on String Theory and music

[FanOf31]

This theory really has me wondering if it's true. Music itself has been a huge influence in my life and it most definitely has an effect positively or negatively on one's soul. We sing hyms in church and God's angels play harps and trumpets no? Wouldn't it only make sense that scientifically we are made of strings vibrating to certain frequencies and this is why music has such a huge effect on us? I've played the guitar for 14 years and in my eyes, music has more effect on us that we can comprehend. How can hearing sounds played a certain way relieve stress, inspire us, uplift us when sad, make your brain smarter? It's always boggled my mind. Being a musician, I wouldn't doubt String Theory is true and the universe is God's cosmic music being played through 11 dimensional hyperspace. The part of String Theory I'm not so sure about is the parallel universes. I'm kind of iffy to believe that part of it, but I still think it's an interesting theory.

[rameumptom]

I personally believe in String Theory, however I am doubtful it has any actual connection with music. The strings vibrate, yes, but that does not mean they make any sound. In fact, the sound we hear is only energy waves passing through the air as sound at different frequencies.

While you see God as the cosmic musician, others see him as the cosmic physicist, chemist, mathematician, biologist, etc.

You cannot have String Theory without parallel universes, or at least multiverses.

[Vort]

This theory really has me wondering if it's true. Music itself has been a huge influence in my life and it most definitely has an effect positively or negatively on one's soul. We sing hyms in church and God's angels play harps and trumpets no? Wouldn't it only make sense that scientifically we are made of strings vibrating to certain frequencies and this is why music has such a huge effect on us?

My brother the trumpeter and organist is more partial to Resonant Tube Theory, which has yet to gain the traction that its cousin String Theory has done.

Personally, as someone who has dabbled in programming, I'm somewhat more convinced by Null-Terminated String Theory, though I sometimes wonder if StringBuilder Theory might not prove more useful in the long run.

[FanOf31]

I personally believe in String Theory, however I am doubtful it has any actual connection with music. The strings vibrate, yes, but that does not mean they make any sound. In fact, the sound we hear is only energy waves passing through the air as sound at different frequencies.

While you see God as the cosmic musician, others see him as the cosmic physicist, chemist, mathematician, biologist, etc.

You cannot have String Theory without parallel universes, or at least multiverses.

I'm not saying we are music that you can necessarily listen to, I just thought it was more of something kind of interesting to think about. We are in a sense, music, but we're not just some random song someone is playing either. I also believe God to be a scientist and all of the rest as you explained. He'd have to be in order to put it all together. The fact music inspires us was more of a tangent, but still interesting how a lot of things are related to "music" in a special way.

[FanOf31]

My brother the trumpeter and organist is more partial to Resonant Tube Theory, which has yet to gain the traction that its cousin String Theory has done.

Personally, as someone who has dabbled in programming, I'm somewhat more convinced by Null-Terminated String Theory, though I sometimes wonder if StringBuilder Theory might not prove more useful in the long run.

I haven't heard of those other theories. Interesting stuff. I'll have to check it out. I just enjoy a lot of what Michio Kaku brings to the table even though he's not LDS. He's a genius man and I believe a lot of what he says.

[Traveler]

I am not a fan of string theory - String theory is not a very elegant solution in that it creates as many problems as it solves. There was an ancient cult of scientist and mathematicians that had a most interesting model of the universe with water at the “basic” element. Water is likely the most bountiful stuff of the universe. These scientist and mathematicians laid the foundation of Algebra, Trigonometry, Geometry and other concepts from which modern science is predicated.

They had a rather interesting theory about the universe. They believed that all things are associated with ratios (similar to string theory). They believed that all mater existed as harmonic ratios to everything in it’s environment. By knowing or understanding the harmonic ratios it was believed that anything could be controlled. With this understanding the ancient Egyptians understood square roots and pi as ratios and not just numbers. They invented the harmonic triad long before it was used in music and they also understood the ratios of light. In modern times we were not able to duplicate their understanding of light until we mastered lazars.

They also believed in the harmony of souls in the same way we relate to harmony of sounds. Much like Karma they believed that we must live in harmony with others and ourselves as well as our environment. Things like homosexuality (relationships) would create destructive dissonant harmonics that bring chaos and ruin.

I find a lot of similarity with this ancient concept and the modern use of Chaos Theory to explain complex systems. For those that love music - there are in our ancient past better concepts than string theory - at least according to my understanding.

The Traveler

[Vort]

String theory has to do with reconciling quantum mechanics with gravitation (aka general relativity). My physics BS does not make me competent to explain it, though for those who have an interest, reading the Wikipedia article would be a good starting point.

The most telling criticism I have heard against string theory is that it is not predictive. That is, you can't use string theory to say that such-and-such must therefore exist. When you come to something you don't yet understand, you just add some parameters to the string theory to make the equations come out correctly. But you can't then use those equations to make useful predictions; there are simply too many solutions.

My opinion (worth exactly what you have paid for it) is that in its present form, string theory will never lead to anything useful. It either needs to be radically modified or discarded altogether.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Vort

[RipplecutBuddha]

Or, it could just need some time to mature. After all, the solution it's aimed at is a rather large issue in and of itself.

Another possible direction is that it opens the way for other, simpler theories in the future. Being predictive is tricky no matter what, and as far as we've pushed our scientific abilities, we're going to have to get used to the outer edges of wisdom. We know the limits are within us, but they're also built into the universe we understand.

There may be no physical barrier to the universe, but the structure of the universe and our own mental limits provide far more formidable barriers as it is.

[FanOf31]

String theory has to do with reconciling quantum mechanics with gravitation (aka general relativity). My physics BS does not make me competent to explain it, though for those who have an interest, reading the Wikipedia article would be a good starting point.

The most telling criticism I have heard against string theory is that it is not predictive. That is, you can't use string theory to say that such-and-such must therefore exist. When you come to something you don't yet understand, you just add some parameters to the string theory to make the equations come out correctly. But you can't then use those equations to make useful predictions; there are simply too many solutions.

My opinion (worth exactly what you have paid for it) is that in its present form, string theory will never lead to anything useful. It either needs to be radically modified or discarded altogether.

Hasn't the Large Hadron Collider been used with many of String Theories ideas? The LHC has discovered 2 new elements on the Periodic Table. That's pretty useful no?

[FanOf31]

String theory has to do with reconciling quantum mechanics with gravitation (aka general relativity). My physics BS does not make me competent to explain it, though for those who have an interest, reading the Wikipedia article would be a good starting point.

The most telling criticism I have heard against string theory is that it is not predictive. That is, you can't use string theory to say that such-and-such must therefore exist. When you come to something you don't yet understand, you just add some parameters to the string theory to make the equations come out correctly. But you can't then use those equations to make useful predictions; there are simply too many solutions.

My opinion (worth exactly what you have paid for it) is that in its present form, string theory will never lead to anything useful. It either needs to be radically modified or discarded altogether.

So you're saying everything Michio Kaku tells us such as Time Travel, gateways, lazers, and on and on isn't useful? He's a pretty smart fellow ya know.

[Vort]

Hasn't the Large Hadron Collider been used with many of String Theories ideas? The LHC has discovered 2 new elements on the Periodic Table. That's pretty useful no?

Not particularly. But in any case, "discovering" new elements doesn't have anything to do with string theory or superstring theory.

So you're saying everything Michio Kaku tells us such as Time Travel, gateways, lazers, and on and on isn't useful? He's a pretty smart fellow ya know.

Actually, I believe I didn't say anything of the sort.

But since you bring it up...

Yes, Kaku is a reasonably smart guy, no doubt. But he is a popularizer of science, which means he dwells on fringe topics that get the non-scientist or casual, Popular Science type all excited but that have little chance of real relevance.

For heaven's sake, the guy is a big supporter of SETI. That alone should tell you something about his scientific priorities. The fact that he is one of the original developers of string theory and yet no longer pursues active research in the area (that I know of) should also tell you something about string theory.

Also note that in one of his books, he classifies "precognition" as what he terms a "Class III impossibility", e.g. something that violates the known laws of physics. This is false, of course, but suggests his preconceptions and prejudices regarding religious beliefs, of which different elements of precognition are often a staple.

[FanOf31]

Not particularly. But in any case, "discovering" new elements doesn't have anything to do with string theory or superstring theory.

Actually, I believe I didn't say anything of the sort.

But since you bring it up...

Yes, Kaku is a reasonably smart guy, no doubt. But he is a popularizer of science, which means he dwells on fringe topics that get the non-scientist or casual, Popular Science type all excited but that have little chance of real relevance.

For heaven's sake, the guy is a big supporter of SETI. That alone should tell you something about his scientific priorities. The fact that he is one of the original developers of string theory and yet no longer pursues active research in the area (that I know of) should also tell you something about string theory.

Also note that in one of his books, he classifies "precognition" as what he terms a "Class III impossibility", e.g. something that violates the known laws of physics. This is false, of course, but suggests his preconceptions and prejudices regarding religious beliefs, of which different elements of precognition are often a staple.

I don't know much about science or Michio, but I have just started listening to his ideas and things, and he seems smart. Thanks for your insight Vort :)