Warped dimensions

DoctorBeaver

I've been reading a book called "Warped Passages" by Lisa Randall. In it she explains theories in physics from Newton right through to the latest conjectures about extra dimensions, strings & quantum gravity. Some of the theories are very interesting and the conclusions drawn, fascinating.

However, some of them seem as if they were dreamed up as quick patches to fill a gap and all they've done is create a hole somewhere else. For instance, there's the concept of symmetry. It sounds all very well until you realise that following on from it there have had to be theories of symmetry breaking. These in their turn have caused problems in other theories.

So, my question is this - why do physicists continue piling theory upon theory in order to plug holes when, surely, the most obvious answer is that there is a flaw in the basic assumption. In other words, why strive to find ways of making symmetry-breaking, heirarchy, the weakness of gravity etc all fit together over the top of the theory of symmetry? It seems to me that the most obvious course would be to dump symmetry and look for a theory that actually works.

Any comments from theoretical physicists would be greatly appreciated.

The Conspirator

General relativity and quantum physics have both been proven but they don't work when you put them together. So they have to find some way of putting them together and there not quick patches, they take years of work before they are even published.

Juparis

Quick patches or not, the people behind these theories are determined to prove them true--that means making up any excuse (I realize that's generalizing and exaggerating, but...) to make the puzzle piece fit.

It's sure a lot of work and study that goes into these theories, but the only people behind it are scientists more stubborn than me. Shocked

s43ros

ocalhoun

All right, supergenious, you go out there and publish a unified field theory that is simple and 100% provable.
The reality is that scientists have been trying to do just that since the early 1800's, and although they've made good progress, they're not finished yet.

Bikerman

The job will probably never be 'finished' in an absolute sense. The first thing you learn in science is : the map is not the territory. (That's my own favourite way of expressing it, borrowed from Alfred Korzybski).
In other words the thing which you derive from reality is not reality itself. The model is not the thing being modelled, etc.
It's very easy to forget this but very important not to.

Regards
Chris

redace

It´s easy to say :" Look for the theory that works", but where to start? Majority of the young theoretical physicist have problem to really understand the outstanding ideas of general relativity and quantum electrodynamics and then when they understand it, they take the theory like a given thing. And its logical, because this theories have experimental proof. There are only a little of those who know that there exists alternative theory of general relativity and this theory for example says that gravity is stronger at the long distances than genral relativity predicts and this could explain the difference in the Pioneer sonds velocity. The moral is that it is hard to leave the old ideas. It requires someone with the genius of Einstein to change the course. The modern theories are just good working models...nothing more and like that must be understand. I´m sure one day we will get a better model of our universe, but in the limit, this model must give the same experimental results like models we are currently working with.