tgamble

A creationist responded with this when I mentioned the Big Bang theory.

What does string theory have to do with the Big Bang? Is the Big bang theory being replaced? Thanks.

lpetrich

String theory is a theory that elementary particles are stringlike rather than pointlike. However, this stringiness is expected to be noticeable at somewhere around the Planck length, the natural length scale of quantum gravity.

However, everything after the quantum-gravity epoch is unaffected, which is most of the Big Bang.

Oolon Colluphid

No, it's not, and if your cretinist genuinely had "read up on it" he'd know that. Either he's read a bit on strings (maybe Greene) and didn't understand it, or he's just plain lying. Since he likes to keep up with cosmological theories, ask him what he makes of Guth's inflation, or maybe Smolin .

Oolon

graden1

Good call, Oolon. Greene's "Elegant Universe" discusses how the Big Bang might relate to string theory, but the creationist quoted by tgamble has yet to demonstrate any understanding of either.

Grady

eh

Perhaps your creationist happened to stumble onto some M theory based cosmology, such as the ekpyrotic scenario. If true, it would replace the big bang to an extent. Instead of the BB originating from a singularity, it would be the result of a massive brane collision in the 5th dimension.

But inflation is apparently still the best current theory on the BB, even if we don't have a viable TOE yet.

Tim Thompson

Tell the creationist typist to read a bit more before deciding that they know more than they really do. <a href="http://www.superstringtheory.com/" target="_blank">String theory</a> (also known as superstring theory) is a mathematical theory for quantizing general relativity. It most certainly does not "replace" the Big Bang. Rather, it explains the Big Bang, which is the real point overlooked by the creationist.

One of the standard complaints from creationists is that Big Bang cosmology postulates the creation of "something" (like the whole universe) from "nothing" (as in "nothing existed before the Big Bang"). Someone familiar only with the popular literature could make that mistake, but it has never been the case that working scientists considered such a ridiculous idea. It's just that, without a quantized theory of gravity, there was no way to know what the Big Bang "really" was. General Relativity (a non-quantized theory), left to its own devices, would consider the Big Bang as a true singularity, about as close to "something from nothing" as science gets, and it would be a problem.

But String theory, originally devised to solve some other problem in quantum mechanics (which it did not do), turned out to be the wonder boy theory for quantizing general relativity. It is short on observational evidence thus far, so theoretical speculation is rampant. Colliding 5-dimensional "branes" fuel the "<a href="http://www.earthfiles.com/earth227.htm" target="_blank">ekpyrotic universe</a>", and create Big Bangs. Or perhaps some other quantum effect, in what is now called "pre Big Bang cosmology".

Big Bang cosmology is alive & well, and in much better shape these days bay far. <a href="http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CMB-DT.html" target="_blank">Anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background</a> match up very well with predictions based on Big Bang cosmology & "inflation". Some cosmologists are already at work figuring out how to use the cosmic microwave background to find the signatures of string effects.

The small list of technical papers below are really that, technical. I know some of you have a backgrounmd in math and/or physics, and you'll need it for these papers (there are lots more, I just arbitrarily pick a few that I think are worth it). For the less mathematically inclined reader (and string theory is extremely mathematical), I agree in endorsing <a href="http://phys.columbia.edu/faculty/greene.htm" target="_blank">Brian Greene</a>'s book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375708111/qid=1014242606/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-6731694-9558235" target="_blank">Elegant Universe</a>. You won't find anything about string theory that is more reader friendly, and it is reasonably up to date as well. On the web, you can try the <a href="http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/qg_home.html" target="_blank">Quantum Gravity pages</a> of the <a href="http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/index.html" target="_blank">Cambridge Relativity Group</a>. They are meant for the more general reader. Another invaluable resource is the <a href="http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm" target="_blank">Cosmology Tutorial</a> from UCLA Astronomy Professor <a href="http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/intro.html" target="_blank">Ned Wright</a>. His tutorial includes current news, and a "<a href="http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/errors.html" target="_blank">Cosmological Fads & Fallacies</a>" section the shows the flaws in many popular anti Big Bang alternative cosmologies. If you have any interest in cosmology, you should bookmark his tutorial.

Anyone not satisfied by a "small list" of technical papers is invited to visit the <a href="http://www.ba.infn.it/~gasperin/" target="_blank">webpage of Maurizio Gasperini</a>, which has a huge list of technical papers.

• A small list of technical papers
• <a href="http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/0103239" target="_blank">The Ekpyrotic Universe: Colliding Branes and the Origin of the Hot Big Bang</a>
• <a href="http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9907067" target="_blank">Elementary introduction to pre-big bang cosmology and to the relic graviton background</a>
• <a href="http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/0111275" target="_blank">String Cosmology</a>

Cheers.

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: Tim Thompson ]</p>

Pomp

Thanks, Tim. That will keep me reading for a while.

eh

Tim, you seem to know your cosmology well. Perhaps you could help explain to me the idea of inflation, zero energy and how it relates to the singularity? I posted a new topic in the S&S forum, which is at <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=57&t=000096" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=57&t=000096</a>

Orpheous99

BTW, what does either of these theories have to do with Evolution?