When was string theory developed

But it was not apparent then that it had anything to do with strings, let alone quantum gravity. It took until for other theorists to prove this crucial link. Some details were obviously wrong: one of the most striking features of strong interactions is their short-range nature, while a massless state produces long-range interactions.

The model being inconsistent for three spatial dimensions our world! During the following decade, describes Veneziano, most people stayed away from string theory; the Standard Model of particle physics had just come to life and there was so much to do in order to extract its predictions and test it.

But is string theory any closer to describing reality? It predicts the dimensionality of space, which is the only theory so far to do so, and it also predicts, at tree level the lowest level of approximation for a quantum-relativistic theory , a whole lot of massless scalars that threaten the equivalence principle the universality of free-fall , which is by now very well tested.

If we could trust this tree-level prediction, string theory would be already falsified. But the same would be true of quantum chromodynamics QCD , since at tree level it implies the existence of free quarks. On the other hand, in order to test string theory at short distance, the best way is through cosmology.

Because the shape of the hidden dimensions yields the spectrum of physical features that allow us to exist. In another universe, for example, the different shape might make the electron a little heavier or the nuclear force a little weaker, shifts that would cause the quantum processes that power stars, including our sun, to halt, interrupting the relentless march toward life on Earth.

Radical though this proposal may be, it was supported by parallel developments in cosmological thinking that suggested that the Big Bang may not have been a unique event, but was instead one of innumerable bangs spawning innumerable expanding universes, called the multiverse.

Susskind was suggesting that string theory augments this grand cosmological unfolding by adorning each of the universes in the multiverse with a different shape for the extra dimensions. With or without string theory, the multiverse is a highly controversial schema, and deservedly so.

It not only recasts the landscape of reality, but shifts the scientific goal posts. Most physicists, string theorists among them, agree that the multiverse is an option of last resort.

Yet, the history of science has also convinced us to not dismiss ideas merely because they run counter to expectation. If we had, our most successful theory, quantum mechanics, which describes a reality governed by wholly peculiar waves of probability, would be buried in the trash bin of physics. This spring, after nearly two years of upgrades, the Large Hadron Collider will crackle back to life, smashing protons together with almost twice the energy achieved in its previous runs.

While it is likely that the revamped machine is still far too weak to see strings themselves, it could provide clues pointing in the direction of string theory. While none of these predictions can properly be called a smoking gun—various non-stringy theories have incorporated them too—a positive identification would be on par with the discovery of the Higgs particle, and would, to put it mildly, set the world of physics on fire.

The scales would tilt toward string theory. But what happens in the event—likely, according to some—that the collider yields no remotely stringy signatures? By this measure, string theory is off the charts. Decades of analysis filling thousands of articles have had a dramatic impact on a broad swath of research cutting across physics and mathematics. Take black holes, for example. String theory has resolved a vexing puzzle by identifying the microscopic carriers of their internal disorder, a feature discovered in the s by Stephen Hawking.

Its ability to seamlessly meld general relativity and quantum mechanics remains a primary achievement, but the allure goes deeper still. Within its majestic mathematical structure, a diligent researcher would find all of the best ideas physicists have carefully developed over the past few hundred years. All the same, science is powerfully self-correcting. Should decades drift by without experimental support, I imagine that string theory will be absorbed by other areas of science and mathematics, and slowly shed a unique identity.

In the interim, vigorous research and a large dose of patience are surely warranted. If experimental confirmation of string theory is in the offing, future generations will look back on our era as transformative, a time when science had the fortitude to nurture a remarkable and challenging theory, resulting in one of the most profound steps toward understanding reality. Editor's Note: The web headline has been changed to better reflect the article's content.

Science columnist Brian Greene is a mathematician and physicist at Columbia University, the author of bestselling cosmology books such as The Hidden Reality , co-founder of the World Science Festival and the prime mover behind the online education resource World Science U. When string theory became mainstream, physicists realised that these early insights were extraordinarily prescient.

The story begins in with a little known Polish [ Inception : The Emergence of Strings - The first time strings were used to model particles, it was as a convenient way to look at data.

He realised that an equation, written by Leonard Euler several centuries earlier, seemed to do the job. But while this approach worked well, no one really understood why. Several people began to [ The First Revolution : Superstring Physics - For about a decade, string theory was a totally marginal subject in theoretical physics.