03Z3Vibrate

Adapted for the Internet from:

Why God Doesn't Exist

Strings are not
tied, but they
vibrate

Fig. 2

1.0 The ends of

string are not tied, it floats freely in space, but it is under tension

nother irrational description is that strings are taut for no reason:

In strin

g theor

y, as in guitar playing, the string must be stretched under tension

order to become

excited. However, the strings in string theory are floating in

spacetime, they aren’t tied down to a guitar.

Nonetheless, they have tension.

[

]

[

So let’s just wave the magic wand and give tension to the strings through an Act of God!

It is cynically

ironic that, after years of studying Physics in college, this is the nonsense

the mathematicians have come

up with as an explanation for reality.

]

It makes you wonder what the word tension means in Mathematics. In Physics, a string would have

tension if it is pulled

from two ends

" Tension is a reaction force applied by a stretched string (rope or a similar object)

on the objects which stretch it. The direction of the force of tension is parallel to

the string, away from the object exerting the stretching force. So if an object hangs

from a rope due to gravity, the gravitational force on the object points downward,

and there is an equal tension force in the rope point upward, making the net force

on the object equal to zero."

[

]

What does a string that floats alone in space (i.e., the graviton

version) latch on to? Pursuant to Schwarz’s

description, her

floating strings couldn’t be more stress-free

(

Fig. 1

)

She just makes her strings tense and

amenable to vibration with a swift

movement of her wand.

3.3.4 The ends of a string are not tied, but it vibrates like a guitar cord

.0 The ends of a string are not tied, yet it vibrates like a guitar cord

et another inconsistent description has it that a particle such as an electron is really a vibrating

string:

the elementary particles we observe in particle accelerators could be thought of

as the ‘musical

notes’ or excitation

modes of elementary strings.

[

]

These strings have certain vibrational modes which can be characterized by

various quantum

numbers such as

mass, spin, etc. The basic idea is that each

mode carries a set of quantum

numbers that correspond to a distinct

type of

fundamental particle. This is the ultimate unification:

all the fundamental particles

we know can be described

by one object, a string! [A very loose

analogy can be

made with say, a violin string. The vibrational modes are like the

harmonics or

notes of the violin string, and each type of particle corresponds to one of these

notes.]

[

]

The theorists are saying that a string is the shortest entity yet it has the ability to vibrate.

Something doesn’t jive! Mukhi reminds us once again that a string is made of infinite points each

of which

is smaller

than the

Planck-length string.

A string is like a collection of infinitely many point particles, constrained to fit

together to form a

continuous object.

Thus it effectively has infinitely many

degrees of freedom – always a

dangerous thing!

[

]

[

eah. We run the risk of

entering the realm of infinite idiocy.

]

So let’s see if we got this straight. A point particle such as an electron is really a vibrating Planck-

length

string which

is in turn

made of countless point-particles. Man, that’s deep!

More to the point, if as the mathematicians say, a string is one dimensional (i.e., mathematical

dimensions), a plucked

string

inevitably encroaches on another dimension

(

Fig.

)

. When a

string

‘vibrates’ it is no longer mathematically 1-

D! The

mathematician now needs an

ordered pair

(x, y) to

specify a point on the shortest length! Again, the theorist

has retroactively

amended his

assumptions.

Fig 1 Tensions are high: The supernatural string of String Theory

The string theorist begins the presentation by pointing to a 1-D string. He states that the
string is 1-D because there is no up/down or left/right on it. The string is 1-D because you
can only move back and forth along it. They are describing a concept and not an object.
There is no object that is 1-D. Suddenly, the string morphs from a concept to an object.
The string theorist tells us that the string is held at the ends for no reason and the center
begins to vibrate like a plucked guitar cord. Now the string is no longer mathematically
1-D. The string has suddenly encroached on a second mathematical dimension. In the
illustration, the 1-D string has converted into the 2-D string. Point B on the string could
initially be specified with the mathematical ‘coordinate’ (2). Now B is must be specified
with the ordered pair (2, 3). The mathematicians have in effect amended their assumptions
retroactively.

Like Newt's snake, a string is not tied, yet it has tension and wiggles, Bill!

I think I'm going to
give you two
swindlers and your
snake a good whack
with my scepter!

The string of String Theory is a magical entity that embodies every possible contradiction.
Theorists proclaim a string to be the tiniest length imaginable, but then the string stretches as
necessary to accommodate any theory. The string is purportedly under tension, but then, it is
a malleable entity that grows, bends, coils, and forms closed and opened loops to suit the
theorist’s wishes. According to the mathematicians, the string is one-dimensional: it seems to
have only width. But then it encroaches on other dimensions when it vibrates or loops around.
To top it off, string theorists claim that the vacuum that serves as a backdrop and gives shape
to the string is also made of strings. Oh. I almost forgot. String Theorists are asking anyone
with a generous heart to finance an experiment that would enable them to see a 1-D string
and thus prove their theory. [Sure! Why not? Here’s a nickel! Catch!]