String theory research

[grayson]

Hello, my name is Grayson. I am currently learning calculus, trigonometry, and chemistry (My own research). I want to prove string theory somehow with calculus but need to somehow find a video of an atom under a microscope. Anything to research the movements. Anyone who has an STM or AFM. Please record something please

[swansont]

How will this prove string theory?

[exchemist]

10 hours ago, grayson said:

Hello, my name is Grayson. I am currently learning calculus, trigonometry, and chemistry (My own research). I want to prove string theory somehow with calculus but need to somehow find a video of an atom under a microscope. Anything to research the movements. Anyone who has an STM or AFM. Please record something please

Try the internet. But I too don't see how it can help to have a picture of atoms. String theory is not concerned with the motion of atoms. All you need for that is simple kinetic theory  - and some QM if they are bound by chemical bonds.  

[studiot]

11 hours ago, grayson said:

Hello, my name is Grayson. I am currently learning calculus, trigonometry, and chemistry (My own research). I want to prove string theory somehow with calculus but need to somehow find a video of an atom under a microscope. Anything to research the movements. Anyone who has an STM or AFM. Please record something please

Hello, Grayson.

Are you sure you mean string theory not something else ?
Your goal seems more about some form of quantum theory.

 

Are you aware of the size difference between atoms (of the order of 10^-10) metres and strings (of the order of 10^-35) metres ?

This makes atoms 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times larger than strings so you would not really see strings on pictures of atoms.

By the way, I see you are just starting calculus, trigonometry and chemistry and you have posted this in applied chemistry so do you understand this mathematical notation ?

Just ask, we can help with.

[Genady]

11 hours ago, grayson said:

I want to prove string theory

In addition to very good questions above, what does it mean to prove a theory? Is there a proof of any theory in physics that you can point to?

[joigus]

Very good questions indeed.

The only proof of a scientific theory is experiment. Theory by itself doesn't allow us to prove a theory right, but it does allow us to prove it wrong.

My advice would be to try to master trigonometry and calculus first. Also physics and chemistry, of course.

Then algebra, geometry, topology... the works.

Quantum mechanics, relativity --both special and general--, quantum field theory.

Once you understand general relativity and quantum field theory, it's possible to understand why superstrings are perhaps worth considering.

That's the pathway in a nutshell. You're allowed to enter a 'room' before you've completely understood the contents of the previous one. Otherwise it would take several lifetimes.

[studiot]

To put my figures in perspective say you had a picture of a string on an A4 sheet of paper.

Then to put a picture of an atom on a piece of paper at the same scale you would need a piece of paper to be

0.3 x 10²⁵ metres.

1 light year is approximately 10¹⁶ metres so your paper would need to be 3 x 10⁸ light years or 300,000,000 light years

This is the distance to 'nearby' clusters of galaxies, not stars or even individual galaxies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coma_Cluster

Edited August 18, 2023 by studiot

[grayson]

Well I was going to study the electrons of the atoms. Electrons one of the main particles. It is said that string are part of the particles. Also I heard that atoms constantly vibrate. Maybe studying the vibration of the atoms can prove string theory.

2 minutes ago, grayson said:

Well I was going to study the electrons of the atoms. Electrons one of the main particles. It is said that string are part of the particles. Also I heard that atoms constantly vibrate. Maybe studying the vibration of the atoms can prove string theory.

Also, please understand that I dont know for sure if I will prove string theory ever. This i just my lifelong goal

[studiot]

15 minutes ago, grayson said:

Well I was going to study the electrons of the atoms.

Good idea. Most of Chemistry is to do with electrons in one way or another.

 

15 minutes ago, grayson said:

It is said that string are part of the particles.

It was once said that if you rubbed yourself with pig fat and chicken excrement it would cure syphillis.

That was untrue then as it is now.

15 minutes ago, grayson said:

Also I heard that atoms constantly vibrate. Maybe studying the vibration of the atoms can prove string theory.

Studying atomic vibrations is good, very good.

How much do you know about vibrations ? Do you know, for instance, the difference between a wave and a vibration ?

 

Talking of vibrations, I asked a few useful questions in a previous post.

Are you going to answer them ?  They were designed to be helpful.

Edited August 18, 2023 by studiot

[exchemist]

6 minutes ago, grayson said:

Well I was going to study the electrons of the atoms. Electrons one of the main particles. It is said that string are part of the particles. Also I heard that atoms constantly vibrate. Maybe studying the vibration of the atoms can prove string theory.

Also, please understand that I dont know for sure if I will prove string theory ever. This i just my lifelong goal

If you want to study electrons in atoms you need quantum theory, not string theory. I highly recommend quantum theory, once you can do calculus. I studied molecular quantum mechanics as part of my chemistry degree and it was the best thing I ever did.

Atoms constantly vibrate if they are in a chemically bound state, because there is always some energy (zero point energy) in the bonding. If they are not bound, e.g. in a monatomic gas such as argon or helium, they do not vibrate.

By the way, if you don't mind me asking, how old are you? 

  

[grayson]

11 minutes ago, exchemist said:

If you want to study electrons in atoms you need quantum theory, not string theory. I highly recommend quantum theory, once you can do calculus. I studied molecular quantum mechanics as part of my chemistry degree and it was the best thing I ever did.

Atoms constantly vibrate if they are in a chemically bound state, because there is always some energy (zero point energy) in the bonding. If they are not bound, e.g. in a monatomic gas such as argon or helium, they do not vibrate.

By the way, if you don't mind me asking, how old are you? 

  

String theory and quantum mechanics are closely tied. I am wondering if there is any correlation to the vibration of strings and the vibration of atoms. And I would rather not say my age.

Just now, grayson said:

String theory and quantum mechanics are closely tied. I am wondering if there is any correlation to the vibration of strings and the vibration of atoms. And I would rather not say my age.

But I am ahead of my age by a lot, that is for sure.

19 hours ago, swansont said:

How will this prove string theory?

Vibration. Maybe I will convert Hz of the atom (if that is even a thing) to an easy to read sine wave.

9 hours ago, studiot said:

Hello, Grayson.

Are you sure you mean string theory not something else ?
Your goal seems more about some form of quantum theory.

 

Are you aware of the size difference between atoms (of the order of 10^-10) metres and strings (of the order of 10^-35) metres ?

This makes atoms 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times larger than strings so you would not really see strings on pictures of atoms.

By the way, I see you are just starting calculus, trigonometry and chemistry and you have posted this in applied chemistry so do you understand this mathematical notation ?

Just ask, we can help with.

Yes, I know they are very small. I am using particles to better understand string theory

[exchemist]

39 minutes ago, grayson said:

String theory and quantum mechanics are closely tied. I am wondering if there is any correlation to the vibration of strings and the vibration of atoms. And I would rather not say my age.

But I am ahead of my age by a lot, that is for sure.

Vibration. Maybe I will convert Hz of the atom (if that is even a thing) to an easy to read sine wave.

Yes, I know they are very small. I am using particles to better understand string theory

OK that's fine if you don't want to say your age.

But I repeat, atoms only vibrate when bound to something else by a bond that allows motion about a central position. In such cases the vibration frequency is determined by the characteristics of the bond, which is in turn determined by molecular QM. Free atoms don't vibrate. There is no Hz of the atom. 

String theory is something else entirely - and by the way it isn't really even a proper theory so far, as it makes no testable predictions.  

Edited August 18, 2023 by exchemist

[grayson]

Hello everyone. I love all of your answers but make sure to read this before posting. Either quote this or quote something else other than the main question. Mr. Brown and Einstein all made discoveries in Brownian motion. Maybe In an atom there is something causing it to vibrate. Some external factor other than heat. All I need is a video of an atom under a really good microscope so I can study its vibration. If I can do that than I can find a correlation to string theory. Thank you

[Genady]

3 minutes ago, grayson said:

Maybe In an atom there is something causing it to vibrate.

Yes. Gravitational waves.

[chenbeier]

Quote

All I need is a video of an atom under a really good microscope so I can study its vibration.

Are you kidding?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/see-the-highest-resolution-atomic-image-ever-captured/

 

 

[grayson]

Okay that's fine if you don't want to say your age

But I repeat, atoms only vibrate when bound to something else by a bond that allows motion about a central position. In such cases the vibration frequency is determined by the characteristics of the bond, which is in turn determined by molecular QM. Free atoms don't vibrate. There is no Hz of the atom. 

String theory is something else entirely - and by the way it isn't really even a proper theory so far, as it makes no testable predictions.

(couldnt find a way to quote it)

Isn't a bond made from electromagnetism?

And also, Doesn't string theory make up pretty much every property of a particle?

What I am trying to say is that electromagnetic bond has to do with string theory, so shouldn't vibrations have to do with it to?

[chenbeier]

3 minutes ago, grayson said:

couldnt find a way to quote it)

Quote

 

Use " in the answer section

Edited August 18, 2023 by chenbeier

[studiot]

20 minutes ago, grayson said:

Maybe In an atom there is something causing it to vibrate. Some external factor other than heat. All I need is a video of an atom under a really good microscope so I can study its vibration. If I can do that than I can find a correlation to string theory. Thank you

I am not interested in your age, but since you clearly think you know more than the experts here, I can only suggest you get a good book on NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) and the vibrational modes due to quantum angular momentum.

 

Bu I have to tell you that you will find that rotational quantum mechanics has nothing to do with string theory, which has already been long discredited, as you have already been advised.

 

Edited August 18, 2023 by studiot

[grayson]

Clearing some things up:

Quote

17 hours ago, studiot said:

you clearly think you know more than the experts here,

 

No I don't.

Quote

18 hours ago, studiot said:

It was once said that if you rubbed yourself with pig fat and chicken excrement it would cure syphillis.

That was untrue then as it is now.

 

What?!?!?! I am sorry. There is so much stuff in the world that it is hard to know what's real and fake.

Quote

17 hours ago, chenbeier said:

Are you kidding?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/see-the-highest-resolution-atomic-image-ever-captured/

 

That is the most useful thing I have ever come across. Thank you very much. All the other pictures are just tiny dots or have you ever seen "The boy and his atom"? Idk what those things are at this point.

Edit: Also, I don't want to argue. One thing to think about, Science is done best together.

Edited August 19, 2023 by grayson

[iNow]

10 hours ago, grayson said:

Also, I don't want to argue. One thing to think about, Science is done best together.

Sure… Together, because then you can argue!

We all have biases. Pointing out errors and biases in the work and comments of others is sort of at the heart of what science is.

Science is a method of removing/minimizing human bias while finding better and better ways to model the cosmos. Everything we learn is only provisionally accepted, then immediately replaced when a better version comes along.

Science is a blood sport where we assassinate bad ideas wild abandon. You don’t get extra credit for trying hard. 

If you can’t grow a thicker skin and can’t take unending criticism and keep wanting to sing kumbaya with everyone, then you may not be the most ideally suited person to practice science. 

[glueboy]

Ive never seen at atom, and I dont believe you can see one no matter what you got.

 

I believe computers can be miniaturized 10000000000 and MORE below a nanometre.  I've got different thinkings.

Edited September 18, 2023 by glueboy