Falsifying string theory by testing W boson scattering

[bascule]

http://cmu.edu/news/archive/2007/January/jan23_stringtheory.shtml

 

When the LHC turns on later this year, scientists will begin to investigate the scattering of W bosons, which has not been possible with other particle accelerators. Because the new test follows from a measurement of W boson scattering, it could eventually be performed at the LHC, according to the authors.

 

"The beauty of our test is the simplicity of its assumptions," explained Grinstein. "The canonical forms of string theory include three mathematical assumptions — Lorentz invariance (the laws of physics are the same for all uniformly moving observers), analyticity (a smoothness criteria for the scattering of high-energy particles after a collision) and unitarity (all probabilities always add up to one). Our test sets bounds on these assumptions.

 

"If the test does not find what the theory predicts about W boson scattering," he added, "it would be evidence that one of string theory's key mathematical assumptions is violated. In other words, string theory — as articulated in its current form — would be proven impossible."

 

Thoughts? (I can't find a link to their actual paper, that would be much appreciated, even if I'm too dumb to understand it)

[timo]

I´d assume it´s this paper: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0604/0604255.pdf

 

(hep-ph/0604255)

[Martin]

in case anyone just wants the brief summary, HTML, here's the link

http://arxiv.org/hep-ph/0604255

(Atheist's link gives you the whole article pdf file)

http://cmu.edu/news/archive/2007/January/jan23_stringtheory.shtml

 

 

 

Thoughts? (I can't find a link to their actual paper, that would be much appreciated, even if I'm too dumb to understand it)

 

some current discussion here

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=510

 

the paper came out last year in April and was discussed a fair amount back then. the link I gave has links to some of that earlier discussion.

BTW when it came out last April, the title was "Falsifying String Theory Through WW Scattering" but they apparently had some trouble getting that by the referees so they changed the title---the paper has gone thru 3 or 4 revisions which are linked-to on the summary page.

[bascule]

the paper came out last year in April and was discussed a fair amount back then. the link I gave has links to some of that earlier discussion.

BTW when it came out last April, the title was "Falsifying String Theory Through WW Scattering" but they apparently had some trouble getting that by the referees so they changed the title---the paper has gone thru 3 or 4 revisions which are linked-to on the summary page.

 

What I suppose I'm confused on is if these are tests I've been hearing about for supersymmetry or whether these tests can falsify string theory without falsifying supersymmetry?

[Martin]

some choice comments

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=510#comment-21530

 

Discovering Vedic spirits at LHC would be very interesting, but a paper that tells “if LHC sees Vedic spirits we would have to rethink string theory” is not very interesting.

 

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=510#comment-21574

 

here are a few other observations that would similarly falsify current theories (including string theory): a 4th generation of quarks only, a W that moves faster than light, new vectors that do not fill an adjoint representation, perpetual motion, an anti-commuting boson, a new lepton doublet without its neutrino, nonconservation of energy, antigravity, time machines, a fundamental particle with spin 3, etc.

Why do you think that WW scattering is more interesting?

 

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=510#comment-21474

 

Yes, I was just about to post about this misinformation. You have to admire the sophistry involved in these kinds of press releases. Since string theorists claim that string theory susbsumes all the rest of physics, it therefore follows that any test which confirms any theory anywhere in physics necessarily confirms string theory.

 

Good thinking. That kind of incisive reasoning will surely get us to a Theory Of Everything “real soon now”…that is, if we don’t experience The Singularity first. Or find WMDs in Iraq…

 

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=510#comment-21476

 

In related news, I recently saw a non-black non-raven.

 

========================

 

I looked at the paper some last year. IIRC there was nothing about supersymmetry. Also string would not be falsified if LHC does not find SUSY.

This paper does not propose a test of string theory----more like a test of some foundations of QFT, much older better established theory of which string is a not-very-successful offshoot.

 

It is reasonable that the peer review forced them to scrap the title "Test of String Theory" and substitute the more general "Test of New Physics".

they should not be allowed to pretend that they are offering a test to "falsify string theory", so it is good that they have been required to change the title to "falsifying new physics"------a step in direction of truth in labeling.

 

I guess would apply to pretty much anything after 1950 if not earlier.

 

Paper is a non-issue. Sorry I don't have time to respond with adequate care.

[Royston]

Since string theorists claim that string theory susbsumes all the rest of physics, it therefore follows that any test which confirms any theory anywhere in physics necessarily confirms string theory.

 

Sorry to Bascule for being off topic, but I find this a little ludicrous. AFAIK string theory dictates that the universe is not homogeneous (regarding translational invariance), i.e one co-ordinate is no more significant than another, background independent. So how can they qualify that claim ?