Yeeeee-Hah! Look at that growth curve!

[Martin]

This is Loop-and-allied Quantum Gravity growth in research papers as of 7 December (I've updated because of minor variation in the last couple of numbers):

 

Year 1994:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/1994/0/1

Year 1995:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/1995/0/1

Year 1996:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/1996/0/1

Year 1997:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/1997/0/1

Year 1998:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/1998/0/1

Year 1999:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/1999/0/1

Year 2000:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/2000/0/1

Year 2001:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/2001/0/1

Year 2002:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/2002/0/1

Year 2003:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/2003/0/1

Year 2004:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/2004/0/1

 

 

Last twelve months (e.g. 20 January 2004 to 20 January 2005):

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/past/0/1

 

1994    61    
1995    83    
1996    72
1997    70
1998    67
1999    76
2000    89
2001    98
2002   121
2003   139
2004   178

 

For contrast I will show the corresponding figures for string-stuff, branes, M, etc. Loop is still small by comparison---fewer people working in it although some really productive ones---and maybe that's good. StringM is an overcrowded field that appears to be going nowhere at present---and is losing citations in the Spires ranking (a measure of how significant other scientists consider research to be, by how often they cite it).

 

for completeness here is the link for postings in 2005 (although at present we are only a few months into the year)

Year to date, 2005:

http://arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+AND+loop+quantum+OR+cosmology+gravity+abs:+AND+AND+quantum+gravity+OR+OR+discrete+phenomenology+OR+canonical+nonperturbative+abs:+OR+OR+spinfoam+AND+spin+foam+AND+OR+triply+doubly+special/0/1/0/2005/0/1

[Severian]

You have to be very careful with the Spires citation rankings since they count self citations (so someone who writes a lot of papers on one area will have more than someone who writes on lots of different areas) and there is no distinction between 'This paper relies heavily on the excellent work of Ref.[4]' and 'This paper demonstrates that the assumptions made in Ref.[5] are not valid.'.

[Martin]

You have to be very careful with the Spires citation rankings...

 

I strongly agree! There is no surefire quantitative way of rating scientific importance of research, or at least no automatic way.

I think Michael Peskin of Stanford SLAC does a knowledgeable job of interpreting the main citation numbers in his annual review of the "Top 50"

sometimes called "What's hot in high energy particle physics".

If you have caught him not being objective or well-informed please let me know---I will count it as educational.

 

trouble is, citations is one of the few measures of quality, as opposed to sheer quantity of research in a given field, that we have!

 

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

speaking of sheer quantity! here is sheer quantity of string research over the past few years as posted on arxiv and retrieved by the same keyword search (string, brane, M-theory) each year:

 

Year 1994:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1994/0/1

Year 1995:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1995/0/1

Year 1996:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1996/0/1

Year 1997:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1997/0/1

Year 1998:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1998/0/1

Year 1999:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1999/0/1

Year 2000:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2000/0/1

Year 2001:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2001/0/1

Year 2002:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2002/0/1

Year 2003:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2003/0/1

Year 2004:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2004/0/1

 

 

Last twelve months:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/past/0/1

 

there was some unexplained variation in the counts. The first column is what I got Tuesday, 7 December, the second is for Tuesday 14 December, the third is for Thursday 30 December, the fourth column is for evening Tuesday 4 January, the fifth column is for evening Thursday 20 January. the sixth column is for evening Tuesday 1 February. So there is still variation (even after the year is over)

 

1994    610   610    610    610    610    610  
1995    801   801    810    801    801    801    
1996   1002  1002   1002   1002   1002   1002   
1997   1248  1248   1248   1248   1248   1248   
1998   1298  1298   1298   1298   1298   1298   
1999   1403  1403   1403   1403   1403   1403   
2000   1428  1428   1428   1492   1492   1492   
2001   1545  1545   1545   1545   1547   1546   
2002   1509  1569   1517   1474   1518   1567  
2003   1406  1420   1337   1368   1261   1440 
2004                1152   1158   1029   1104  

[Severian]

I think Michael Peskin of Stanford SLAC does a knowledgeable job of interpreting the main citation numbers in his annual review of the "Top 50"

 

I know Mike Peskin very well; he is an excellent physicist and I respect his opinions. But there are thousands of particle physics papers published each year, so the 'top 50' is not a good respresentation either. Quantity is not always a good thing.

[Martin]

Sev makes the good point that sets of numbers dont tell the full story and can even give the wrong impression

 

there is another aspect to the Quantum Gravity scene, a small but important area of research------the Dynamical Triangulations approach to QG.

 

there was a breakthrough in 1998 when the "Causal" or "Lorentzian" way of doing DT was found.

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/1998/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/1999/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2000/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2001/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2002/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2003/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2004/0/1

 

Last 12 months:

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/past/0/1

 

 

 

 

1998   3
1999   3
2000   5 
2001   4
2002   6
2003   4
2004   4

 

======

for comparison, the following are wider searches, so miss less but get more stuff they shouldnt

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+Lorentzian+OR+AND+integral+path+AND+triangulations+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/1998/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+Lorentzian+OR+AND+integral+path+AND+triangulations+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/1999/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+Lorentzian+OR+AND+integral+path+AND+triangulations+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2000/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+Lorentzian+OR+AND+integral+path+AND+triangulations+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2001/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+Lorentzian+OR+AND+integral+path+AND+triangulations+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2002/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+Lorentzian+OR+AND+integral+path+AND+triangulations+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2003/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+Lorentzian+OR+AND+integral+path+AND+triangulations+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2004/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+Lorentzian+OR+AND+integral+path+AND+triangulations+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/past/0/1

[ydoaPs]

in The Fabric of The Cosmos, Brian Greene talks about how some people think quantum loop and string theories are going to end of being the same theory. they are just supposed to be starting at different ends of the theory. what do you think?

[Martin]

in The Fabric of The Cosmos, Brian Greene talks about how some people think quantum loop and string theories are going to end of being the same theory. they are just supposed to be starting at different ends of the theory. what do you think?

 

I believe he has been heard singing a different tune lately

 

like in the 7 December New York Times Science section article

 

"String theory, at 20, explains everything (not)"

 

If you like to pay attention to what BG says then I will try to find an online quote. things have been changing for string a lot in the past 3 years, so it is good to get people recent messages

 

as for my personal opinion, not sure you would find it relevant or be open to the reasoning behind it

[Martin]

This is part of a long article in the 7 December New York Times Science section, by NYT science writer Dennis Overbye:

String theory, at 20, explains everything (not)

 

It was reporting an Aspen conference celebrating the string theory 20th birthday. The last paragraph described the closing words of the conference: a summary by Stephen Shenker, with comment from the audience by Brian Greene.

 

---quote----

 

...Dr. Shenker said it would be great to find out that string theory was right.

 

From the audience Dr. Greene piped up, "Wouldn't it be great either way?"

 

"Are you kidding me, Brian?" Dr. Shenker responded. "How many years have you sweated on this?"

 

But if string theory is wrong, Dr. Greene argued, wouldn't it be good to know so physics could move on? "Don't you want to know?" he asked.

 

Dr. Shenker amended his remarks. "It would be great to have an answer," he said, adding, "It would be even better if it's the right one."

----endquote---

 

for more from the NYT article on string theory (recent perspectives) see

http://pmbryant.typepad.com/b_and_b/2004/12/string_theory_d.html

[ydoaPs]

that doesn't go either way, and FOTC was published this year.

[Martin]

that doesn't go either way,..

 

That is your opinion. On this issue I disagree with you and agree instead with Brian Greene:

 

From the audience Dr. Greene piped up, "Wouldn't it be great either way?"

 

"Are you kidding me, Brian?" Dr. Shenker responded. "How many years have you sweated on this?"

 

But if string theory is wrong, Dr. Greene argued, wouldn't it be good to know so physics could move on? "Don't you want to know?" he asked.

 

...[Fabric'] was published this year.

 

You are certainly right about that! I think that Brian Greene has changed his message since that book, Fabric, was written and even since it was published. I think it is greatly to his credit that even though he has built a writing career on promoting and popularizing string he is now openly considering the possibility that it is wrong.

 

B.G. is entertaining the possibility that string is a flop (as physics) and may need to be chucked out so that physics can move on.

 

the confusion and decline in string research has been interesting to watch in the past several years----especially since Jan 2003 with the publication of a paper by Kachru et al.

 

B.G. was not exactly at the forefront in acknowledging the change that has come over the string enterprise, but (to his credit) he seems to be increasingly aware of it.

 

you mentioned Loop Gravity (one of the alternative approaches to quantizing General Relatvity) but I do not see that this has very much to do with Loop Gravity. except that Loop has been gaining researchers while people have been getting out of string. (but that doesnt have to be significant---as Sev has observed, raw numbers of papers, raw research output is not the final measure!)

[Martin]

... some people think quantum loop and string theories are going to end of being the same theory. they are just supposed to be starting at different ends of the theory. what do you think?

 

this was a central message in Lee Smolin's book "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity" (August 2002)

 

that was a popular book (like "Elegant" and "Fabric") and I suspect they tend to lag the field by a few years

 

but that idea seems to have made sense back in 2002 when Smolin was making the point.

 

the central flaw in stringy analysis is its dependence on a preselected background geometry---Loop gets around this, but has its own shortcomings----so (the idea went) maybe the answer is to put them together. Get BACKGROUND INDEPENDENCE into string by basing it on Loop methods.

 

but in 2003 signs appeared that string approaches might experience general failure---the whole enterprise might be a flop

some people had been pointing out the absence of experimental verification for a long time, but in 2003 things became more worrisome

 

there is less interest among the Loop people now in the prospect of a connection with String-----you dont want to tie your little boat to a sinking Titanic---so you dont hear Smolin talking about this.

he used to do string papers as well as loop, but he told John Baez this summer that he wont be doing any more string research from now on.

 

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

 

well, you asked my opinion and I havent hinted at it yet.

I have been talking about what Smolin said in 2002 and various utterances of Brian Greene in 2004.

 

I am doubtful that this will make much sense to you, but my opinion is that the newer (1998) approach of Lorentzian DT is making more rapid progress now than either String (1980s) or Loop (1990s).

 

DT is a completely different approach from String and Loop

and it had an important success in 2004. (string simulation of gravity is actually not very good as Thanu Padmanabhan pointed out this year, but

Lorentzian DT seems to make classical spacetime emerge in the limit and to reproduce some semiclassical results)

 

my guess would be that String research will continue to decline or be increasingly shifted over to mediocre people, my guess is that Loop will continue exponential growth for the foreseeable future

but that in the end will be absorbed into an even newer approach (like maybe DT?)

 

my guess is that DT will be entering a growth phase in 2005 or 2006 (after being flat for some years)

 

my feeling is that finding theoretical connections linking Loop to String is probably irrelevant----well, this is what you asked about, isnt it

[Martin]

This is part of a long article in the 7 December New York Times Science section' date=' by NYT science writer Dennis Overbye:

[b']String theory, at 20, explains everything (not)[/b]

 

It was reporting an Aspen conference celebrating the string theory 20th birthday. The last paragraph described the closing words of the conference: a summary by Stephen Shenker, with comment from the audience by Brian Greene.

 

---quote----

 

...Dr. Shenker said it would be great to find out that string theory was right.

 

From the audience Dr. Greene piped up, "Wouldn't it be great either way?"

 

"Are you kidding me, Brian?" Dr. Shenker responded. "How many years have you sweated on this?"

 

But if string theory is wrong, Dr. Greene argued, wouldn't it be good to know so physics could move on? "Don't you want to know?" he asked.

 

Dr. Shenker amended his remarks. "It would be great to have an answer," he said, adding, "It would be even better if it's the right one."

----endquote---

 

for more from the NYT article on string theory (recent perspectives) see

http://pmbryant.typepad.com/b_and_b/2004/12/string_theory_d.html

 

that article by Dennis Overbye (science reporter for the NYT) had some words from Lawrence Krauss too, that I want to keep tabs on. He is a cosmologist at Case Western Reserve. here is one of the quotes from Krauss in the NYT article:

---exerpt from Overbye---

Dr. Krauss said, "We bemoan the fact that Einstein spent the last 30 years of his life on a fruitless quest, but we think it's fine if a thousand theorists spend 30 years of their prime on the same quest."

---end quote---

 

In another context, Krauss has also quoted Richard Feynman memorably:

"String theorists don't make predictions.

They make excuses."

[Martin]

here is a new URL, or maybe an old one updated

 

http://arxiv.org/Stats/

 

it gives stats for various branches of physics research postings per month in HEP compared with other things. (HEP is high energy physics, particle physics, for many years dominated by stringy research but the focus may be shifting slightly). So the graphs compare

 

HEP

Condensed Matter Physics

Astrophysics

 

As the arxiv page points out, CM has grown strongly in past decade and may surpass HEP this year or next

 

one of these things where a picture or graph can help get an idea of what's going on

[Martin]

here is stringy research postings over the past few years retrieved by the same keyword search (string, brane, M-theory) each year:

 

Year 1994:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1994/0/1

Year 1995:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1995/0/1

Year 1996:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1996/0/1

Year 1997:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1997/0/1

Year 1998:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1998/0/1

Year 1999:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/1999/0/1

Year 2000:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2000/0/1

Year 2001:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2001/0/1

Year 2002:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2002/0/1

Year 2003:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2003/0/1

Year 2004:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2004/0/1

 

Past twelve months:

http://lanl.arXiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/past/0/1

 

often there is unexplained variation in the counts. I recorded them Tuesday evening for a few weeks. you can see the results in a previous post. The tabulation here includes Past 12 Months (PTM) for dates in 2005

String/M research preprints at Arxiv.org
date    8Feb  15Feb  22Feb
1994    610    610     610      
1995    801    801     801      
1996   1002   1002    1002    
1997   1248   1248    1248   
1998   1298   1298    1298    
1999   1403   1402    1402    
2000   1493   1492    1492    
2001   1546   1546    1546   
2002   1529   1445    1468
2003   1422   1383    1359
2004   1136   1113    1110
PTM    1044   1032    1033 

[Martin]

that article by Dennis Overbye (science reporter for the NYT) had some words from Lawrence Krauss too' date=' that I want to keep tabs on. He is a cosmologist at Case Western Reserve. here is one of the quotes from Krauss in the NYT article:

---exerpt from Overbye---

Dr. Krauss said, "We bemoan the fact that Einstein spent the last 30 years of his life on a fruitless quest, but we think it's fine if a thousand theorists spend 30 years of their prime on the same quest."

---end quote---

 

In another context, Krauss has also quoted Richard Feynman memorably:

"String theorists don't make predictions.

They make excuses."[/quote']

 

the quote from Feynman surfaced in debate between Brian Greene and Lawrence Krauss.

Here is a bit from the archives at Not Even Wrong:

------------------------------

Peter,

 

 

"String theorists do not make predictions. They make excuses".

 

 

Do you recall where you read that?

Posted by: O at February 6, 2005 05:48 AM

----------------------------

About the Feynman quote: kind of funny, given the other discussion here, but the source is Lawrence Krauss. Two or three years ago the Museum of Natural History here in New York organized a public debate about string theory. On the pro side were Brian Greene and Jim Gates, on the negative side Krauss and Glashow, with Lisa Randall also on the panel. It was during this debate that Krauss quoted Feynman. You'd have to ask Krauss for his source, possibly he heard Feynman say this.

Posted by: Peter at February 6, 2005 07:54 AM

-----------------------------

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/blog/archives/000151.html

[Martin]

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/library/topcites/2004/annual.shtml

 

the Spires HEP "TopCites" list is out for 2004. It is the closest thing to an objective scorecard or a "Top Forty Hits" list for high energy physics (HEP).

 

How many later papers refer back to and cite a given paper is a rough quantitative index of how important or useful researchers find it to be. (of course, as Severian pointed out, authors may cite their own papers---which if they write a great many later papers citing a given one can give an inflated idea of its importance)

 

Back in the 1990s, indeed up until 2002 or so, this annual list was dominated by string-and-related research papers. In the nineties, recent (past five years) stringy research papers tended to be the most frequently cited. This was consistent with the impression that stringy research was important and progressing.

 

Since 2003 there has been a sharp decline in the number of recent stringy papers that make the TopCite chart. String has gone from almost all to almost nothing, in this sense. It is interesting to observe and chronicle this decline in string importance.

 

I will take the Spires HEP TopCite list and copy it here with all the papers from before year 2000 excluded. that way we can see what the most highly cited RECENT (past five years) papers are.

 

What I find is that if one does this one gets a list of the 54 most highly cited recent papers and of these 54 only 7 are stringish.

[Martin]

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/library/topcites/2004/annual.shtml'>http://www.slac.stanford.edu/library/topcites/2004/annual.shtml

Here are TopCite lists from past years, for comparison.

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/library/topcites/

 

What I have prepared here is the Spires TopCite list for 2004 with pre-2000 papers deleted to show the most highly cited recent papers. the original list had 111 papers: it was not a "top forty" or "top fifty" as it has been in past years, but a "top 111". There are more stringy papers at the bottom, if you scroll down, but still not a lot. I have bold-faced the stringy papers to make them easier to find. The number before the paper is how many other later papers cited it, a measure of its importance or usefulness. The most highly cited was (as usual) the report of the Particle Data Group, with 1689 citations.

 

1689

 

Review of particle physics. Particle Data Group

By Particle Data Group (C. Caso et al.).

Most recent version published in Phys.Lett.B592:1-1110,2004

 

1082

 

First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmological parameters

By WMAP Collaboration (D.N. Spergel et al.).

Published in Astrophys.J.Suppl.148:175,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0302209]

 

0539

 

First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Preliminary maps and basic results

By C.L. Bennett, M. Halpern, G. Hinshaw, N. Jarosik, A. Kogut, M. Limon, S.S. Meyer, L. Page, D.N. Spergel, G.S. Tucker, E. Wollack, E.L. Wright, C. Barnes, M.R. Greason, R.S. Hill, E. Komatsu, M.R. Nolta, N. Odegard, Hiranya V. Peiris, L. Verde, J.L. Weiland (NASA, Goddard & British Columbia U. & Princeton U. & Chicago U., Astron. Astrophys. Ctr. & Chicago U. & Chicago U., EFI & KICP, Chicago & Brown U. & UCLA & SSAI, Lanham).

Published in Astrophys.J.Suppl.148:1,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0302207]

 

0315

 

Evidence for a narrow S = +1 baryon resonance in photoproduction from the neutron

By LEPS Collaboration (T. Nakano et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.91:012002,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0301020]

 

0314

 

First results from KamLAND: Evidence for reactor anti-neutrino disappearance

By KamLAND Collaboration (K. Eguchi et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.90:021802,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0212021]

 

0248

 

Cosmological parameters from SDSS and WMAP

By SDSS Collaboration (Max Tegmark et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.D69:103501,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0310723]

 

0248

 

Observation of a baryon resonance with positive strangeness in K+ collisions with Xe nuclei

By DIANA Collaboration (V.V. Barmin et al.).

Published in Phys.Atom.Nucl.66:1715-1718,2003 (Yad.Fiz.66:1763-1766,2003) [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0304040]

 

0235

 

Observation of an exotic S = +1 baryon in exclusive photoproduction from the deuteron

By CLAS Collaboration (S. Stepanyan et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.91:252001,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0307018]

 

0227

 

Diquarks and exotic spectroscopy

By Robert L. Jaffe, Frank Wilczek (MIT, LNS).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.91:232003,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ph/0307341]

 

0215

 

Direct evidence for neutrino flavor transformation from neutral current interactions in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

By SNO Collaboration (Q.R. Ahmad et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.89:011301,2002 [PDF file from arXiv: nucl-ex/0204008]

 

0204

 

Type Ia supernova discoveries at z > 1 from the Hubble Space Telescope: Evidence for past deceleration and constraints on dark energy evolution

By Supernova Search Team (Adam G. Riess et al.).

Published in Astrophys.J.607:665-687,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0402512]

 

0197

 

High-energy physics event generation with PYTHIA 6.1

By Torbjorn Sjostrand (Lund U., Dept. Theor. Phys.), Patrik Eden (Nordita), Christer Friberg, Leif Lonnblad, Gabriela Miu (Lund U., Dept. Theor. Phys.), Stephen Mrenna (UC, Davis), Emanuel Norrbin (Lund U., Dept. Theor. Phys.).

Published in Comput.Phys.Commun.135:238-259,2001 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ph/0010017]

 

0190

 

De Sitter vacua in string theory

By Shamit Kachru (Stanford U., Phys. Dept. & SLAC), Renata Kallosh, Andrei Linde (Stanford U., Phys. Dept.), Sandip P. Trivedi (Tata Inst.).

Published in Phys.Rev.D68:046005,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0301240]

 

0189

 

The Sloan Digital Sky Survey: technical summary

By SDSS Collaboration (Donald G. York et al.).

Published in Astron.J.120:1579-1587,2000 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0006396]

 

0186

 

Strings in flat space and pp waves from N=4 superYang-Mills

By David Berenstein, Juan M. Maldacena, Horatiu Nastase (Princeton, Inst. Advanced Study).

Published in JHEP 0204:013,2002 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0202021]

 

0186

 

Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) first year observations: TE polarization

By A. Kogut, D.N. Spergel, C. Barnes, C.L. Bennett, M. Halpern, G. Hinshaw, N. Jarosik, M. Limon, S.S. Meyer, L. Page, G.S. Tucker, E. Wollack, E.L. Wright (NASA, Goddard & Princeton U. & British Columbia U. & Chicago U., EFI & KICP, Chicago & Brown U. & UCLA).

Published in Astrophys.J.Suppl.148:161,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0302213]

 

0181

 

Observation of an exotic S = -2, Q = -2 baryon resonance in proton proton collisions at the CERN SPS

By NA49 Collaboration (C. Alt et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.92:042003,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0310014]

 

0178

 

Large N field theories, string theory and gravity

By Ofer Aharony (Rutgers U., Piscataway), Steven S. Gubser (Harvard U.), Juan M. Maldacena (Harvard U. & Princeton, Inst. Advanced Study), Hirosi Ooguri (UC, Berkeley & LBL, Berkeley), Yaron Oz (CERN).

Published in Phys.Rept.323:183-386,2000 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/9905111]

 

0177

 

Evidence for a narrow |S| = 1 baryon state at a mass of 1528-MeV in quasireal photoproduction

By HERMES Collaboration (A. Airapetian et al.).

Published in Phys.Lett.B585:213,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0312044]

 

0177

 

First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Implications for inflation

By H.V. Peiris, E. Komatsu, L. Verde, D.N. Spergel, C.L. Bennett, M. Halpern, G. Hinshaw, N. Jarosik, A. Kogut, M. Limon, S.S. Meyer, L. Page, G.S. Tucker, E. Wollack, E.L. Wright (Princeton U. & NASA, Goddard & British Columbia U. & Chicago U., EFI & KICP, Chicago & Brown U. & UCLA).

Published in Astrophys.J.Suppl.148:213,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0302225]

 

0173

 

Observation of an exotic baryon with S = +1 in photoproduction from the proton

By CLAS Collaboration (V. Kubarovsky et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.92:032001,2004 (Erratum-ibid.92:049902,2004) [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0311046]

 

0172

 

Final results from the Hubble Space Telescope key project to measure the Hubble constant

By W.L. Freedman, B.F. Madore, B.K. Gibson, L. Ferrarese, D.D. Kelson, S. Sakai, J.R. Mould, R.C. Kennicutt, H.C. Ford, J.A. Graham, J.P. Huchra, S.M.G. Hughes, G.D. Illingworth, L.M. Macri, P.B. Stetson, P.B. Stetson (Carnegie Inst. Observ. & Caltech, IPAC & Swinburne U., Ctr. Astrophys. Supercomput. & Rutgers U., Piscataway & Carnegie Inst., Wash., D.C. & NOAO, Tucson & Res. Sch. Astron. Astrophys., Weston Creek & Arizona U., Astron. Dept. - Steward Observ. & Johns Hopkins U. & Harvard-Smithsonian Ctr. Astrophys. & Cambridge U., Inst. of Astron. & Lick Observ. & Dominion Astrophys. Obs., Victoria).

Published in Astrophys.J.553:47-72,2001 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0012376]

 

0169

 

Measurement of the total active B-8 solar neutrino flux at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory with enhanced neutral current sensitivity

By SNO Collaboration (S.N. Ahmed et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.92:181301,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: nucl-ex/0309004]

 

0166

 

Evidence for formation of a narrow K0(S) p resonance with mass near 1533-MeV in neutrino interactions

By A.E. Asratyan, A.G. Dolgolenko, M.A. Kubantsev (Moscow, ITEP).

Published in Phys.Atom.Nucl.67:682-687,2004 (Yad.Fiz.67:704-709,2004) [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0309042]

 

0166

 

Cosmological results from high-z supernovae

By Supernova Search Team (John L. Tonry et al.).

Published in Astrophys.J.594:1-24,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0305008]

 

0164

 

The Cosmological constant and dark energy

By P.J.E. Peebles (Princeton U.), Bharat Ratra (Kansas State U.).

Published in Rev.Mod.Phys.75:559-606,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0207347]

 

0161

 

The BaBar detector

By BABAR Collaboration (B. Aubert et al.).

Published in Nucl.Instrum.Meth.A479:1-116,2002 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0105044]

 

0153

 

Indications of neutrino oscillation in a 250 km long baseline experiment

By K2K Collaboration (M.H. Ahn et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.90:041801,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0212007]

 

0152

 

New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from global QCD analysis

By J. Pumplin, D.R. Stump, J. Huston, H.L. Lai, P. Nadolsky, W.K. Tung (Michigan State U.).

Published in JHEP 0207:012,2002 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ph/0201195]

[Total citations in HEP]

 

0147

 

Hierarchies from fluxes in string compactifications

By Steven B. Giddings (Santa Barbara, KITP & UC, Santa Barbara), Shamit Kachru (Santa Barbara, KITP & Stanford U., Phys. Dept. & SLAC), Joseph Polchinski (Santa Barbara, KITP).

Published in Phys.Rev.D66:106006,2002 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0105097]

 

0147

 

Observation of narrow baryon resonance decaying into pK0(s) in pA interactions at 70-GeV/c with SVD-2 setup

By SVD Collaboration (A. Aleev et al.). [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0401024]

 

0141

 

Measurement of the rate of nu/e + d --> p + p + e- interactions produced by B-8 solar neutrinos at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

By SNO Collaboration (Q.R. Ahmad et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.87:071301,2001 [PDF file from arXiv: nucl-ex/0106015]

 

0140

 

Evidence for the positive-strangeness pentaquark Theta+ in photoproduction with the SAPHIR detector at ELSA

By SAPHIR Collaboration (J. Barth et al.).

Published in Phys.Lett.B572:127-132,2003

 

0140

 

The Sloan Digital Sky Survey: early data release

By SDSS Collaboration (Chris Stoughton et al.).

Published in Astron.J.123:485-548,2002

 

0139

 

A Phantom menace?

By R.R. Caldwell (Princeton U.).

Published in Phys.Lett.B545:23-29,2002 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/9908168]

 

0135

 

Noncommutative field theory

By Michael R. Douglas (Rutgers U., Piscataway & IHES, Bures-sur-Yvette), Nikita A. Nekrasov (IHES, Bures-sur-Yvette & Moscow, ITEP).

Published in Rev.Mod.Phys.73:977-1029,2001 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0106048]

 

0132

 

Stellar population synthesis at the resolution of 2003

By G. Bruzual (Merida, CIDA), Stephane Charlot (Garching, Max Planck Inst. & Paris, Inst. Astrophys.).

Published in Mon.Not.Roy.Astron.Soc.344:1000,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0309134]

 

0130

 

First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: The Angular power spectrum

By G. Hinshaw, D.N. Spergel, L. Verde, R.S. Hill, S.S. Meyer, C. Barnes, C.L. Bennett, M. Halpern, N. Jarosik, A. Kogut, E. Komatsu, M. Limon, L. Page, G.S. Tucker, J. Weiland, E. Wollack, E.L. Wright (NASA, Goddard & Princeton U. Observ. & SSAI, Lanham & Chicago U., Astron. Astrophys. Ctr. & Chicago U. & Chicago U., EFI & KICP, Chicago & Princeton U. & British Columbia U. & Brown U. & UCLA).

Published in Astrophys.J.Suppl.148:135,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0302217]

 

0124

 

The First data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey

By SDSS Collaboration (Kevork Abazajian et al.).

Published in Astron.J.126:2081,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0305492]

 

0118

 

Measurement of day and night neutrino energy spectra at SNO and constraints on neutrino mixing parameters

By SNO Collaboration (Q.R. Ahmad et al.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.89:011302,2002 [PDF file from arXiv: nucl-ex/0204009]

 

0118

 

Rolling tachyon

By Ashoke Sen (Harish-Chandra Res. Inst. & Penn State U.).

Published in JHEP 0204:048,2002 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0203211]

 

0118

 

TESLA: The Superconducting electron positron linear collider with an integrated x-ray laser laboratory. Technical design report. Part 3. Physics at an e+ e- linear collider

By ECFA/DESY LC Physics Working Group (J.A. Aguilar-Saavedra et al.). [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ph/0106315]

 

0118

 

New constraints on omega_M, omega_ lambda, and w from an independent set of eleven high - redshift supernovae observed with HST

By Robert A. Knop, G. Aldering, R. Amanullah, P. Astier, G. Blanc, M.S. Burns, A. Conley, S.E. Deustua, M. Doi, R. Ellis, S. Fabbro, G. Folatelli, A.S. Fruchter, G. Garavini, S. Garmond, K. Garton, R. Gibbons, G. Goldhaber, A. Goobar, D.E. Groom, D. Hardin, I. Hook, D.A. Howell, A.G. Kim, B.C. Lee, C. Lidman, J. Mendez, S. Nobili, P.E. Nugent, R. Pain, N. Panagia, C.R. Pennypacker, S. Perlmutter, R. Quimby, J. Raux, N. Regnault, P. Ruiz-Lapuente, G. Sainton, B. Schaefer, K. Schahmaneche, E. Smith, A.L. Spadafora, V. Stanishev, M. Sullivan, N.A. Walton, L. Wang, W.M. Wood-Vasey, N. Yasuda (Vanderbilt U. & LBL, Berkeley & Stockholm U. & Paris U., VI-VII & Colorado Coll. & UC, Berkeley & American Astron. Society & Tokyo U., RESCEU & Caltech & Lisbon, CENTRA & Baltimore, Space Telescope Sci. & Oxford U. & Cambridge U., Inst. of Astron. & European Southern Obs., Chile & Isaac Newton Group & Barcelona U.).

Published in Astrophys.J.598:102,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0309368]

 

0116

 

Evidence for a narrow resonance at 1530-MeV/C**2 in the K0 p system of the reaction pp ---> Sigma+ K0 p from the COSY-TOF experiment

By COSY-TOF Collaboration (M. Abdel-Bary et al.).

Published in Phys.Lett.B595:127-134,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-ex/0403011]

 

0112

 

4-D gravity on a brane in 5-D Minkowski space

By G.R. Dvali, Gregory Gabadadze, Massimo Porrati (New York U.).

Published in Phys.Lett.B485:208-214,2000 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0005016]

 

0108

 

Cosmological constant: The Weight of the vacuum

By T. Padmanabhan (IUCAA, Pune).

Published in Phys.Rept.380:235-320,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0212290]

 

0105

 

Lattice study of exotic S = +1 baryon

By Shoichi Sasaki (Tokyo U.).

Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.93:152001,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-lat/0310014]

 

0104

 

The Bethe ansatz for N=4 superYang-Mills

By J.A. Minahan, K. Zarembo (Uppsala U., Inst. Theor. Phys.).

Published in JHEP 0303:013,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0212200]

 

0103

 

A Flat universe from high resolution maps of the cosmic microwave background radiation

By Boomerang Collaboration (P. de Bernardis et al.).

Published in Nature 404:955-959,2000 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0004404]

 

 

0102

 

Supergravity and a confining gauge theory: Duality cascades and chi SB resolution of naked singularities

By Igor R. Klebanov (Princeton U.), Matthew J. Strassler (Princeton, Inst. Advanced Study).

Published in JHEP 0008:052,2000 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0007191]

 

 

0102

 

A Fundamental relation between supermassive black holes and their host galaxies

By Laura Ferrarese (UCLA), David Merritt (Rutgers U., Piscataway).

Published in Astrophys.J.539:L9,2000 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0006053]

 

0100

 

Perturbative gauge theory as a string theory in twistor space

By Edward Witten (Princeton, Inst. Advanced Study).

Published in Commun.Math.Phys.252:189-258,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0312171]

 

0100

 

Towards inflation in string theory

By Shamit Kachru (Stanford U., Phys. Dept. & SLAC), Renata Kallosh, Andrei Linde (Stanford U., Phys. Dept.), Juan Maldacena (Princeton, Inst. Advanced Study), Liam McAllister (Stanford U., Phys. Dept.), Sandip P. Trivedi (Tata Inst.).

Published in JCAP 0310:013,2003 [PDF file from arXiv: hep-th/0308055]

 

0100

 

The 3-D power spectrum of galaxies from the SDSS

By SDSS Collaboration (Max Tegmark et al.).

Published in Astrophys.J.606:702-740,2004 [PDF file from arXiv: astro-ph/0310725]

[Martin]

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showpost.php?p=58232&postcount=8

 

for comparison, look back at the 1999 TopCite list

 

The 1999 overall Spires HEP topcite list, with only recent papers counted, had 24 papers which received 125+ citations.

Of these, 15 were recent string papers.

 

The number of citations these 15 recent string papers received that year were:

625, 464, 425, 285, 215, 202, 170 170, 167, 148, 146, 139, 137, 130, 126

 

In 2003, the overall Spires HEP topcites list, with only recent articles were included, had 20 papers which garnered 125+ citations. In sharp contrast only 4 of the 20 were stringy type research (a smaller percentage than in 1999, 25 percent instead of 60 percent)

 

the numbers of citations for these 4 string papers were:

197, 135, 134, 125

 

Now look at 2004, the data we just received.

 

there were 38 recent papers that garnered 125+ citations but again just FOUR were stringy, a still lower percentage of the highly cited research.

Four out of 38 is 10 percent. The numbers of citations for these four were:

190, 186, 178, 147

 

So stringy research has progressed from a dominant position of 60 percent in 1999, to a more marginal importance of 10 percent in 2004.

 

for definiteness remember that the percentage here is of the HEP Topcite list, limited to recent papers with 125 or more citations.

[Martin]

trends noted here continue.

the links to arxiv postings are worth keeping handy

I will update this thread when Michael Peskin's Spires TopCite HEP review comes out for 2004.

 

2005's most important LQG conference is probably the one in Potsdam Germany 10-14 October

http://loops05.aei.mpg.de/index_files/Contents.html

 

http://loops05.aei.mpg.de/index_files/Programme.html

 

http://loops05.aei.mpg.de/index_files/Home.html

[Martin]

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/blog/archives/000201.html

 

Peter Woit's blog ("Not Even Wrong") has been keeping track of the String Crash pretty steadily. Here is a recent lively discussion thread.

[Martin]

one of the on-going stories at this point in physics history is the decline in superstring/M-theory research

 

we need some handy way to keep track of this, like a statistical index.

of course it is like the stockmarket. LQG research, or more precisely

"QGATS" (quantum gravity alternatives to string) has been on the rise but it may not necessarily continue, while string has been on the decline and THAT may not necessarily continue

 

we have no way of accurately predicting the future of scientific research

 

but we can keep track

 

some of the links for indexes I was using earlier in this thread don't work now. the arxiv search engine was changed etc etc. but we can use other

indicators

 

for example suppose every year we simply count the papers with the terms "M-THEORY" or "BRANE" appearing in the abstract. We can do that for the whole year, or as a rough and ready we can do it just for one month, like May.

 

this will not tell us ALL the string-theory-related papers but if we do it consistently it will give us an index and we can watch how that index changes as a measure of activity.

[Martin]

this is what happens if each year you count May publications of papers with the keywords m-theory or brane in the abstract, using a search engine at harvard

 

May 2001    94
May 2002    77
May 2003    58
May 2004    66
May 2005    53

 

I didnt try some other month. I dont care about extreme accuracy it is just a rough trend indicator. If you did it for the whole year then you would have the same qualitative picture, but of course you wouldnt know the score for 2005 yet.

 

these are hardcopy publication figures, the ABSTRACT POSTINGS ONLINE that you get at arxiv would tend to lead this by 6 month or a year because people usually post online first and then the article goes through review and may eventually be accepted for publication, which makes a time-lag.

 

this is the harvard search engine

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/physics_service.html

 

here is an example

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-abs_connect?db_key=AST&db_key=PHY&aut_xct=NO&aut_logic=OR&author=&sim_query=YES&start_mon=06&start_year=2004&end_mon=05&end_year=2005&ttl_logic=OR&title=&txt_logic=OR&text=M-theory+brane&nr_to_return=100&start_nr=1&jou_pick=ALL&ref_stems=&data_and=ALL&group_and=ALL&start_entry_day=&start_entry_mon=&start_entry_year=&min_score=&sort=SCORE&aut_syn=YES&ttl_syn=YES&txt_syn=YES&aut_wt=1.0&ttl_wt=0.3&txt_wt=3.0&aut_wgt=YES&obj_wgt=YES&ttl_wgt=YES&txt_wgt=YES&ttl_sco=YES&txt_sco=YES&version=1

 

this searches for M-theory or brane papers which were published between June 1 2004 and May 31 2005 inclusive-----that is, a recent twelve month period----and it finds 746 such papers

[Martin]

Loop gravity has had a period of rapid growth but

right now it looks to me like 2005 research output will be roughly comparable to 2004.

 

String output still seems to be in decline.

 

What impresses me as the fast growing field of Quantum Gravity is CDT which is still very small---just a few papers a year.

 

To keep track of it, I will use these links, and edit out anything they bring up by mistake. Like Lee Smolin's 2003 survey mentions dynamical triangulations, so it comes up in a keyword search. But the article is not primarily about CDT, so I dont count it.

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2003/0/1

 

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/2004/0/1

 

Last 12 months:

http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/OR+OR+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+Lorentzian+dynamical+abs:+AND+triangulations+AND+causal+dynamical+ti:+AND+gravity+AND+Lorentzian+quantum/0/1/0/past/0/1

 

2003   3
2004   4
LTM    8

 

The same is true in 2005, the keyword search for the last 12 months comes up with 9 articles, but one of them is a broad-scope one by Smolin that surveys several approaches to quantum gravity, so I just count the 8 that are primarily CDT.

 

Of those 8 papers in LTM, six are from 2005, so we know the 2005 crop will be at least 6, but I think since we are still only in mid-August there should be more. In fact 8 seems like a good guess. That would be TWICE last year, which begins to look like exponential growth.

[Martin]

http://arxiv.org/Stats/

 

this shows the relative growth of different branches of physics research

 

you can see that the fast growing area is CONDENSED MATTER (green) and there is even some decline in HEP (blue) which is where string reseach is mainly posted

 

 

 

the general category where quantum gravity research is posted is GR-QC which stands for Gen Rel/Quant Cosmology

the overall category GR-QC is not growing very fast

 

http://arxiv.org/Stats/gr-qc_monthly.png

 

however within that category Loop and Spinfoam QG has shown strong growth in past years. hard to say where this will go in the future. a different approach to QG may emerge and researchers in QG are usually prepared to shift.

 

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

 

people considering research in physics may want to look at these charts to help get an idea of where the fastest growing research areas are

 

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

 

here is a link that used to work until Arxiv changed its search engine

 

http://lanl.arxiv.org/find/nucl-ex,astro-ph,nucl-th,math-ph,hep-ex,physics,cond-mat,hep-lat,quant-ph,gr-qc,hep-ph,hep-th/1/OR+OR+abs:+OR+string+brane+abs:+OR+braneworld+D-brane+abs:+OR+M-theory+p-brane/0/1/0/2006/0/1

 

this is for the year 2006, but the same link for 2003, 2004 etc gave an idea of the trend in string research, which was declining roughly 10 percent per year, it was down to something like 1100 for the year 2004

 

then arxiv would not count hits over a cap of 300, so the link was no longer so useful

 

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

 

the Harvard search engine does not have such a cap, so it still serves to get an idea of the trends in research