Just caught this on slashdot, and I don't watch streaming content at work, so I haven't actually viewed it. But, apparently, there was a contest judged by Greene (The Elegant Universe) to submit a video explaining string theory in two minutes or less. The best entries, as judged by Greene, are posted at this link:

Science and Technology News, Science Articles | Discover Magazine

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

I just got a better understanding of string theory in 2 minutes than I had after my 3rd reading of Green's book. (Not really, but it was a great video).

You'll enjoy it when you get around to watching it.

__________________
...Old Europe, a once-dominant region now reduced to sucking at the geopolitical teat of America... they spent the better part of the last millennium conquering the world and taking the good stuff home with them... And what do they get for their troubles? Ungrateful colonies demanding their independence. And after you taught them how to play cricket!...

-Jon Stewart

Awesome, I'll have to check that out when I get home.

Thanks.

__________________
“Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.” -Dr. Carl Sagan

I just had to pause it a few times because those ideas can't be absorbed that fast. At least not by me.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

It's actually not bad, given the medium and the time frame.

But the maths, where are the maths ?

I watched both "String Ducky" and "The Problem with Math".

To be honest, I'm not into physics or math at all and only had a 'passing familiarity' with the topic of string theory before and neither of these two videos told me anything about string theory that I didn't already know.

I suppose if one had never heard of the theory, then these videos ought to help give a basic outline of what it is about (which is what I had to begin with).

Btw, I wouldn't say these videos "explain" string theory. The just describe what it kinda looks like.

LOL, my vote goes to those wacky kids at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.

__________________
“Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.” -Dr. Carl Sagan

Still haven't had a chance to watch, as my home time lately has not been in front of a computer. But, that's about what I expected - a primer for the initiate. I just thought that the brevity angle was interesting.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

aye - same for me.
I watched an hour long show on Science Channel awhile back on string theory..and kinda-sorta-mabye understood at least the elementarily concepts of it.
I watched 3 of these videos so far, and I agree - you may only see the value of these videos if you ALREADY have a grasp of the subject.

But in the end - lots of brilliant folks are spending their lives trying to discover this theory - so no 2 minute video is going to it.

Watched "String Ducky". I must say, after struggling to understand the accent of the girl on the video, string theory was a breeze.

It's probably nitpicking, but 'discovery' isn't the right word in this context.
String theory is a purely mathematical construct, which has as of now no way to be confirmed empirically or experimentally. We can't check and look for strings, they're too small (Planck scale). The only foreseeable confirmation (not 'proof') would be the discovery -here it's appropriate- of the supersymmetric cousins of the known particles. These are predicted by the maths and are orders of magnitude heavier than their known counterparts. But the energies involved in discovering them are thus far eluding our tools (heavier particles are, perhaps counterintuitively, more difficult to observe because of the E=mc² relation between matter and energy, see 'particle accelerators' for a full explanation).

I love the sound of the 'Eastern European' (Polish or Russian) accent when speaking English as a second language - it sounds very cool and quite distinctive!

Never mind the videos, I know enough about
String Theory to know I hate it, and I hope it
is supplanted.

I mean, ten dimensions? (11?) 6-7 of them all
"bundled up", or something?

Chrissake, I thought the most reliable theories
were in essence SIMPLE. Well, String Theory
ain't simple, and the last I read was that its
leading authorities, such as Edward Witten,
were saying the math was so complicated it
might not be all put together for another 50 years. 50!

Furthermore, a big strike against String Theory
is that in all this time it has made NO predictions
subject to experimental verification.

Since it became been the focus of intense study
in the mid-1960s you would think it might by now
have produced a little something for the guys with
the colliders and telescopes.

But no: it has not.

My best hope for the damn thing is that it proves
useful in the formulation of a more incisive theory,
somewhat as Lorenz-Fitzgerald contraction was
useful to Special Relativity.

For the time being the area at the edge of physics
which I find most interesting is Bell's Inequality,
which IS subject to experiment.

I wish I was smart enough to grasp it better.

Mr. drgoodtrips, I commend Prof. Bell to your attention.

You could probably grasp all that I cannot, and I think
it would interest you.

__________________
From the fury of the Northmen, Good Lord, deliver us.

Those whose attention spans exceed two minutes
and do not require motion picture stimulation might
wish to take a look at this very good 5-page article
featuring string theory from The New Yorker
(pub. 10/2/06):


Unstrung: The New Yorker

__________________
From the fury of the Northmen, Good Lord, deliver us.

Emotional reactions to theories - other than perhaps perplexity or wonder - continue to amuse me. Why would we desire to supplant a theory that holds so much promise despite it's absence in experimental science?

I guess beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. Granted, to visually behold more than 3 dimensions + time is a challenge with our eyes and senses limited in the 3D + time world. However with some well used and readily understood mathematics (for those who care to wander that path) we can in a fashion extend our senses and draw 2D models (or build 3D models) of the higher dimensions. These models appear visually complex and unreachable from our braneworld - but the math behind them is not.

Now, the development of new math to further extend the string theories can be left to the likes of Witten, and I think that this is what he refers to when lamenting complexity.

Besides 50 years is not that long. 2400 years or so ago Democritus postulated the atom. Aristotle and others rejected it and it took another 2000 years for Dalton to pick it up and try again - this time with the advantage of accurate quantitative measurements when combining chemicals (Lavoisier). It then took another 50 years for the theory to be generally accepted. I'd say we are comfortably ahead of schedule if we are to accept Witten's 50 year wait plus the 90 years since the first postulation of string theory. Interestingly string theory also, like Democritus' atoms, underwent a falling out of favour and revival.

GUT - may be observable from proton decay. The now repaired in 2006 Super-K III may find it.

Supersymmetry - observations possible with current technology in 5-10 years. This may also yield clues to the nature of multidimensional space.