There’s a lot of discussion about the usefulness of String Theory. What is it for? Is it Science? Physics? Philosophy? Mathematics? Performance Art? (Check this out!) Has it lost its way, or are people just attacking it because it is now the biggest and easiest target out there? Well, I don’t know for sure but I have my own position. Maybe I’ll talk about it later. Look at Peter Woit’s blog if you want to get a jump start on the matter.
Right now, I want to offer the thesis that one definitely known use of string theory (and other related endeavours) is to give employment to frustrated (but nonetheless enthusiastic) musicians. I give you Brian Wecht, Brook Williams, Nelia Mann, Ted Erler, Matt Lippert, and Nick Jones singing the Strings 2005 song, via the website of Jacques Distler, where I found the mp3 file. Wow!
Before rushing to unkind judgement, be aware that the standard was set by a very large portion of the String Theory community at Strings 1998 in Santa Barbara, where we all (350 of us or so!) sang and danced to Jeff Harvey’s song “The Maldacena” to the tune of “The Macarena”, as described in this article. The person who “blurts out an adequate rendition of the popular Latin tune on his trumpet” (my italics) is me, and it’s also me in silhouette with the weirdest finger positions. Let me be the first to say that my playing was awful, but everybody (except it seems, the reporter) was very kind.
-cvj
P.S. If anyone who went to Strings 2005 has a picture of the above people singing at Strings 2005, please send it if they’d like it posted here!
July 20th, 2005 at 7:34 am
Clifford – Could you at some point try the presumably impossible task of explaining from first principles to a scientifically informed but mathematically limited (yeah, I know it’s a contradiction) lay person why so many physicists think string theory is likely to be, in some sense, correct. I didn’t think Brian Greene really did this, and he’s about as lucid a science writer as I’ve encountered so maybe it’s impossible, but I’d love to see you try.
July 20th, 2005 at 7:43 am
It is far from impossible to get across the sense of it. Note that I cannot explain the motivation of others, but I can explain mine, and speculate as to the others’. I would leave out the word “likely” from what you said above, and replace it with “hoped”. I should probably do this in a proper post on the main page, but I’m going to sit back a while and not put up any long posts for a little bit, so please check back soonish for that.
Thanks for asking!
-cvj
July 20th, 2005 at 8:45 pm
Thanks, I’ll look forward to the post.
July 21st, 2005 at 10:40 am
[...] You may recall my recollection in an earlier post about the dancing of the string theorist participants of the Strings 1998 meeting in Santa Barbara, and you may have listened to the singing of the youth of the field at Strings 2005. A good time was had by all in each case, I understand. [...]
October 27th, 2005 at 12:27 am
as i am alive i tell you i dont know much of what string theory is but i do believe there is something in the air atmosphere that i can see with my own eyes .i have told my doctor that every day these squigly lines sometimes singular sometimes connected before me in the air atmosphere or how ever you want to explain it but their there evey day day. what could this be?it seems to be a conglomerent of stringy like bacteria in the air.what do i see?
October 27th, 2005 at 2:42 am
Ah…. you’ve commented on a post from the old days. Brings tears to my eyes. I was so young, innocent, and fresh to blogging back then….
-cvj
October 27th, 2005 at 9:55 am
Strings and No_sense?
In defense of Peter Woit, and nt that he needs it. Froma layman perspectie it was necessary to have someone stand up and reject the basis,a nd if you beingthe sacradficial lamb for such a position, well, it’s what happens when you at as the a sounding board.
So like K.C. saids people watchthis converstain going on, and from that point of view, I watch and loked for the rejection of string theory and the basis for this approach. S inthis sense it was not a journalistic ability that was coming forward but the basis of such rejection and if such views were unsupported as to the model assumption
October 27th, 2005 at 10:02 am
I know I just broke the point on a “troll’s spelling,” but something interrupted the train of thought before I could correct.
It was a reactionary trigger finger moment to deal with it.
My apologies.
February 21st, 2006 at 9:04 pm
[...] [Update: I was hoping that I might find a home video of Strings 96’s perfomance of “The Maldacena”, by 400 string theorists in unison (to the tune of “The Macarena”, but that seems to be lost forever… see here, and here, for more on that, by the way.] -cvj [...]