Introduction to Superstring Theory and its postulated 10-dimensional Universe

(revised 01/23/02)
New theories have recently emerged to explain discoveries in the macroscopic universe as well as within the
subatomic world. There are 4 observable forces in Nature. Quantum mechanics describes well the
electromagnetic force (light, radio, magnetism), the strong nuclear force (what binds protons together with
neutrons), and the weak nuclear force (seen in certain radioactive decays). Einsteins General Relativity
describes gravity. Like oil and water, the t w o theories dont mix. Each theory has developed independently of the
other, and each has had unparalleled success as long as it has stayed within its domain.
There is universal consent among mainstream physicists that at one moment the two theories must have been
contained within a larger one. This moment coincides with the Big Bang that suggests our universe evolved
instantaneously from an expanding point of infinite density and energy. The secret of the Big Bangs origin lies with
merging these 2 theories into a higher one, physics Holy Grail theory of everything that has eluded the greatest
physicists (including Einstein). Although many theories have been proposed, the ONLY one that is mathematically
rigorous enough to contain both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics is superstring theory (and its recent
intellectual descendant M-Theory ).
The most challenging notion about superstrings is the rigid requirement for a 10-dimensional universe. We have
trouble visualizing more than 3-dimensions. Einstein proved that time can not be separated from 3-dimensional space
although it is hard to picture what space-time looks like. In retrospect, had Einstein followed course and allowed for
more dimensions as he did with time, he might have discovered what the best minds are leaning toward now.
Recent developments in M-theory have made it easier to determine which of the millions of solutions to
superstring theory are correct. And these recent developments have radically modified the 30-yr-old Big
Bang concept, allowing for millions of big bangs occurring in a never-changing multiverse which may
also contain parallel universes and alternate worlds (and Heaven and Hell???) . This document summarizes
this development up to last weeks (04/16/01) announcements. It is largely based and taken-in-context from Michio
Kakus excellent book Hyperspace (which is a MUST -buy, its a $14 paperback at any mall bookstore, and is
the best of its genre Ive ever read! What Ive reprinted here does not do the subject total justice and you really need
to get the complete book for yourself.)

If my colleagues and I are right, we may soon be saying good-bye to the idea that our universe was a
single fireball created in the Big Bang. (Andrei Linde of Stanford University, in the cover article for the
Nov94 issue of Scientific American)

Perhaps the most deeply entrenched common-sense notion about our world is that it is 3dimensional. It goes without saying that length, width, and breadth suffice to describe all objects in our visible
universe. If we include time as another dimension, then 4 dimensions are sufficient to record all events in the
universe. No matter where our instruments have probed - from deep within the atom to the farthest reaches of the
galactic cluster - we have only found evidence of these 4 dimensions. To claim otherwise publicly that other
dimensions might exist or that our universe may coexist with others is to invite certain scorn.
Yet there is a growing acknowledgement among physicists worldwide (including several Nobel laureates) that
the universe may actually exist in higher-dimensional space . Attempts to splice Quantum Mechanics and
Relativity together have always failed. However if we add one more dimension - a 5th dimension - then the equations
governing light and gravity appear to merge together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Light, in fact, can be explained
as vibrations in the 5th dimension. In a similar way higher dimensions allow for describing all 4 observable forces
under the same mathematical umbrella.
A major problem is accepting such a radical notion is that our senses only perceive 4 dimensions. Vector
Analysis is the calculus of vectors. It is a quantum leap upwards from 2nd-year college calculus. The mathematical
tool of choice for investigating general relativity is Tensor Analysis which in its purest form allows for any number of
dimensions (more than the 3 in standard vector analysis). From p.166 of Schaums Outline Series Theory and
Problems of Vector Analysis (and an introduction to Tensor Analysis) , Dr. Murray Spiegel of Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute states the fact that we cannot visualize points in spaces of dimensions higher than
three has of course nothing whatsoever to do with their existence. (much like saying not being able to
see God doesnt mean He doesnt exist). While straightforward, Tensor Analysis is arguably the most complicated

form of mathematics. Many tensor equations can be formulated only up to a certain qualitative state. Further
derivations can yield multiple solutions which deny a simple E=MC2-type quantitative form. This was a major problem
for superstring theory in which millions of solutions existed but mathematics hadnt progressed far enough to be able to
tell which solution was the correct one. And the experimental means to generate the fantastic energies to split an atom
down to the impossibly-small Planck size - in order to test the superstring hypothesis -- are on the order of a black
hole and way beyond our present-day technological reach.
Fields were first introduced by the great 19th century British scientist Michael Faraday. Simply put, a field is
a collection of numbers defined at every point in space that completely describes a force at that point. What makes
Faradays field concept so powerful is that all forces of nature can be expressed as a field. However we need
one more ingredient before we can understand the nature of any force : We must be able to write down the equations
that these fields obey. The progress of the past hundred years in theoretical physics can be succinctly summarized as
the search for the field equations of the forces of nature.
In the 1860s Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell wrote down the field equations for electricity and
magnetism. In 1915 Einstein discovered the field equations for gravity. The field equations for subatomic forces
were finally written down in the 1970s utilizing the earlier work of Yang and Mills . However the puzzle that has
stumped the greatest minds in physics within this century is why the subatomic field equations look so vastly different
from the field equations of Einstein. In other words, why Quantum Theory is so radically different from
General Relativity.
Perhaps the reason for their failure is they were trapped by common sense. Confined to 3 or 4 dimensions, the
field equations of the subatomic world and the macroscopic universe are impossible to unify. If one allows for higher
dimensions (i.e., hyperspace), the Yang-Mills field, Maxwells field, and Einsteins field can all be placed within
comfortably. The other advantage of field theory is that it allows us to calculate the precise energies at which we can
expect space and time to form wormholes. Unlike the ancients we have the mathematical tools to guide us in building
machines that may one day bend space and time to our whims.
On June 10, 1854, a new geometry was born. The theory of higher dimensions was introduced when George
Bernhard Riemann gave his celebrated lecture before the faculty of the University of Gottingen in Germany. The old
geometry of Euclid - in which all geometric figures are 2- or 3-dimensional - came tumbling down as a new Riemannian
geometry emerged from its ruins. Within 6 decades of Riemanns lecture, Einstein would use 4-dimensional Riemannian
geometry to explain the creation of the universe and its evolution. And 130 years after Riemanns lecture, physicists
would use 10-dimensional geometry to attempt to unite all the laws of the physical universe.
At a very early age, Riemann exhibited his famous traits: fantastic calculational ability, coupled with timidity, and a
life-long horror of any public speaking. Painfully shy, he was the butt of cruel jokes by other boys, causing him to
retreat further into the intensely private world of mathematics. Riemanns father scraped together enough funds to
send his 19-year-old son to the renowned University of Gottingen, where he first met Carl Friedrich Gauss, the
acclaimed Prince of Mathematicians, one of the greatest mathematicians of all time.
The decisive break with Euclidean geometry came when Gauss asked his student Riemann to prepare a
presentation on the foundation of geometry. Gauss was keenly interested in seeing if his student could develop an
alternative to Euclidean geometry based on Gausss own research and beliefs. Over the next several months,
Riemann began painfully developing the theory of higher dimensions, straining his health to the point of a nervous
breakdown. Eventually Riemann developed a startling new picture of the meaning of a force. Breaking from
traditional Newtonian thinking that regarded a force to be an instantaneous interaction at-a-distance, to Riemann
force was a consequence of geometry. Riemann concluded that electricity, magnetism, and gravity are caused
by the crumping of our 3-dimensional universe in the unseen 4-th dimension. By introducing the 4th spatial dimension,
Riemann accidentally stumbled on what would become one of the dominant themes in modern theoretical physics : that
the laws of nature appear simple when expressed in higher-dimensional space.
Riemanns aim was to introduce a new object in mathematics that would enable him to describe all surfaces no
matter how complicated. Riemann found that in 4 spatial dimensions, one needs a collection of 10 numbers at each
point to describe its properties. No matter how crumpled or distorted the space, this collection of 10 numbers at each
point is sufficient to encode all the information about that space. Today this collection of numbers is called the Riemann
metric tensor. It allowed him to erect a powerful apparatus for describing spaces of any dimension with arbitrary
curvature. To his surprise he found that all these spaces are well-defined and self-consistent. Previously it was
thought that terrible contradictions would arise when investigating the forbidden world of higher dimensions.
Riemann found none. In fact it was almost trivial to extend his work to N-dimensional space.

In 1858 he announced that he had finally succeeded in a unified description of light and electricity. Although his
metric tensor gave him a powerful way to describe any curved space in any dimension, he did not know the precise
equations that the metric tensor obeyed; that is, he did not know what made the sheet crumple. Unfortunately a life of
poverty had broken his health, and he died prematurely at the age of 39 before he could complete his geometric theory
of gravity and electricity and magnetism.
{Although Riemann is credited as having been the driving creative force who finally shattered the confines of
Euclidean geometry, by rights the man who should have discovered the geometry of higher dimensions was
Riemanns aging mentor, Gauss himself. In 1817 almost a decade before Riemanns birth, Gauss privately
expressed his deep frustration with Euclidean geometry. In 1869 mathematician James Sylvester recorded that
Gauss had seriously considered the possibility of higher-dimensional spaces. But historians have noted Gausss
tendency to be conservative in his work, his politics, and his personal life. In fact he never once left Germany, and
spent almost his entire life in one city. This also affected his professional life.
The British mathematician William Clifford, who translated Riemanns famous speech for Nature in 1873,
amplified many of Riemanns seminal ideas and was perhaps the first to expand on Riemanns idea that the bending
of space is responsible for the force of electricity and magnetism. This is the first time that anyone had speculated
that a force is nothing but the bending of space itself, preceding Einstein by 50 years. Clifford and Riemann thus
anticipated the discoveries of the pioneers of the 20th century, that the meaning of higher-dimensional space is in its
ability to give a simple and elegant description of forces.}
Riemann was ahead of his time. During the years 1860 to 1905 there was not any fundamental breakthroughs in
our understanding of hyperspace. The mathematical apparatus developed by Riemann became a province of pure
mathematics, contrary to Riemanns original intentions. Without field theory, you cannot make any predictions with
hyperspace. Thus by the turn of the century, the cynics claimed (with justification) that there was no experimental
confirmation of the 4th dimension. But within a few decades, the theory of the 4th-dimension (time) would forever
change the course of human history. It would give us the atomic bomb and the theory of Creation itself. And the man
who would do it would be an obscure physicist named Albert Einstein.
Einsteins early work produced the Special Theory of Relativity which included limits on the speed-of-light and
the notion that matter can be viewed as condensed energy. The profound difference between the work of the
mathematician (such as a Charles Hinton) and that of the physicist (such as an Albert Einstein) could be seen. Hinton
spent most of his adult years trying to visualize higher spatial dimensions. He had no interest in finding a physical
interpretation for the 4th-dimension. Einstein saw however that the 4th-dimension can be taken as a temporal one. He
was guided by a conviction and physical intuition that higher dimensions have a purpose: to unify the principles of
nature. By adding higher dimensions he could unite physical concepts that in a 3-dimensional world have no
connection, such as matter and energy.
Einstein still wasnt satisfied. His key insight up-to-this-time was to use the 4th-dimension (time) to unite the laws
of nature by introducing 2 new concepts: space-time and matter-energy. Although he had unlocked some of the
deepest secrets of nature, he realized there were several gaping holes in his theory. What was the relationship
between these two new concepts? More specifically, what about accelerations, which are ignored in Special
Relativity? And what about gravitation?
His friend Max Planck, the founder of the quantum theory, advised young Einstein that the problem of gravitation
was too difficult. But Einstein plunged ahead to unravel its mystery. In the course of his research with light
propagation, he came to the conclusion that light beams could bend under the influence of gravity. The shocking
conclusion meant that space itself is curved. Einstein independently discovered Riemanns original program to give a
purely geometric explanation of the concept of force. The problem with Riemanns approach, however, was that he
had no idea specifically how gravity or electricity and magnetism caused the warping of space. His approach was
purely mathematical, without any concrete physical picture of precisely how the bending of space was accomplished.
Here Einstein succeeded where Riemann failed.
Einstein used Machs principle as a guide to create his General Theory of Relativity. The presence of
matter-energy determines the curvature of the space-time surrounding it. This is the essence of the physical
principle that Riemann failed to discover, that the bending of space is directly related to the amount of energy and
matter contained within that space. From this deceptively simple statement emerges the principles behind the motions
of stars and galaxies, black holes, the Big Bang, and perhaps the fate of the universe itself.
Nevertheless Einstein was still missing a piece of the puzzle. He had discovered the correct physical principle,
but lacked a rigorous mathematical formalism powerful enough to express this principle. He lacked a version of

Faradays fields for gravity. Ironically Riemann had the mathematical apparatus but not the guiding principle. Einstein
spent 3 long frustrating years from 1912 to 1915 in a desperate search for a mathematical formalism powerful enough
to express the principle. He wrote a letter to his close friend, mathematician Marcel Grossman, pleading, Grossman,
you must help me or else Ill go crazy! Fortunately Grossman, when combing thorough the library for clues to
Einsteins problem, accidentally stumbled on the work of Riemann. Grossman showed Einstein the work of Riemann
and his metric tensor which had been ignored by physicists for 60 years.
To his shock, Einstein found Riemanns celebrated 1854 lecture to be the key to the problem. Almost
line-for-line, the great work of Riemann found its true home in Einsteins principle. The physical
reinterpretation of Reimanns famous 1854 lecture is now called General Relativity; and Einsteins field equations rank
among the most profound ideas in scientific history. In retrospect we now see how close Riemann came to
discovering the theory of gravity 60 years before Einstein. The entire mathematical apparatus was in place in 1854.
His equations were powerful enough to describe the most complicated twisting of space-time in any dimension.
However he lacked the physical picture and the keen physical insight that Einstein provided.
In the mid-1920s Einstein was still not satisfied. He would try one last time to produce another world-class
theory. But on his third try, he failed. He was searching for the theory of everything, a theory that would explain
all the familiar forces found in nature including light and gravity. He coined this theory the Unified Field Theory. He
died with unfinished ideas of various manuscripts on his desk. Ironically the source of Einsteins frustration was the
structure of his own equation. For 30 years he was disturbed by a fundamental flaw in this formulation. On one side
of the equation was the curvature of space-time, which he likened to marble because of its beautiful geometric
structure. However he hated the other side of this equation describing matter-energy, which he considered to be ugly
and he compared to wood. While the marble of space-time was clean and elegant, the wood of matter-energy
was a horrible jumble of confused, seemingly random forces, from subatomic particles, atoms, polymers, and crystals
to rocks, trees, planets, and stars.
Einsteins grand strategy was to turn wood into marble - that is, to give a completely geometric
origin to matter. In retrospect we can probably spot Einsteins error. We recall that the laws of nature simplify and
unify in higher dimensions. Einstein correctly applied this principle twice : in special and in general relativity. However
on his third try, he abandoned this fundamental principle. He blindly tried a number of purely mathematical approaches.
He apparently thought that matter could be viewed as kinks, vibrations, or distortions of space-time. However
without any more solid leads or experimental data, this idea led to a blind alley. It would be left to an obscure
mathematician to take the next step, which would us to the 5th-dimension.
In 1919 Einstein received a letter that left him speechless. It was from a Theodr Kaluza living in what is
Kaliningrad in the former Soviet Union. In a few short paragraphs this young mathematician was proposing a solution
to one of the greatest problems of the century. He was uniting Einsteins theory of gravity with Maxwells theory of
light by introducing the 5th-dimension (that is, 4 dimensions of space and 1 dimension of time). Kaluza began
innocently enough by writing down Einsteins field equations for gravity in 5 dimensions , not the usual 4.
(Reimanns metric tensor, we recall, can be formulated in any number of dimensions.) Then he proceeded to show
that these 5-dimensional equations contained within them Einsteins early 4-dimensional theory (which was to-beexpected) with an additional piece. But what shocked Einstein was that this additional piece was precisely Maxwells
theory of light. In other words this unknown scientist was proposing to combine - in one stroke - the 2 greatest field
theories known to science, Maxwells and Einsteins, by mixing them in the 5th-dimension. This was a theory made
of pure marble-that is, pure geometry. Kalauza had found the first important clue in turning wood into
marble.
Einstein was deeply shaken by Kaluzas letter and in fact refused to respond to the article. He held up its
publication for 2 years. Finally convinced that it was potentially important, he released it for publication. In 1926 the
mathematician Oskar Klein made several improvements on Kaluzas theory, stating perhaps quantum theory could
explain why the 5th-dimension rolled up. On this basis he calculated the size of the 5th-dimension should be 10-35
centimeters (the Planck length), which is much too small for any early experiment to detect its presence. But by the
1930s Kaluza-Klein theory was dead. On the one-hand physicists werent convinced that the 5th-dimension really
existed. Kleins conjecture that the 5th-dimension was curled up into a tiny circle the size of the Planck length was
untestable. The energy necessary to probe this tiny distance is called the Planck energy or 1019 billion electron volts.
It is almost beyond comprehension, beyond anything we will be able to produce within the next several
centuries.

In 1925 a new theory burst into existence. It was christened Quantum Mechanics, and gave us the first
comprehensive formulation with which to pry open the secrets of the atom . Not only did its dazzling rise include a
definitive explanation of the bizarre properties of the atomic world; but quantum mechanics also eclipsed Einsteins
work for many decades. One of the first casualties of the quantum revolution was Einsteins geometric theory of the
universe. In the halls of Princetons Institute for Advance Study where Einstein taught, young physicists began to
whisper that Einstein was over the hill, that the quantum revolution had bypassed him completely. The younger
generation rushed to read the latest papers written about quantum theory, not those about the theory of relativity. Even
the director of the institute, J. Robert Oppenheimer (who later spearheaded the atomic bomb effort) confided
privately to his close friends that Einsteins work was hopelessly behind the times.
Einsteins dream was to create a universe made of marble - that is, pure geometry. Einstein was repelled by the
relative ugliness of matter which he called wood. Einsteins goal was to banish this blemish from his theories forever,
to turn wood into marble. His ultimate hope was to create a theory of the universe based entirely on marble. To his
horror Einstein realized that the quantum theory was a theory made entirely of wood! In almost every
sense of the word, quantum theory is the opposite of Einsteins theory. Einsteins general relativity is a theory of the
cosmos, a theory of stars and galaxies held together via the smooth fabric of space and time. Quantum theory, by
contrast, is a theory of the microcosm, where subatomic particles are held together by particle-like forces dancing on
the sterile stage of space-time, which is viewed as an empty arena, devoid of any content.
Up to now the premise has been that the laws of physics appear simple and unified in higher dimensions.
However with the appearance of this quantum heresy after 1925, we see the first serious challenge to this
theme. In fact for the next 60 years, until the mid-1980s, the ideology of the quantum heretics would dominate the
world of physics, almost burying the geometric ideas of Riemann and Einstein under an avalanche of undeniable
successes and stunning experimental victories. The key differences between Einsteins beautiful geometric theory and
quantum theory can be summarized:
1.

2.

3.

4.

Forces are created by the exchange of discrete packets of energy, called quanta . In contrast to
Einsteins geometric picture of a force, in quantum theory light was to be chopped up into tiny pieces.
These packets of light were named photons, and they behave very much like point particles.
Different forces are caused by the exchange of different quanta. In this way we have a new
unifying principle for the laws of physics. We can unite the laws of electromagnetism, the weak
force, and the strong force by postulating a variety of different quanta that mediate them. 3 of the 4
forces (excluding gravity) are therefore united by quantum theory, giving us unification without
geometry.
We can never know simultaneously the velocity and position of a subatomic particle. They are
accompanied by a wave that obeys a well-defined and proven equation, the Schrodinger wave
equation.
There is a finite probability that particles may tunnel through or make a quantum leap through
impenetrable barriers. That impossible-to-rationalize concept is seen in todays tunnel diodes which are
in every tv, radio, and computer.

If quantum theory violates our common sense, it is only because Nature does not seem to care much about our
common sense. Wave equations predict the same electrons can be in multiple places at the same time. As alien and
disturbing as quantum predictions may seem, they are consistently verified in the laboratory.
But quantum physics began to run out of steam by the 1960s. New theories emerged that provided a more
consistent theory of matter (but still not including gravity). In 1971 Garard t Hooft reexamined the Yang-Mills field
proposed in 1954 where the weak and strong forces were proposed to be caused by the exhange of a quantum of
energy. t Hooft used a different mathematical approach to resolve the infinities in the original Yang-Mills formulations.
In the 1970s the reformulated Yang-Mills filed was applied to the strong interactions, and then came the stunning
realization that the secret of all nuclear matter could be unlocked. The secret of wood that bound matter together
was the Yang-Mills field, not the geometry of Einstein. It appeared as though this - and not geometry - was the
central lesson of physics.
Today the Yang-Mills field has made possible a comprehensive theory of all matter. In fact we are so
confident of this theory that we blandly call it the Standard Model . The Standard Model can explain every piece of
experimental data concerning subatomic particles up to about 1 trillion electron volts in energy. According to the
Standard Model, each of the forces binding the various particles is created by exchanging different kinds of quanta.
But not even its most fervent advocates believes it is the FINAL theory of matter. First the Standard Model does not
describe gravity, so it is necessarily incomplete. Second, it is very ugly because it crudely splices 3 very different

interactions together (e.g., 36 quarks coming in 6 flavors and 3 colors and their antimatter counterparts 8 YangMills fields to describe the gluons; 4 Yang-Mills fields to describe the weak and electromagnetic forces; 6 types of
leptons to describe the weak interactions; a large number of mysterious higgs particles necessary to fudge the
masses and constants describing the particles; and at least 19 arbitrary constants that have to be put in by hand and
cannot be determined by theory in any way). Worse yet, this long list of particles can be broken into 3 families of
quarks and leptons that appear to be exact copies of one another, giving a threefold redundancy in the number of
supposedly elementary particles. The ugliness of the Standard Model can be contrasted to the simplicity of Einsteins
equations, in which everything was deduced from first principles.
By the 1980s physics was reaching an impasse. Gravity alone stubbornly stood apart and aloof from the other 3
forces. All the giants of physics have had their crack at unifying gravity with quantum theory and all have failed.
Einstein devoted the last 30 years of his life to his unified field theory. The quantum theory of wood had begun to run
out-of-steam after a half-century of almost uninterrupted success. Since the Standard Model had 19 free parameters
that could be arbitrarily tuned to any value - like the dials on a radio - physicists would likely spend decades finding
the precise values of all 19 parameters. The time had come for a revolution. The time had come for
Einsteins Revenge.
Kaluza-Klein theory had been in dormancy for about 60 years. But physicists were so frustrated in their attempts
to unify gravity with the other quantum forces that they began to overcome their prejudice about unseen dimensions
and hyperspace. They looked again at Kaluza-Klein theory. The problem was how to derive quarks and leptons
(which were well defined by the Standard Model theory of wood) from marble. When physicists extended the old 5dimensional Kaluza-Klein theory to N dimensions , they realized that there is freedom to impose a symmetry on
hyperspace. When the 5th-dimension was curled up, they saw that the Maxwell field popped out of Riemanns metric.
But when N dimensions were curled up, physicists found the celebrated Yang-Mills field - the key to the Standard
Model - popping out of their equations!
If the wave function of a particle vibrates along a hyperspheric surface, it will inherit a special SU(N) symmetry.
The mysterious SU(N) symmetries arising in subatomic physics can now be seen as by-products of vibrating
hyperspace. In other words we now have an explanation for the origin of the mysterious symmetries of wood: they
are really the hidden symmetries coming from marble. If we now take a Kaluza-Klein theory defined in 4+N dimensions
and then curl up N dimensions, we find that the equations split into 2 pieces. The first piece is Einsteins usual
equations. But the second piece will not be the theory of Maxwell. We find that the remainder is precisely the YangMills theory, which forms the basis of all subatomic physics! This is the key to turning the symmetries of wood
into the symmetries of marble.
Extracting the Yang-Mills field out of Kaluza-Klein theory was only the first step. Although the symmetries of
wood could now be seen as arising from the hidden symmetries of unseen dimensions, the next step was to create
wood itself (made of quarks and leptons) entirely out of marble. This next step would be called supergravity.
Supergravity theory is defined in 11-dimensional space. It seemed that physics was finally fulfilling Einsteins dream of
giving a purely geometric derivation of all the forces and particles in the universe. Many physicists labeled it Einsteins
Revenge. The critics, however, gradually began to see problems with supergravity. After a few years of fervent
interest and scores of international conferences, it became clear that this theory could not be quantitized correctly. It
failed for a very simple reason: Whenever we tried to calculate numbers from these theories, we would arrive at
meaningless infinities. The theory was still non-renormalizable.
There were other problems. The highest symmetry that supergravity could include was called O(8), which was
too small to accommodate the symmetry of the Standard Model. It cured one problem (turning wood into marble) only to
fall victim to several other diseases. However, just as interest in supergravity began to wane, a new theory came
along that was perhaps the strangest but most powerful physical theory ever proposed: the 10-dimensional
superstring theory !
The essence of string theory is that it can explain the nature of both matter and space-time - that is, the nature of
wood and marble. String theory also answers a series of puzzling questions about particles, such as why there
are so many of them in nature. The deeper we probe into the nature of subatomic particles, the more we find. The
current zoo of subatomic particles numbers several hundred. Even with the Standard Model, we are left with a
bewildering number of elementary particles. String theory answers this question because the string - about 100
billion billion times smaller than a proton - is vibrating; each mode of vibration represents a distinct resonance or particle.
According to string theory, if we could somehow magnify a point particle, we would actually see a small vibrating
string. There are an infinite number of forms of matter that can be constructed out of vibrating strings. This explains
the richness of the particles in nature. String theory can explain space-time as well. As a string moves in space-time,

it executes a complicated set of motions. The string can break into smaller strings or collide with other strings to form
longer strings. The key point is that all these quantum corrections or loop diagrams are finite and calculable. This is
the FIRST quantum theory of gravity in the history of physics to have finite quantum corrections . (ALL
known previous theories - including Einsteins original theory, Kaluza-Klein theory, and supergravity - failed this key
criterion.)
In order to execute these complicate motions, a string must obey a large set of self-consistency conditions.
These self-consistency conditions are so stringent that they place extraordinarily restrictive conditions on space-time.
Physicists were shocked to find Einsteins equations emerging from the string. This was REMARKABLE! Without
assuming any of Einsteins equations, physicists found that they emerged out of string theory as if by magic! Einsteins
equations were no longer found to be fundamental - they could be derived from string theory.
If correct, then string theory solves the long-standing mystery about the nature of wood and marble. Einstein
conjectured that marble alone would one day explain all the properties of wood. To Einstein, wood was just a kink or
vibration of space-time, nothing more or less. Quantum physicists however thought the opposite, that marble could be
turned into wood - that is, Einsteins metric tensor could be turned into a graviton, the discrete packet of energy that
carries the gravitational force. These are two diametrically opposite points of view, and it was long thought that a
compromise between them was impossible. The string, however, is precisely the missing link between wood
and marble.
String theory can derive the particles of matter as resonances vibrating on the string. And string
theory can also derive Einsteins equations by demanding that the string move self-consistently in
space-time. In this way we have a comprehensive theory of both matter-energy and space-time. These selfconsistency constraints are surprisingly rigid. For example they forbid the string to move in 3 or 4 dimensions. We will
see that these force the string in a specific number of dimensions. In fact, the only magic numbers allowed by
string theory are 10 and 26 dimensions. String theory is rich enough to explain all the fundamental laws of nature.
Starting from a simple theory of a vibrating string, one can extract the theory of Einstein, Kaluza-Klein theory,
supergravity, the Standard Model, and even GUT theory.
One of the deepest secrets of string theory is why it is defined in only 10 and 26 dimensions. If we calculate how
strings break and re-form in N-dimensional space, we constantly find meaningless terms cropping up that destroy the
marvelous properties of the theory. Fortunately these unwanted terms appear multiplied by (N - 10). Therefore to
make these anomalies vanish, we have no choice but to fix N to be 10. String theory is the only known quantum
theory that specifically demands that the dimension of space-time be fixed at a unique number.
Unfortunately string theorists are at a loss to explain why 10 dimensions are singled out. The answer
lies deep within mathematics in an area called modular functions. Whenever we manipulate the KSV loop diagrams
created by interacting strings, we encounter these strange modular functions where the number 10 appears in the
strangest places. These modular functions are as mysterious as the man who investigated them, the mystic
from the East.
Srinivasa Ramanujan was the strangest man in all of mathematics, probably in the entire history of science. He
was tragically struck down by tuberculosis at the age of 33 like Riemann before him. Working in total isolation from the
main currents of his field, he was able to rederive 100 years worth of Western mathematics on his own. The tragedy
of his life is that much of his work was wasted rediscovering known mathematics. Scattered throughout the obscure
equations in his notebooks are these modular functions which are among the strangest ever found in mathematics.
One function is today called the Ramanujan Function in his honor. It contains a term raised to the 24th power.
In the work of Ramanujan the number 24 appears repeatedly. This is an example of what mathematicians call
magic numbers, which continually appear when we least expect them for reasons that no one understands.
Miraculously Ramanujans Function also appears in string theory. The number 24 is also the origin of the
miraculous cancellations occurring in string theory. In string theory each of the 24 modes of the Ramanujan function
corresponds to a physical vibration of the string. Whenever the string executes its complex motions in space-time by
splitting and recombining, a large number of highly sophisticated mathematical identities must be satisfied. These are
precisely those discovered by Ramanujan. (Since physicists add 2 more dimensions when they count the total number
of vibrations appearing in relativistic theory, this means that space-time must have 24+2=26 space-time dimensions.)
When the Ramanujan function is generalized, the number 24 is replaced by the number 8. Thus the critical number
for the superstring is 8 + 2 or 10. This is the origin of the 10th dimension. The string vibrates in 10 dimensions
because it requires these generalized Ramanujan functions in order to remain self-consistent. In other words,
physicists have not the slightest understanding of why 10 and 26 dimensions are singled out as the

dimension of the string. Its as though there is some kind of deep numerology being manifested in these functions
that no one understands.
Ramanujan was born in 1897 in Erode, India. His family was destitute, living off the meager wages of
Ramanujans fathers job as a clerk in a clothing office. By the age of 10, it was clear that Ramanujan was not like the
other children. Like Riemann before him, he became well known in his village for his awesome calculational powers.
As a child he had already rederived Eulers identity between trigonometric functions and exponentials.
In every young scientists life, there is a turning point - a singular event that helps to change the course of his or
her life. For Einstein it was the fascination of observing a compass needle. For Riemann it was reading Legendres
book on number theory. For Ramanujan it was when he stumbled on an obscure, forgotten book on mathematics by
George Carr. This book has since been immortalized by the fact that it marked Ramanujans only known exposure to
modern Western mathematics. According to his sister, It was this book which awakened his genius. He set himself
to establish the formulae given therein. As he was without the aid of other books, each solution was a piece of
research so far as he was concerned Ramanujan used to say that the goddess of Namakkal inspired him with the
formulae in dreams.
With the help of friends, Ramanujan managed to become a low-level clerk in the Port Trust of Madras. It was a
menial job paying a paltry salary. But it freed Ramanujan - like Einstein before him at the Swiss patent office - to follow
his dreams in his spare time. Ramanujan then mailed some of the results of his dreams to 3 well-known British
mathematicians, hoping for contact with other mathematical minds. Two of them, receiving this letter from an unknown
Indian clerk with no formal education, promptly threw it away. The third one was the brilliant Cambridge mathematician
Godfrey H. Hardy. Because of his stature in England, Hardy was accustomed to receiving crank mail and thought
dimly of the letter. Amid the dense scribbling he noticed many theorems of mathematics that were already well known.
Thinking it was the obvious work of a plagiarist, he also threw it away.
But something wasnt quite right. Something nagged at Hardy; he couldnt help wondering about this strangers
letter. At dinner on January 16, 1913 Hardy and colleague John Littlewood discussed this odd letter and decided to
take a second look. The letter from the poor Madras clerk contained theorems that were totally unknown
to Western mathematicians. In all it contained 120 theorems. Hardy was stunned. He recalled that proving some
of these theorems defeated me completely. He recalled, I had never seen anything the least like them before. A
single look at them is enough to show they could only be written down by a mathematician of the highest class.
Littlewood and Hardy reached the identical astounding conclusion: this was obviously the work of a genius
engaged in rederiving 100 years of European mathematics. He had been carrying an impossible handicap, a poor
and solitary Hindu pitting his brains against the accumulated wisdom of Europe, recalled Hardy. Hardy sent for
Ramanujan and arranged for his stay in Cambridge in 1914. For the first time Ramanujan could communicate regularly
with his peers, the community of European mathematicians. Then began 3 short, intense years of collaboration with
Hardy at Trinity College in Cambridge.
Hardy later tried to estimate the mathematical skill that Ramanujan possessed. He rated David Hilbert, universally
recognized as one of the greatest Western mathematicians of the 19th century, an 80. To Ramanujan, he assigned
a 100. (Hardy rated himself a 25.) Unfortunately neither Hardy nor Ramanujan seemed interested in the psychology or
thinking process by which Ramanujan discovered these incredible theorems, especially when this flood of material
pouring out of his dreams with such frequency. Hardy noted, It seemed ridiculous to worry him about how he had
found this or that known theorem, when he was showing me half-a-dozen new ones almost every day. Always in poor
health and after collaborating with Hardy for 3 years, Ramanujan fell ill and never recovered. He died a year later in
1920.
Ramanujans legacy is his work, which consists of 4,000 formulas on 400 pages filling 3 volumes of notes, all
densely packed with theorems of incredible power without any commentary or - which is more frustrating - without
any proof. In 1976 a new discovery was made. 130 pages of scrap paper - containing the output of the last year of
his life - was discovered by accident in a box at Trinity College. This is now called Ramanujans Lost
Notebook. Mathematician Richard Askey says, The work of that one year - when he was dying - was the equivalent
of a lifetime of work for a very great mathematician. What he accomplished was unbelievable. If it were a novel,
nobody would believe it. To underscore the difficulty of their arduous task of deciphering the notebooks,
mathematicians Jonathan and Peter Borwein have commented, To our knowledge no mathematical redaction of this
scope or difficulty has ever been attempted.
As physicists know accidents do not appear without a reason. When performing a long and difficult
calculation, and then suddenly having thousands of unwanted terms miraculously add up to zero, physicists know that

this does not happen without a deeper, underlying reason. Today physicists know that these accidents are an
indication that a symmetry is at work. For strings, the symmetry is called conformal symmetry. This is precisely
where Ramanujans work comes in. In order to protect the original conformal symmetry from being destroyed by
quantum theory, a number of mathematical identities must be miraculously satisfied. These identities are precisely
the identities of Ramanujans modular function.
In summary we have said that our fundamental premise is that the laws of nature simplify when expressed in
higher dimensions. However - in light of quantum theory - we must now amend this basic theme. The correct
statement should now read: The laws of nature simplify when self-consistently expressed in higher
dimensions. The addition of the word self-consistently is crucial. This constraint forces us to use Ramanujans
modular functions, which fixes the dimension of space-time to be 10. This is turn may gives us the decisive clue
to explain the origin of the universe.
Einstein often asked himself whether God had any choice in creating the universe. According to
superstring theorists, once we demand a unification of quantum theory and general relativity, God had NO choice.
Self-consistency alone, they claim, must have forced God to create the universe as He did. The fundamental problem
of superstring theory is that an experimental test of the theory is beyond our present-day technology. In fact the
theory predicts that the unification of all forces occurs at the Planck energy, or 1019 billion electron volts , which is
about 1 quadrillion times larger than energies currently available in our accelerators. There is not enough money in the
treasuries of all the countries in the world to generate this fantastic energy.
Cal Tech physicist John Schwarz said that of millions of possible solutions to string theory, there seemed to be
five major distinct variants. We really didnt understand why there should be 5 theories when we only need one.
Figuring out if any of the 5 theories was the right one proved difficult. The math is so complex that efforts to solve
the superstring equations required many approximations, an approach known in physics as perturbation theory.
Edward Witten of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton (where Einstein taught) dominates
the world of theoretical physics. He is currently the leader of the pack, the most brilliant high-energy physicist
who sets trends in the physics community the way Picasso would set trends in the art world. He became a graduate
student at Princeton, taught at Harvard, and then rocketed a full professorship at Princeton at the age of 28. He also
received the prestigious MacArthur Fellowship (sometimes dubbed the genius award by the press). Spin-offs from
his work have also deeply affected the world of mathematics. In 1990 he was awarded the Fields medal which is as
prestigious as the Nobel Prize in the world of mathematics.
Most of the time, however, Witten sits and stares out the window, manipulating and rearranging vast arrays of
equations in his head. Wittens wife also teaches physics at IAS. She notes, He never does calculations except in
his mind. I will fill pages with calculations before I understand what Im doing. But Edward will sit down only to
calculate a minus sign, or a factor of 2.
Wittens most recent project is the most ambitious and daring of his career. He was not content with the way
superstring theory is currently formulated (with all its possible variants and solutions). He has set for himself the
problem of finding the origin of superstring theory, which may prove to be a decisive development toward
explaining the very instant of Creation. His work resulted in a plot twist worthy of a Hitchcock mystery, revealing the
5 basic superstring theories to be one character wearing different disguises. So-called M-Theory , by
avoiding the need for approximations, revealed unsuspected links connecting the 5 superstring variants.
M-theorys magic requires an extra dimension of space for a total of 11 dimensions instead of the 10 in superstring
theory. And for its basic units of existence, M-theory replaces the rubberband-like loops of superstrings with
something more like soap bubbles, called supermembranes. A supermembrane has 2 dimensions, like the surface
of a sphere.
Membrane-like objects with even more dimensions - collectively known as p-branes - can also exist. The 11dimensional spacetime of M-theory can contain objects with 5 dimensions along with the 2-dimensional membranes.
Particular important actors in the M-theory drama are the membrane-like objects known as D-branes. (The D stands
for Dirichlet, a 19th-century mathematician whose math is useful in their description.)
In some versions of superstring theory, for example, the one-dimensional strings are not closed loops but openended snippets. D-branes provide surfaces, or something like edges in space-time, for the open strings to end on. In
this role D-branes help to show how the 5 versions of superstring theory relate to one another. And under certain
conditions, a membrane may be made of a collection of zero-branes (or no-braners), objects with no dimensions like
the point particles of traditional physics. But the zero-branes live in a space-time radically different from the ordinary.

For 50 years the concept of the Big Bang creation of our universe has dominated mainstream cosmologists and
physicists. At time-zero our universe sprung forward in a violent instant from an infinite small point of infinite density.
At the instant of creation Gravity and Quantum theory were part of the same force. The only theory that
qualitatively describes this today is the superstring/M-theory model. The current superstring model of the Big Bang
goes like this (note: new developments will modify this model as will be seen shortly) :
1.

2.

3.
4.
5.

6.

7.
8.
9.

10-45 seconds The 10-dimensional universe breaks down to a 4-dimensional and a 6-dimensional
universe. The 6-dimensional universe collapses down to 10-32 centimeter in size. The 4-dimensional
universe inflates rapidly. The temperature is 1032 deg.K
10-35 seconds The GUT force breaks; the strong force is no longer united with the electroweak
interactions. SU(3) breaks off from the GUT symmetry. A small speck in the larger universe becomes
inflated by a factor of 1050, eventually becoming our visible universe.
10-9 seconds The temperature is now 1015 deg.K, and the electroweak symmetry breaks into SU(2)
and U(1)
10-3 seconds Quarks begin to condense into neutrons and protons. The temperature is roughly 1014
deg.K.
3 minutes The protons and neutrons are now condensing into stable nuclei. The energy of random
collisions is no longer powerful enough to break up the nucleus of the emerging nuclei. Space is till
opaque to light because ions do not transmit light well.
300,000 years Electrons begin to condense around nuclei. Atoms begin to form. Because light is no
longer scattered or absorbed as much, the universe becomes transparent to light. Outer space
becomes black.
3 billion years The first quasars appear.
5 billion years The first galaxies appear.
10 to 15 billion years The solar system is born. A few billion years after that, the first forms of life
appear on earth.

Every year more experimental evidence is found that the Big Bang occurred roughly 15 to 20 billion years ago.
Much of this is based on the red shift of receding stars. The Big Bang produced a cosmic echo, and its circulation
around the universe billions of years after the event was first predicted by the great cosmologist George Gamow .
Scientists at Bell Labs won the 1978 Nobel Prize for detecting this echo of the Big Bang. Gamow and his students
calculated the echo radiation that occurred about 300,000 years after the Big Bang cooled down to 3 deg.K.
Breakthroughs in materials technology led to new sensors, and decades later in 1992 the COBE satellite was launched
to search for this hard-to-detect fossil radiation from the Big Bang. Led by George Smoots team and after
painstaking computer enhancement, the detected microwave background radiation echo fit the earlier prediction of
Gamow to within 0.1% ! Smoots team also found tiny, almost microscopic blotches in the microwave background that
were precisely what was needed to explain the clumpiness and voids found 1 billion years after the Big Bang.
Dr. Kaku (responsible for most of what you have read so far in this document) says he is frequently asked in a
seminar, But professor, what happened before the Big Bang? He says he replies with an answer they were not
expecting. Im glad you asked, because that is the subject of todays lecture. Today we will discuss what
probably happened before creation! What catches them off guard is that in the leading physics laboratories
around the world, the universe BEFORE the Big Bang has become one of the hottest areas of research.
There is a tangible air of excitement as we witness the birth of a new science called quantum cosmology. Although
there is no experimental proof, the theory is so compelling and beautiful that is has become the center of intense
research. Already the theory has forced us - almost against our will - to confront the bizarre possibilities of parallel
universes, wormholes, alternate worlds, and all within the 10/11-dimensions of superstring/M-theory. Many physicists
are leaping into this game, following the lead of such pioneers as Stephen Hawking and Nobel laureate Murray GellMann.
One of the principles of quantum cosmology is that we must treat the universe just like we treat a quantum
particle, such as an electron. Once we treat the universe like an electron, then we are forced to conclude that it can
exist in several different states simultaneously, i.e., parallel universes. Our universe may be the result of a quantum
fluctuation in an infinite ocean frothing with universes. In this infinite ocean - called the MULTI-VERSE - the vacuum is
constantly spawning new universes. In this picture big bangs constantly take place, each representing a quantum
fluctuation in the vacuum.
This new picture of cosmology creates a new twist on religious mythology. In theology, most myths concerning
the origin of the universe fall into one of two categories: the Judeo-Christian myth of Genesis , which describes a
definite instant called creation; or the Hindu-Buddhist myth of Nirvana, which describes an endless universe that

has no beginning in time or space. In this new picture, we combine these 2 mythologies into one coherent picture: we
have a constant genesis, or boiling of universes, in an ocean of cosmic nothing or Nirvana.
Dr. Kaku recalls a discussion with Nobel laureate Steve Weinberg. When he mentioned this picture of millions of
big bangs constantly emerging from nothing, Weinberg said, I find this an attractive picture and its certainly worth
thinking about very seriously. An important implication is that there wasnt a beginning; that there were increasingly
large big bangs, so that the multiverse goes on forever - one doesnt have to grapple with the question of it before the
bang. The multiverse has just been here all along. I find that a very satisfying picture. [indeed the empty
vacuum of space has been predicted by quantum mechanics to be teeming with trillions of particles and antiparticles
annihilating each other in immeasurably small timeframes, and this has been confirmed in the laboratory in the Casimir
effect]
Weinberg cautioned, however, that there may not be life in these other universes. Most of them, in fact, are
probably dead universes, where the proton lifetime is less than 10 billion years, the minimum time necessary to create
stable organic chemicals, DNA, and life itself. These other universes may be lifeless seas of neutrinos, photons, and
electrons, incapable of combining to form life. Our universe, in fact, may be one of the few universes that are
compatible with life.
Stephen Hawking visualizes our universe as being connected by a vast, infinite network of invisible
threads with all the other bubble universes. This web connecting these universes consists of wormholes,
which are tunnels or gateways in space itself created by black holes warping space-time. And Hawkings recent
wave function of the universe is reviving another theory that fell out of favor in past decades.
World-renowned physicist John Wheeler (the mentor of Nobel laureate Richard Feynman) used quantum
theory to postulate the existence of many or alternate worlds , parallel universes possibly evolving on different
time lines. His graduate student Hugh Everett resumed Wheelers project (Wheeler reluctantly rejected it because it
required too much meta-physical baggage to carry around, it poses a philosophical nightmare for physicists who
traditionally love simplicity). Remote-viewers (psychic spies) of different intelligence agencies have reported
existence of alternate worlds where history evolved differently. The theory is grounded well in the experimentally
proven mathematics of quantum theory. Recent developments have suggested most of these alternate worlds collapse
with one another leaving just a few. A major difference between Everett/Wheelers Many-Worlds theory and
Hawkings wave function of the universe is that Hawkings theory places wormholes that connect these parallel
universes at the center of his theory.
And recent experiments by Dr. Nicolas Gisin of the University of Geneva demonstrated mysterious long-range
communications between so-called entangled pairs of photons sent in opposite directions along optical fibers.
Relativity and classical physics would predict that all the turns they made during their opposite path treks would bear
no relationship to each other. But when the results were compared, the independent decisions by the paired photons
always matched, even though there was no physical way for them to communicate with each other. This
phenomena was also known in Einsteins time. He himself sneered at the very possibility of such a thing, calling it
spooky action at a distance. He and his colleagues offered a more intuitive explanation based on the idea that the
match between them is ordained by their identical antecedents. (Remember that Einstein was still having trouble
coming to grips with Kaluzas suggestion of a 5th-dimension.) But again and again in recent years, increasingly
sensitive experiments have decisively proved that Einsteins explanation was wrong and quantum
theory is correct here. The superstring model of the universe provides extra dimensions for these quantum
communications by tunneling into and out-of rather than sending out a signal like a radio wave in ordinary 3-dimensional
space.
One of the weird aspects of quantum mechanics is that something can simultaneously exist and not exist. If a
particle is capable of moving along several different paths, or existing in several different states, the uncertainty
principle of quantum mechanics allows it to travel along all paths and exist in all possible states simultaneously. (No
wonder we have trouble grasping quantum theory from a philosophical viewpoint!) However if the particle happens to
be measured by some means, its path or state is no longer uncertain. The simple act of measurement instantly forces it
into just one path or state. Physicists call this a collapse of the wave function. The amazing thing here is that if
just one particle in an entangled pair is measured, the wave function of BOTH particles collapses into a definite state
that is the SAME for both partners, even separated by great distance (theoretically it could be the width of the entire
universe!). And among several proposed explanations for all this is the Everett/Wheeler Many Worlds hypotheses:
the notion that for every possible pathway or state open to a particle, there is a separate universe. For each of the 10
possible pathways a quantum particle might follow, for example, there would exist a separate universe.

There is a fundamental difference between religious mythology and quantum cosmology. Mythology makes no
pretense of being scientific; it fails the test of being falsifiable, there is no experiment that can rigorously exclude the
possibility of miracles, angels, and the like, which are not (by definition) reproducible. Quantum cosmology, however,
may eventually be verified or falsified. The COBE satellite detected tiny ripples in the otherwise uniform microwave
background radiation. This is significant because these ripples most likely correspond to quantum fluctuations that
existed at the instant of the Big Bang. We are in fact children of these ripples. The quantum fluctuations at the
beginning of time gradually grew in size over billions of years, becoming the galaxies, stars, and planets that we see
today.
Other tests of this scenario may come from dark matter. Numerous observations have verified the existence of
a mysterious, invisible form of matter that makes up perhaps 90% of the mass of the universe. For example, our own
galaxy cluster - the Local Group - would have disintegrated billions of years ago if it werent held together by enormous
quantities of unseen matter. One of the leading candidates for dark matter is a new form of matter called sparticles
(short for super particles) , which are some of the lowest vibrations of the superstring.
Looking further ahead, we may one day even detect a new form of relic radiation left over from the Big Bang, the
neutrino background. If this notoriously elusive radiation can be detected, then we have a snapshot of the universe
when it was only 3 seconds old. Then ripples on the neutrino background will give us a breathtaking looking into the
cosmic fireball itself, when quantum fluctuations created by the superstring were the dominant forces shaping cosmic
expansions.

taken from http://www.mkaku.org/m_theory.htm on January 23, 2002

M-Theory
The Mother of All Superstrings
by Dr. Michio Kaku
Every decade or so, a stunning breakthrough in string theory sends shock waves racing through the theoretical
physics community, generating a feverish outpouring of papers and activity. This time, the Internet lines are burning up
as papers keep pouring into the Los Alamos National Laboratory's computer bulletin board, the official clearing house
for superstring papers.
John Schwarz of Caltech, for example, has been speaking to conferences around the world proclaiming the "second
superstring revolution."
Edward Witten of the Institute for Advanced Study in Prince- ton gave a spell-binding 3 hour lecture describing it. The
after- shocks of the breakthrough are even shaking other disciplines, like mathematics. The director of the Institute,
mathematician Phillip Griffiths, says, "The excitement I sense in the people in the field and the spinoffs into my own field
of mathematics ... have really been quite extraordinary. I feel I've been very privileged to witness this first hand."
And Cumrun Vafa at Harvard has said, "I may be biased on this one, but I think it is perhaps the most important
development not only in string theory, but also in theoretical physics at least in the past two decades."
What is triggering all this excitement is the discovery of something called "M-theory," a theory which may explain the
origin of strings. In one dazzling stroke, this new M-theory has solved a series of long-standing puzzling mysteries
about string theory which have dogged it from the beginning, leaving many theoretical physicists (myself included!)
gasping for breath.
M-theory, moreover, may even force string theory to change its name. Although many features of M-theory are still
unknown, it does not seem to be a theory purely of strings. Michael Duff of Texas A & M is already giving speeches
with the title "The theory formerly known as strings!"
String theorists are careful to point out that this does not prove the final correctness of the theory. Not by any means.
That may make years or decades more. But it marks a most significant breakthrough that is already reshaping the entire
field.
PARABLE OF THE LION
Einstein once said, "Nature shows us only the tail of the lion. But I do not doubt that the lion belongs to it even though he
cannot at once reveal himself because of his enormous size." Einstein spent the last 30 years of his life searching for
the "tail" that would lead him to the "lion," the fabled unified field theory or the "theory of everything," which would unite

all the forces of the universe into a single equation. The four forces (gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and
weak nuclear forces) would be unified by an equation perhaps one inch long. Capturing the "lion" would be the
greatest scientific achievement in all of physics, the crowning achievement of 2,000 years of scientific investigation,
ever since the Greeks first asked themselves what the world was made of.
But although Einstein was the first one to set off on this noble hunt and track the footprints left by the lion, he ultimately
lost the trail and wandered off into the wilderness.
Other giants of 20th century physics, like Werner Heisenberg and Wolfgang Pauli, also joined in the hunt. But all the
easy ideas were tried and shown to be wrong. When Niels Bohr once heard a lecture by Pauli explaining his version of
the unified field theory, Bohr stood up and said, "We in the back are all agreed that your theory is crazy. But what
divides us is whether your theory is crazy enough!"
The trail leading to the unified field theory, in fact, is littered with the wreckage of failed expeditions and dreams. Today,
however, physicists are following a different trail which might be "crazy enough" to lead to the lion. This new trail leads
to superstring theory, which is the best (and in fact only) candidate for a theory of everything. Unlike its rivals, it has
survived every blistering mathematical challenge ever hurled at it. Not surprisingly, the theory is a radical, "crazy"
departure from the past, being based on tiny strings vibrating in 10 dimensional space-time. Moreover, the theory easily
swallows up Einstein's theory of gravity. Witten has said, "Unlike conventional quantum field theory, string theory
requires gravity. I regard this fact as one of the greatest in- sights in science ever made."
But until recently, there has been a glaring weak spot: string theorists have been unable to probe all solutions of the
model, failing miserably to examine what is called the "non- perturbative region," which I will describe shortly. This is
vitally important, since ultimately our universe (with its wonderfully diverse collection of galaxies, stars, planets, subatomic particles, and even people) may lie in this "non-perturbative region." Until this region can be probed, we don't
know if string theory is a theory of everything -- or a theory of nothing!
That's what today's excitement is all about. For the first time, using a powerful tool called "duality," physicists are now
probing beyond just the tail, and finally seeing the outlines of a huge, unexpectedly beautiful lion at the other end. Not
knowing what to call it, Witten has dubbed it "M-theory." In one stroke, M-theory has solved many of the embarrassing
features of the theory, such as why we have 5 superstring theories. Ultimately, it may solve the nagging question of
where strings come from.
PEA BRAINS AND THE MOTHER OF ALL STRINGS
Einstein once asked himself if God had any choice in making the universe. Perhaps not, so it was embarrassing for
string theorists to have five different self-consistent strings, all of which can unite the two fundamental theories in
physics, the theory of gravity and the quantum theory.
Each of these string theories looks completely different from the others. They are based on different symmetries, with
exotic names like E(8)xE(8) and O(32).
Not only this, but superstrings are in some sense not unique: there are other non-string theories which contain "supersymmetry," the key mathematical symmetry underlying superstrings. (Changing light into electrons and then into gravity
is one of the rather astonishing tricks performed by supersymmetry, which is the symmetry which can exchange
particles with half-integral spin, like electrons and quarks, with particles of integral spin, like photons, gravitons, and Wparticles. )
In 11 dimensions, in fact, there are alternate super theories based on membranes as well as point particles (called
super- gravity). In lower dimensions, there is moreover a whole zoo of super theories based on membranes in different
dimensions. (For example, point particles are 0-branes, strings are 1-branes, membranes are 2-branes, and so on.) For
the p-dimensional case, some wag dubbed them p-branes (pronounced "pea brains").
But because p-branes are horribly difficult to work with, they were long considered just a historical curiosity, a trail that
led to a dead-end. (Michael Duff, in fact, has collected a whole list of unflattering comments made by referees to his
National Science Foundation grant concerning his work on p- branes. One of the more charitable comments from a
referee was: "He has a skewed view of the relative importance of various concepts in modern theoretical physics.")
So that was the mystery. Why should supersymmetry allow for 5 superstrings and this peculiar, motley collection of pbranes? Now we realize that strings, supergravity, and p-branes are just different aspects of the same theory. Mtheory (M for "membrane" or the "mother of all strings," take your pick) unites the 5 superstrings into one theory and
includes the p-branes as well.

To see how this all fits together, let us update the famous parable of the blind wise men and the elephant. Think of the
blind men on the trail of the lion. Hearing it race by, they chase after it and desperately grab onto its tail (a one-brane).
Hanging onto the tail for dear life, they feel its one-dimensional form and loudly proclaim "It's a string! It's a string!"
But then one blind man goes beyond the tail and grabs onto the ear of the lion. Feeling a two-dimensional surface (a
membrane), the blind man proclaims, "No, it's really a two-brane!"
Then another blind man is able to grab onto the leg of the lion. Sensing a three-dimensional solid, he shouts, "No, you're
both wrong. It's really a three-brane!"
Actually, they are all right. Just as the tail, ear, and leg are different parts of the same lion, the string and various pbranes appear to be different limits of the same theory: M- theory. Paul Townsend of Cambridge University, one of the
architects of this idea, calls it "p-brane democracy," i.e. all p-branes (including strings) are created equal.
Schwarz puts a slightly different spin on this. He says, "we are in an Orwellian situation: all p-branes are equal, but
some (namely strings) are more equal than others. The point is that they are the only ones on which we can base a
perturbation theory."
To understand unfamiliar concepts such as duality, perturbation theory, non-perturbative solutions, it is instructive to
see where these concepts first entered into physics.
DUALITY
The key tool to understanding this breakthrough is something "duality." Loosely speaking, two theories are "dual" to
each other if they can be shown to be equivalent under a certain interchange.
The simplest example of duality is reversing the role of electricity and magnetism in the equations discovered by James
Clerk Maxwell of Cambridge University 130 years ago. These are the equations which govern light, TV, X-rays, radar,
dynamos, motors, transformers, even the Internet and computers. The remarkable feature about these equations is that
they remain the same if we interchange the magnetic B and electric fields E and also switch the electric charge e with
the magnetic charge g of a magnetic "monopole": E <--> B and e <--> g
(In fact, the product eg is a constant.) This has important implications. Often, when a theory cannot be solved exactly,
we use an approximation scheme. In first year calculus, for example, we recall that we can approximate certain
functions by Taylor's expansion. Similarly, since e^2 = 1/137 in certain units and is hence a small number, we can
always approximate the theory by power expanding in e^2. So we add contributions of order e^2 + e^4 + e^6 etc. in
solving for, say, the collision of two parti- cles. Notice that each contribution is getting smaller and small- er, so we can
in principle add them all up. This generalization of Taylor's expansion is called "perturbation theory," where we perturb
the system with terms containing e^2.
(For example, in archery, perturbation theory is how we aim our arrows. With every motion of our arms, our bow gets
closer and closer to aligning with the bull's eye.)
But now try expanding in g^2. This is much tougher; in fact, if we expand in g^2, which is large, then the sum g^2 + g^4
+ g^6 etc. blows up and becomes meaningless. This is the reason why the "non-perturbative" region is so difficult to
probe, since the theory simply blows up if we try to naively use perturbation theory for large coupling constant g. So at
first it appears hopeless that we could ever penetrate into the non-perturbative region.
(For example, if every motion of our arms got bigger and bigger, we would never be able to zero in and hit the target
with the arrow.)
But notice that because of duality, a theory of small e (which is easily solved) is identical to a theory of large g (which
is difficult to solve). But since they are the same theory, we can use duality to solve for the non-perturbative region.
S,T, AND U DUALITY
The first inkling that duality might apply in string theory was discovered by K. Kikkawa and M. Yamasaki of Osaka Univ.
in 1984. They showed that if you "curled up" one of the extra dimensions into a circle with radius R, the theory was the
same if we curled up this dimension with radius 1/R. This is now called T- duality: R <--> 1/R
When applied to various superstrings, one could reduce 5 of the string theories down to 3 (see figure). In 9 dimensions
(with one dimension curled up) the Type IIa and IIb strings were identical, as were the E(8)xE(8) and O(32) strings.

Unfortunately, T duality was still a perturbative duality. The next breakthrough came when it was shown that there
was a second class of dualities, called S duality, which provided a duality between the perturbative and nonperturbative regions of string theory. Another duality, called U duality, was even more powerful.
Then Nathan Seiberg and Witten brilliantly showed how another form of duality could solve for the non-perturbative
region in four dimensional supersymmetric theories.
However, what finally convinced many physicists of the power of this technique was the work of Paul Townsend and
Edward Wit- ten. They caught everyone by surprise by showing that there was a duality between 10 dimensional Type
IIa strings and 11 dimension- al supergravity! The non-perturbative region of Type IIa strings, which was previously a
forbidden region, was revealed to be governed by 11 dimensional supergravity theory, with one dimension curled up.
At this point, I remember that many physicists (myself included) were rubbing our eyes, not believing what we were
seeing. I remember saying to myself, "But's that's impossible!"
All of a sudden, we realized that perhaps the real "home" of string theory was not 10 dimensions, but possibly 11, and
that the theory wasn't fundamentally a string theory at all! This revived tremendous interest in 11 dimensional theories
and p-branes. Lurking in the 11th dimension was an entirely new theory which could reduce down to 11 dimensional
supergravity as well as 10 dimensional string theory and p-brane theory.
DETRACTORS OF STRING THEORIES
To the critics, however, these mathematical developments still don't answer the nagging question: how do you test it?
Since string theory is really a theory of Creation, when all its beautiful symmetries were in their full glory, the only way
to test it, the critics wail, is to re-create the Big Bang itself, which is impossible. Nobel Laureate Sheldon Glashow likes
to ridicule superstring theory by comparing it with former Pres. Reagan's Star Wars plan, i.e. they are both untestable,
soak up resources, and both siphon off the best scientific brains.
Actually, most string theorists think these criticisms are silly. They believe that the critics have missed the point.
The key point is this: if the theory can be solved non- perturbatively using pure mathematics, then it should reduce
down at low energies to a theory of ordinary protons, electrons, atoms, and molecules, for which there is ample
experimental data. If we could completely solve the theory, we should be able to extract its low energy spectrum,
which should match the familiar particles we see today in the Standard Model. Thus, the problem is not building atom
smashers l,000 light years in diameter; the real problem is raw brain power: of only we were clever enough, we could
write down M-theory, solve it, and settle everything.
EVOLVING BACKWARDS
So what would it take to actually solve the theory once and for all and end all the speculation and back-biting? There
are several approaches. The first is the most direct: try to derive the Standard Model of particle interactions, with its
bizarre collection of quarks, gluons, electrons, neutrinos, Higgs bosons, etc. etc. etc. (I must admit that although the
Standard Model is the most successful physical theory ever proposed, it is also one of the ugliest.) This might be done
by curling up 6 of the 10 dimensions, leaving us with a 4 dimensional theory that might resemble the Standard Model a
bit. Then try to use duality and M- theory to probe its non-perturbative region, seeing if the symmetries break in the
correct fashion, giving us the correct masses of the quarks and other particles in the Standard Model.
Witten's philosophy, however, is a bit different. He feels that the key to solving string theory is to understand the underlying principle behind the theory.
Let me explain. Einstein's theory of general relativity, for example, started from first principles. Einstein had the
"happiest thought in his life" when he leaned back in his chair at the Bern patent office and realized that a person in a
falling elevator would feel no gravity. Although physicists since Galileo knew this, Einstein was able to extract from this
the Equivalence Principle. This deceptively simple statement (that the laws of physics are indistinguishable locally in an
accelerating or a gravitating frame) led Einstein to introduce a new symmetry to physics, general co-ordinate
transformations. This in turn gave birth to the action principle behind general relativity, the most beautiful and compelling
theory of gravity. Only now are we trying to quantize the theory to make it compatible with the other forces. So the
evolution of this theory can be summarized as: Principle -> Symmetry -> Action -> Quantum Theory
According to Witten, we need to discover the analog of the Equivalence Principle for string theory. The fundamental
problem has been that string theory has been evolving "backwards." As Witten says, "string theory is 21st century
physics which fell into the 20th century by accident." We were never "meant" to see this theory until the next century.

IS THE END IN SIGHT?

Vafa recently added a strange twist to this when he introduced yet another mega-theory, this time a 12 dimensional
theory called F-theory (F for "father") which explains the self-duality of the IIb string. (Unfortunately, this 12 dimensional
theory is rather strange: it has two time co-ordinates, not one, and actually violates 12 dimensional relativity. Imagine
trying to live in a world with two times! It would put an episode of Twilight Zone to shame.)
So is the final theory 10, 11, or 12 dimensional?
Schwarz, for one, feels that the final version of M-theory may not even have any fixed dimension. He feels that the
true theory may be independent of any dimensionality of space-time, and that 11 dimensions only emerges once one
tries to solve it. Townsend seems to agree, saying "the whole notion of dimensionality is an approximate one that only
emerges in some semiclassical context."
So does this means that the end is in sight, that we will someday soon derive the Standard Model from first principles?
I asked some of the leaders in this field to respond to this question. Although they are all enthusiastic supporters of this
revolution, they are still cautious about predicting the future.
Townsend believes that we are in a stage similar to the old quantum era of the Bohr atom, just before the full
elucidation of quantum mechanics. He says, "We have some fruitful pictures and some rules analogous to the BohrSommerfeld quantization rules, but it's also clear that we don't have a complete theory."
Duff says, "Is M-theory merely a theory of supermembranes and super 5-branes requiring some (as yet unknown)
non- perturbative quantization, or (as Witten believes) are the under- lying degrees of freedom of M-theory yet to be
discovered? I am personally agnostic on this point."
Witten certainly believes we are on the right track, but we need a few more "revolutions" like this to finally solve the
theory. "I think there are still a couple more superstring revolutions in our future, at least. If we can manage one more
super- string revolution a decade, I think that we will do all right," he says.
Vafa says, "I hope this is the 'light at the end of the tunnel' but who knows how long the tunnel is!"
Schwarz, moreover, has written about M-theory: "Whether it is based on something geometrical (like supermembranes)
or some- thing completely different is still not known. In any case, finding it would be a landmark in human intellectual
history."
Personally, I am optimistic. For the first time, we can see the outline of the lion, and it is magnificent. One day, we will
hear it roar.
[ note: Dr. Kaku's web-site is at http://www.mkaku.org .]

NOW for the newest stuff , hot off-the-press! April 16, 2001 ,
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/bigbang_alternative_010413.html

Faster than you can say Ekpryotic Universe, a movement has taken hold - albeit like fingers on a ledge of
eternal skepticism - that would blow one of the basic tenets of the Big Bang to smithereens. The new idea would not
replace the Big Bang, which has for more than 50 years dominated cosmologists thinking over how the universe began
and evolved. But instead of a universe springing forth in a violent instant from an infinitely small point of infinite density,
the new view argues that our universe was created when two parallel membranes collided
cataclysmically after evolving slowly in 5-dimensional space over an exceedingly long period of time.
The idea, put forth earlier this month at a Space Telescope Science Institute meeting in Baltimore, is based on other
theories about possible multiple dimensions that are rapidly growing in acceptance. It was developed by Neil
Turok of Cambridge University, Burt Ovrut of the University of Pennsylvania, and Paul Steinhardt and Justin
Houry of Princeton University. The [Ekpryotic] scenario is that our current universe is a 4-dimensional membrane
embedded in a 5-dimensional bulk space, something like a sheet of paper in ordinary 3-dimensional space, Turok

told SPACE.com. The idea then is that another membrane collided with ours, releasing energy and heat and leading
to the expansion of our universe.
Its almost crazy enough to be correct, says Michael Turner, a longtime University of Chicago cosmologist who
is familiar with the theory. He added that when youre trying to crack a really hard problem, you need a crazy idea.
Turner said astronomers have reacted with great excitement to the new theory, in part because the idea of alternate
dimensions is largely new to most of them. Cosmologists tend to welcome the idea as a healthy potential alternative to
certain aspects of the Big Bang, but are cautious about the theorys prospects.
The Ekpryotic Universe draws its name from the ancient Greek word ekpryosis, meaning conflagration
(disastrous fire or conflict). According to an ancient cosmological model with this name, the universe was created in a
sudden burst of fire. The modern-day theorists say this ancient idea is not unlike the collision proposed in the new
model. While the new theory is full of complex math and obscure concepts, it is a somewhat soothing idea for anyone
who has ever wondered what-the-heck lies beyond our universe.
So what is beyond the edge of the universe? The 5th-dimension is what is beyond the edge say the creators of
the idea. Though they argue there is in fact no edge. There is only one universe, Ovrut said in a telephone interview.
It does not have a boundary. Its just one large extended brane that has been hit, heated up, and is expanding.
The mind-bending concept does not involve multiple or parallel universes as have been suggested by other
researchers. Instead, Ovrut explains, the 5th-dimension is out there and embedded in it are multiple branes. Each end
of the 5th-dimension is bounded by an infinite brane. Our visible universe is one of those, and before the collision it may
or may not have contained normal matter. At the other end of the 5th-dimension is a brane with physics unlike ours.
The branes in between - while they may contain matter - are not universes, and they do not resemble the brane we
inhabit. There is no reason to assume, given this conceptual framework, that there are any other universes out
there, Ovrut said.
A paper on the concept has been submitted to the journal Physical Review D. While the paper has not yet been
accepted for publication, surprised and thrilled physicists who are familiar with it are describing the Ekpryotic Universe
as exciting, plausible and a worthy competitor to a problematic aspect of the Big Bang known as inflation.
Inflation attempts to account for the seeming uniformity of the universe. Look in any direction of the sky, and there
are features in the universe - galaxies and clusters of galaxies - that very much resemble those in any other direction.
The theory of inflation accounts for this by putting all matter in one spot at the beginning, then shooting it faster than the
speed-of-light in a period of inflation whereby everything developed under similar rules regardless of where it was
headed.
Ovrut said that in modeling a collision of branes, his group found that the result would be a universe that fits neatly
with predictions of the Big Bang. It produces similar temperatures and causes the resulting universe to expand, for
example, and creates matter with the same uniformity predicted by inflation. We are not attacking the theory of
inflation, Ovrut said. Were just presenting an alternative.
Turner, the University of Chicago cosmologist, said inflation theory has been so successful that it has killed all
competing theories. But inflation doesnt address the idea that there might be other dimensions. Interest in
this wild notion has grown among cosmologists in recent years.

Our paper proposes a new theory of the very early universe that resolves the famous puzzles of the hot Big
Bang picture - the horizon, flatness and monopole problems - and that generates fluctuations in energy that seed
galaxy formation and produce temperature variations in the cosmic microwave background. The model is based on
the idea that our hot Big Bang universe was created from the collision of two 3-dimensional worlds moving along a
hidden, extra dimension.
The inflationary model of the universe, developed in the 1980s by Alan Guth (MIT), Andre Linde (Stanford),
Andreas Albrecht (UC Davis) and Steinhardt, was designed to resolve these very same problems, relying on a period
of exponential hyper-expansion or inflation.
Conceptually, the Ekpryotic model is very different. There is no inflation or rapid change happening at all. The
approach to collision takes place very slowly over an exceedingly long period-of-time. It is quite fascinating that
rapid change and very slow change can produce nearly the same effects. The difference results in one distinctive
observations prediction, though: Inflationary cosmology predicts a spectrum of gravitational waves that may be

detectable in the cosmic microwave background. The Ekpryotic model predicts no gravitational waves should be
observable in the cosmic microwave background.
In the Ekpryotic model when the two 3-dimensional worlds collide and stick, the kinetic energy in the collision
is converted to the quarks, electrons, photos, etc. that are confined to move over 3 dimensions. The resulting
temperature is finite, so the hot Big Bang phase begins without a singularity. The universe is homogenous because
the collision and initiation of the Big Bang phase occurs nearly simultaneously everywhere.
The energetically-preferred geometry for the two worlds is flat, so their collision produces a flat Big Bang
universe. According to Einsteins equations, this means that the total energy density of the universe is equal to the
critical density. Massive magnetic monopoles, which are over-abundantly produced in the standard Big Bang
theory, are not produced at all in this scenario because the temperature after collision is far too small to produce any
of these massive particles.
Quantum effects cause the incoming 3-dimensional world to ripple along the extra-dimension prior to collision
so that the collision occurs in some places at slightly different times than others. By the time the collision is
complete, the rippling leads to small variations in temperature, which seed temperature fluctuations in the microwave
background and the formation of galaxies. We have shown that the spectrum of energy density fluctuations is scaleinvariant (the same amplitude on all scales). The production of a scale-invariant spectrum from hyper-expansion
was one of the great triumphs of inflationary theory, and here we have repeated the feat using completely different
physics.
The building blocks of Ekpryotic theory are derived from superstring theory. Superstring theory
requires extra dimensions for mathematical consistency. In most formulations 10 dimensions are
required. In the mid-1990s Petr Horava (Rutgers) and Ed Witten (IAS,Princeton) argued that, under
certain conditions, an additional dimension opens up over a finite interval. 6 dimensions are presumed to
be curled up in a microscopic ball, called a Calabi-Yau manifold. The ball is too small to be noticed in everyday
experience, and so our universe appears to be a 4-dimensional (3 space dimensions and 1 time dimension) surface
embedded in a 5-dimensional space-time. This 5-dimensional theory, called heterotic M-theory, was formulated by
Andre Lukas (Sussex), Ovrut and Dan Waldram (Queen Marry and Westfield College, London). According to
Horava-Witten and heterotic M-theory, particles are constrained to move on one of the 3-dimensional boundaries on
either side of the extra dimensional interval.
Our visible universe would be one of these boundaries; the other boundary and the intervening space would be
hidden because particles and light cannot travel across the intervening space. Only gravity is able to couple matter
on one boundary to the other sides. In addition, there can exist other 3-dimensional hyper-surfaces in the interval,
which lie parallel to the outer boundaries and which can carry energy.
These intervening planes are called branes, short for membranes. The collision that ignites the hot Big
Bang phase of the ekpryotic model occurs when a 3-dimensional brane is attracted to and collides into the boundary
corresponding to our visible universe.
The term ekpryosis means conflagration in Greek, and refers to an ancient Stoic cosmological model.
According to the model, the universe is created in a sudden burst of fire, not unlike the collision between 3dimensional worlds in our model. The current universe evolves from the initial fire. However in the Stoic notion, the
process may repeat itself in the future. This too is possible in our scenario in principle if there is more than one
brane and, consequently, more than one collision. We plan to discuss this possibility in future work, along with
further speculations about what preceded the collision that made our present universe.
As a final remark, we feel that is important to realize that Inflationary theory is based on Quantum
Field theory, a well-established theoretical framework, and the model has been carefully studied and
vetted for 20 years. Our proposal is based on unproven ideas in String Theory and is brand new. While
we appreciate the enthusiasm and interest with which the paper has been received, we could suggest
some patience before promulgating these ideas in order to leave time for us to produce some follow-up
papers that introduce additional elements and to allow fellow theorists time for criticism and sober
judgment.

References
1.

Hyperspace, Michio Kaku, 1994, Doubleday Books, ISBN 0-385-47705-8 .

2.

Brane-Storm Challenges Part of Big Bang Theory , 04/16/01,

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/bigbang_alternative_010413.html

3.

Quantum Weirdness - photons communicate faster than light, newspaper article

4.

Before the Big Bang, Michio Kaku, Astronomy magazine, May 96 .

5.

Gimme an M - scientists string together theories describing universe , newspaper article

Cutting-Edge
Theoretical development & predictions always precede experimental confirmation and engineering applications.
As mentioned on previous pages here, the Big Bang microwave echo that was predicted by George Gamow wasnt
confirmed until decades later when semiconductor advances permitted advanced sensors to be loaded onto the COBE
satellite. The United States wasnt the only nation that knew the theory behind atomic bomb. But it was its massive
engineering program that took the powerful equations off paper and made them work in the real world. Most nations
know the physics behind small thermonuclear warheads used in MIRV-capable missiles. What prevents more from
having that operational capability are advanced engineering designs (which is why the United States is so upset that
the engineering secrets of our mini-sized thermonuclear warhead was given to the Chinese saving them 20 years of
development).
Suggestions that the Universe may be multi-dimensional have not only arisen from purely physics concerns (as in
trying to unite all 4 forces under one mathematical umbrella) but also from other predicted phenomena and even
eyewitness reports of UFOs, the Philadelphia Experiment & Montauk Project, etc. There is theoretical quantum evidence
that scalar fields and zero-point energy exist in the universe. But the problem has remained for decades how to tap
into these. It is an engineering problem, complicated by these new multi-dimensional enhancements to the classical
Newtonian and Einsteinian physics we have been living with.
UNITEL : http://www.unitelnw.com
Much of the problem resides in producing very unique materials (e.g., room-temperature ceramic
superconductors). We have all heard reports of on-going crystal growth experiments in the weightlessness of outer
space by space station and shuttle astronauts. Apparently some of these continue to defy our best attempts to
manufacture them. But if we do succeed one day, their applications will unlock what theories have been predicting for
decades. The private company UNITEL is joining the effort to develop a special laser crystal lens that will have
applications in quantum holographic computers, proton beams that can target individual cancer cells, and
INTERSTELLAR craft that travel via macro-scopic quantum tunneling through these predicted other dimensions.
Please check out their outstanding web site ! Be sure to <click> on Aerospace on their homepage. Then in
order <click> on the categories in bold-blue that appear at the top of the Aerospace menu (Intro, Lens, Basic
Design, Smart Skin, Control & Navigation, Marketing). You will see how they are implanting nano-sized
semiconductors in the hull design (like the smart skin used in the B-2) to counteract some effects caused by the laser
crystal lens as it enables the craft to achieve quantum shortcuts like the entangled twin-photon experiments that
showed infinite speed.

For an easy-reading but slightly more technical discussion of the history of

physics,
substitute "Gibbs_1.doc " for "Strings_1.doc" in the above
URL

Press <BACK> on your Browser to return to the previous page

or substitute "UFO_index.htm" for "Documents/Strings_1.doc" in the above URL