Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

Please welcome our new moderators!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

122 submissions , 103 unreviewed
3,497 questions , 1,172 unanswered
4,544 answers , 19,342 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
408 active unimported users
More ...

What are the chances string theory is more probably the correct description of nature than loop qauntum gravity?

+ 0 like - 0 dislike
34 views

I mean because of Gauge\gravity correspondances and T'thooft discovery that the dynamics of large N gauge theories is dual to string theory and so there is a relation between Nonabelian gauge theories and Superstring theory in a variety of backgrounds but as far as this scenario does not exist for loop quantum gravity

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Feb 24, 2012 in Theoretical Physics by Quarkgluon (0 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Apr 19, 2014 by dimension10
42%. If we consider only these two theories.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
I agree with Moshe. I don't want to see a rehash of the string wars here.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
I'd go further and point to the FAQ: You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Welcome here Quarkgluon and thanks for asking. However, I guess the questions needs some rewording as I don't think than anyone say that _the probability that String Theory is right is $p_1$ and - that Loop Quantum Gravity - $p_2$...

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\varnothing$ysicsOverflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...