All language subtitles for Episode 3 - Welcome to The 11th Dimension

Now, on NOVA,

take a thrill ride into a world

stranger than science fiction,

where you play the game
by breaking some rules,

where a new view of the universe

pushes you beyond the limits

of your wildest imagination.

This is the world of "string theory,"

a way of describing
every force and all matter

from an atom to earth, to
the end of the galaxies--

from the birth of
time to its final tick,

in a single theory, a
"Theory of Everything."

Our guide to this brave new world

is Brian Greene, the
bestselling author and physicist.

BRIAN GREENE And
no matter how many times I come here,

I never seem to get used to it.

NARRATOR: Can he help us solve

the greatest puzzle
of modern physics--

that our understanding of the universe

is based on two sets of
laws that don't agree?

NARRATOR: Resolving that
contradiction eluded even Einstein,

who made it his final quest.

After decades,

we may finally be on the
verge of a breakthrough.

The solution is strings,

tiny bits of energy

vibrating like the strings on a cello,

a cosmic symphony

at the heart of all reality.

But it comes at a price:

parallel universes and 11 dimensions,

most of which

you've never seen.

BRIAN GREENE: We really
may live in a universe

with more dimensions than meet the eye.

AMANDA PEET
People who have said that there were

extra dimensions of space

have been labeled crackpots,
or people who are bananas.

NARRATOR: A mirage of
science and mathematics

or the ultimate theory of everything?

S. JAMES GATES, JR. If string theory fails to provide

a testable prediction,

then nobody should believe it.

SHELDON LEE GLASHOW Is that a theory of physics,

or a philosophy?

BRIAN GREENE: One thing that
is certain is that string theory

is already showing us

that the universe may be a lot stranger

than any of us ever imagined.

NARRATOR: Coming up tonight,

the undeniable pull of strings.

BRIAN GREENE: The
atmosphere was electric.

String theory goes through

a revolution of its own...

MICHAEL DUFF
Five different string theories...

BRIAN GREENE:...and reveals
the new shape of things to come.

SAVAS DIMOPOULOS
Perhaps we live on a threedimensional membrane.

BRIAN GREENE: Our universe
might be like a slice of bread.

We're trapped on just a tiny slice

of the higher dimensional universe.

ALAN GUTH That's actually a problem.

NARRATOR: Watch the
Elegant Universe right now.

THE ELEGANT UNIVERSE

Hosted By Brian Greene

Welcome to the 11th Dimension

The Wild West of Physics

BRIAN GREENE: Imagine that
we were able to control space

or control time.

The kinds of things that we'd
be able to do would be amazing.

I might be able to go from here...

to here...

to here...

to here...

and over to here in only an instant.

Now, we all think that this
kind of trip would be impossible.

And it probably is.

But in the last few years, our ideas

about the true nature of space and time

have been going through some changes.

And things that used to
seem like science fiction

are looking
not-so-far-fetched.

It's all thanks to a
revolution in physics called

"string theory,"

which is offering a
whole new perspective

on the inner workings of the universe.

JOSEPH LYKKEN String
theory holds out the promise

that we can really understand

questions of why the universe

is the way it is at the
most fundamental level.

DAVID GROSS String theory is really

the Wild West of physics.

MICHAEL B. GREEN
This is an area of theoretical physics

which is so radically different
from anything that's been before.

BRIAN GREENE: This radical new
theory starts with a simple premise:

that everything in the universe,

the Earth, these buildings,

even forces like
gravity and electricity,

are made up of incredibly tiny,

vibrating strands of energy

called "strings."

And small as they are,

strings are changing everything

we thought we knew about the universe,

especially our ideas

about the nature of space.

To see how,

let's first shrink all of space

to a more manageable size.

Imagine that the whole
universe consisted

of nothing more than my hometown,

Manhattan.

So now, just one
borough of New York City

makes up the entire fabric of space.

And just for kicks,

let's also imagine that I'm the CEO

of a large corporation
with offices on Wall Street.

And because time is
money, I need to find

the quickest route from my apartment,

here in upper Manhattan

to my offices in lower Manhattan.

Now, we all know that
the shortest distance

between two points is a straight line,

but even if
there's no traffic--

a bit of a stretch even in
our imaginary Manhattan--

it'll still take us some
amount of time to get there.

By going faster and faster,

we can reduce the travel time.

But because nothing can go faster

than the speed of light,
there is a definite limit

to how much time we can cut

from our journey.

This Manhattan Universe fits with

an old, classical vision of space,

basically a flat grid
that's static and unchanging.

But when Albert Einstein looked

at the fabric of space,

he saw something completely different.

He said that space wasn't static;

it could warp and stretch.

And there could even be
unusual structures of space

called "wormholes."

A wormhole is a bridge or tunnel

that can link distant regions of space,

in effect, a cosmic shortcut.

In this kind of universe, my commute

would be a New Yorker's dream.

But there's a hitch:

to create a wormhole,

you've got to rip

or tear a hole in the fabric of space.

But can the fabric of space

really rip?

Can this first step toward forming

a wormhole actually happen?

Well, you can't answer these questions

on an empty stomach.

Turns out that by
looking at my breakfast--

coffee and
a doughnut--

we can get a pretty good sense

of what string theory says about

whether the fabric of space can tear.

Imagine that space is
shaped like this doughnut.

You might think that it
would be very different

from a region of space shaped

like this coffee cup.

But there's a precise sense

in which the shape of the
doughnut and the coffee cup

are actually the same,

just a little disguised.

You see, they both have one hole.

In the doughnut it's in the middle

and in the coffee cup
it's in the handle.

That means we can change the doughnut

into the shape of a
coffee cup and back again

without having to rip
or tear the dough at all.

Okay, but suppose you want to change

the shape of this doughnut
into a very different shape,

a shape with no holes.

The only way to do that is
to tear the doughnut like this

and then re-shape it.

Unfortunately,

according to Einstein's
laws, this is impossible.

They say that space
can stretch and warp,

but it cannot rip.

Wormholes might exist somewhere

fully formed,

but you could not rip space

to create a new one, over
Manhattan or anywhere else.

In other words,

I can't take a wormhole to work.

But now string theory is giving us

a whole new perspective on space,

and it's showing us that Einstein

wasn't always right.

To see how, let's
take a much closer look

at the spatial fabric.

If we could shrink down
to about a millionth

of a billionth of our normal size,

we'd enter the world
of quantum mechanics,

the laws that control how atoms behave.

It's the world of light and electricity

and everything else that operates
at the smallest of scales.

Here, the fabric of space
is random and chaotic.

Rips and tears might be commonplace.

But if they were, what would stop a rip

in the fabric of space from creating

a cosmic catastrophe?

Well,

this is where the power
of strings comes in.

Strings calm the chaos.

And as a single string

dances through space,

it sweeps out a tube.

The tube can act like a bubble

that surrounds the tear,

a protective shield with
profound implications.

Strings actually

make it possible for space to rip.

Which means that space

is far more dynamic and changeable

than even Albert Einstein thought.

So does that mean

that wormholes are possible?

Will I ever be able to
take a stroll on Everest,

grab a baguette in Paris

and still make it back to New York

in time for my morning meeting?

It would be kind of cool,

though it's still a
very distant possibility.

But one thing that is certain

is that string theory

is already showing us that the universe

may be a lot stranger

than any of us

ever imagined.

For example, string theory says

we're surrounded by hidden dimensions,

mysterious places beyond the familiar

three-dimensional space we know.

AMANDA PEET: People who've said

that there were extra
dimensions of space,

have been labeled as, you know,

crackpots or people who are bananas.

I mean, what, do you think
there are extra dimensions?

Well,

string theory really predicts it.

BRIAN GREENE: What we
think of as our universe

could just be one small part

of something much bigger.

SAVAS DIMOPOULOS: Perhaps
we live on a membrane,

a threedimensional membrane

that floats inside
higher dimensional space.

BRIAN GREENE: There could be
entire worlds right next to us,

but completely invisible.

NIMA ARKANI-HAMED These
other worlds would, in a very literal sense, be,

be parallel universes.

This isn't a particularly exotic

or, or strange notion.

BRIAN GREENE: No wonder physics students

are lining up to explore

the strange world of string theory.

SHELDON LEE GLASHOW: String
theory is very active.

Things are happening. There
are a lot of people doing it.

Most of the young
kids, given the choice,

at a ratio of something like ten to one,

they will go into string theory.

BRIAN GREENE: But strings
weren't always this popular.

The Potential of Strings

The pioneers of string
theory struggled for years,

working alone on an idea

that nobody else believed in.

Here's the gist of it:

for decades, physicists believed

that the tiniest bits inside an atom

were point particles.

Flying around the outside
were the electrons,

and inside were protons and neutrons

which were made up of quarks.

But string theory says

that what we thought
were indivisible particles

are actually tiny, vibrating strings.

BURT OVRUT It's
nothing really mystical. It's a really tiny string.

It either closes in to its little
circle or it has end points,

but it's just a little string.

BRIAN GREENE: In the
1980s, the idea caught on,

and people started jumping
on the string bandwagon.

MICHAEL B. GREEN: Well, the fact
that suddenly all these other

people were working in the field

had its advantages
and its disadvantages.

It was wonderful to see how

rapidly the subject could develop now,

because so many people
were working on it.

BRIAN GREENE: One of the
great attractions of strings

is their versatility.

Just as the strings on a cello

can vibrate at different frequencies,

making all the individual musical notes,

in the same way, the tiny
strings of string theory

vibrate and dance in different patterns,

creating all the fundamental particles

of nature.

If this view is right,

then put them all together
and we get the grand

and beautiful symphony
that is our universe.

What's really exciting about this

is that it offers an
amazing possibility.

If we could only master

the rhythms of strings,

then we'd stand a good
chance of explaining

all the matter and all
the forces of nature,

from the tiniest subatomic particles

to the galaxies of outer space.

This is the potential of string theory,

to be a unified "Theory of Everything."

But, at first sight,

in our enthusiasm for this idea,

we seem to have gone too far.

Because we didn't produce
just one string theory,

or even
two--

we somehow managed to come up with five.

MICHAEL DUFF
Five different string theories,

each competing for the title
of the Theory of Everything.

BURT OVRUT: And if there's going to be
a "The Fundamental Theory of Nature,"

there ought to be one of them.

AMANDA PEET: I suppose a number
of string theorists thought,

"Ah, that's fantastic. That's wonderful.
And maybe one of these will end up

being the right theory of the world."

And yet, there must have been a little

nagging voice at the back of the head

that said, "Well, why are there five?"

BRIAN GREENE: With
five competing players,

the stage of string theory was

looking a little crowded.

The five theories had
many things in common.

For example, they all
involved vibrating strings,

but their mathematical details appeared

to be quite different.

Frankly, it was embarrassing.

How could this unified
Theory of Everything

come in five different flavors?

This was a case where more

was definitely less.

But then something remarkable happened.

Getting to One Theory

This is Ed Witten.

He's widely regarded as one

of the world's greatest
living physicists,

perhaps even Einstein's successor.

MICHAEL B. GREEN: Ed Witten is a
very special person in the field.

He clearly has a grasp,

particularly of the underlying
mathematical principles,

which is far greater
than most other people.

JOSEPH POLCHINSKI Well, you know, we all think we're very smart;

he's so much smarter
than the rest of us.

BRIAN GREENE: In 1995,

string theorists from all
over the world gathered

at the University of Southern California

for their annual conference.

Ed Witten showed up at Strings 95

and rocked their world.

EDWARD WITTEN I
was really trying to think of something would be

that significant for the occasion.

And actually, since five
string theories was too many,

I thought I would try to
get rid of some of them.

BRIAN GREENE: To solve the problem,

Witten constructed a
spectacular new way of

looking at string theory.

JOSEPH POLCHINSKI: Ed announced
that he had thought about it,

and moreover, he had solved it.

He was going to tell us the solution to

every string theory in every dimension,

which was an enormous claim,

but coming from Ed it
was not so surprising.

BRIAN GREENE: The atmosphere
was electric because,

all of a sudden, string theory,

which had been going
through a kind of doldrums,

was given an incredible boost,

a shot in the arm.

LEONARD SUSSKIND
Ed Witten gave his famous lecture.

And he said a couple of words
that got me interested...

and for the rest of the lecture...

I got hooked up on the
first few words that he said,

and completely missed
the point of his lecture.

NATHAN SEIBERG
I remember I had to give the talk after him,

and I was kind of embarrassed to.

JOSEPH LYKKEN: Ed Witten
just blew everybody away.

BRIAN GREENE: Ed Witten blew
everybody away because he

provided a completely new perspective

on string theory.

From this point of view, we could see

that there weren't really
five different theories.

Like reflections in a wall of mirrors,

what we thought were five theories

turned out to be just
five different ways

of looking at the same thing.

String theory was unified at last.

Witten's work sparked a breakthrough

so revolutionary that it
was given it's own name,

"M-theory,"

although no one really
knows what the M stands for.

S. JAMES GATES, JR.:
Aah, what is the M for?

ALL: M-theory.

STEVEN WEINBERG M-theory is a theory...

BURT OVRUT: I don't actually
know what the M stands for.

STEVEN WEINBERG: Well, the M has...

BURT OVRUT: I've heard
many descriptions.

STEVEN WEINBERG: Mystery
theory, magic theory...

JOSEPH LYKKEN: It's the Mother theory.

STEVEN WEINBERG: Matrix theory.

LEONARD SUSSKIND: Monstrous theory?

I don't know what it...I
don't know what Ed meant.

EDWARD WITTEN: M stands for magic,
mystery or matrix, according to taste.

SHELDON LEE GLASHOW:
I suspect that the "M"

is an upside down "W" for "Witten."

EDWARD WITTEN: Some cynics
have occasionally suggested

that M may also stand for "murky,"

because our level of
understanding of the theory is,

in fact, so primitive.

Maybe I shouldn't
have told you that one.

BRIAN GREENE: Whatever the
name, it was a bombshell.

Suddenly everything was different.

JOSEPH LYKKEN: There was a
lot of panic, if you like,

realizing that big
things were happening,

and all of us not
wanting to get left behind

in this new revolution of string theory.

BRIAN GREENE: After Witten's talk,

there was renewed hope

that this one theory could be

the theory to explain
everything in the universe.

But there was also a price to pay.

Before M-theory, strings seemed

to operate in a world
with 10 dimensions.

These included one dimension of time,

the three familiar space dimensions,

as well as six extra dimensions,

curled up so tiny

that they're completely invisible.

GARY HOROWITZ: Well, we think
these extra dimensions exist

because they come out of the
equations of string theory.

Strings need to move in more

than three dimensions.

And that was a shock to everybody,

but then we learned to live with it.

BRIAN GREENE: But M-theory
would go even further,

demanding yet another spatial dimension,

bringing the grand total to

11 dimensions.

BURT OVRUT: We know that there
would have to be 11 dimensions

for this theory to make sense.

So there must be 11 dimensions.

We only see three plus one of them.

How is that possible?

BRIAN GREENE: For most of
us, it's virtually impossible

to picture the extra, higher dimensions:

I can't.

And it's not surprising.

Our brains evolved sensing

just the three spatial dimensions

of everyday experience.

So how can we get a feel for them?

Parallel Universes

One way is to go to the movies.

THEATER BRIAN GREENE: We're
all familiar with the real world

having three spatial dimensions.

That is, anywhere I go,

I can move left-right,

back-forth,
or up-down.

MOVIE SCREEN BRIAN But in
the movies, things are a bit different.

Even though the characters
on a movie screen

look three-dimensional, they actually

are stuck in just two dimensions.

There is no back-forth
on a movie screen,

that's just an optical illusion.

To really move

in the back-forth dimension,

I'd have to step out of the screen.

And sometimes moving into

a higher dimension

can be a useful thing to do.

MOVIE SCREEN BRIAN GREENE So dimensions all have to do

with the independent directions

in which you can move.

They're sometimes called
"degrees of freedom."

THEATER BRIAN GREENE: The more
dimensions or degrees of freedom you have,

the more you can do. That's right.

BRIAN GREENE: And if there
really are 11 dimensions,

then strings can do a lot more, too.

BURT OVRUT: People found, fairly soon,

that there were objects
that lived in these theories,

which weren't just strings,
but were larger than that.

They actually looked like
membranes or surfaces.

BRIAN GREENE: The extra
dimension Witten added

allows a string to
stretch into something

like a membrane,

or a "brane" for short.

A brane could be
three-dimensional or even more.

And with enough energy,

a brane could grow to an enormous size,

perhaps even as large as a universe.

This was a revolution in string theory.

STEVEN WEINBERG: String theory
has gotten much more baroque.

I mean now there are not only
strings, there are membranes.

People go on calling this string theory,

but the string theorists
are not sure it really

is a theory of strings anymore.

BRIAN GREENE: The
existence of giant membranes

and extra dimensions

would open up a
startling new possibility,

that our whole universe

is living on a membrane,

inside a much larger,

higher dimensional space.

It's almost as if we
were living inside...

a loaf of bread?

Our universe might be
like a slice of bread,

just one slice,

in a much larger loaf

that physicists
sometimes call the "bulk."

And if these ideas are right,

the bulk may have other slices,

other universes, that
are right next to ours,

in effect, "parallel" universes.

Not only would our
universe be nothing special,

but we could have a lot of neighbors.

Some of them could
resemble our universe,

they might have matter
and planets and, who knows,

maybe even beings of a sort.

Others certainly would
be a lot stranger.

They might be ruled by

completely different laws of physics.

Now, all of these other
universes would exist

within the extra
dimensions of M-theory,

dimensions that are all around us.

Some even say they might be right

next to us, less than a millimeter away.

But if that's true,

why can't I see them or touch them?

BURT OVRUT: If you have a brane living

in a higher dimensional space,

and your particles, your atoms,

cannot get off the brane,

it's like trying to reach out,

but you can't touch anything.

It might as well be on the
other end of the universe.

JOSEPH LYKKEN: It's a very
powerful idea because if it's right

it means that our whole
picture of the universe

is clouded by the fact

that we're trapped on just a tiny slice

of the higher dimensional universe.

BRIAN GREENE: It is a
powerful idea, especially

because it may help solve one

of the great mysteries
of modern science.

Escaping Gravity

It has to do with gravity.

It's been more than 300 years

since Isaac Newton came up

with the universal law of gravity,

inspired, as the story goes,

by seeing an apple fall from a tree.

Today, it seems obvious that gravity

is a powerful force.

SHELDON LEE GLASHOW: It would
seem to most people that gravity is

a very important
force, it's very strong.

It's very hard to get up in the morning,

stand up, and when things fall

they break because gravity is strong.

But the fact of the matter
is that it's not strong.

It's, it's really a very weak force.

BRIAN GREENE: Gravity
pulls us down to the Earth,

and keeps our Earth in
orbit around the sun.

But in fact, we overcome the force

of gravity all the time.

It's not that hard.

Even with the gravity
of the entire Earth

pulling this apple downward,

the muscles in my arm

can easily overcome it.

And it's not just our muscles

that put gravity to shame.

Magnets can do it, too, no sweat.

Magnets carry a different force,

the electromagnetic force.

That's the same force behind light

and electricity.

It turns out that
electromagnetism is much,

much stronger than gravity.

Gravity, in comparison,

is amazingly weak.

How weak?

The electromagnetic force is some

thousand billion, billion, billion,

billion times stronger.

That's a one with 39
zeroes following it.

1.000.000.000.000.000.000.
000.000.000.000.000.000.000

The weakness of gravity

has confounded scientists for decades.

But now, with the radical
world of string theory,

filled with membranes
and extra dimensions,

there's a whole new way
to look at the problem.

NIMA ARKANI-HAMED: One way of
approaching the question of why gravity

is so weak compared to
all the other forces, is to

turn the question completely
on its head, and say,

"No, actually gravity isn't very weak.

Compared to all the other forces,
it just appears to be weak."

BRIAN GREENE: It may be
that gravity is actually

just as strong as electromagnetism,

but for some reason,

we can't feel its strength.

SAVAS DIMOPOULOS: Consider a pool table,

a very large pool table.

Think of the surface of the pool table

as representing our
three-dimensional universe,

although it is just two-dimensional,

and think of the billiard balls

as representing atoms

and other particles that
the universe is made out of.

BRIAN GREENE: So here's the wild idea:

the atoms and particles

that make up stuff
in the world around us

will stay on our particular membrane,

our slice of the universe

just as the billiard balls will stay

on the surface of
the pool table--

unless you're a really bad pool player.

But whenever the balls collide,

there is something that
always seeps off the table,

sound waves.

That's why I can hear the collision.

Now, the idea is that gravity

might be like the sound waves,

it might not be
confined to our membrane.

It might be able to seep off

our part of the universe.

Or think about it another way.

Instead of pool tables,
let's go back to bread.

Imagine that our universe is

like this slice of toast.

And that you and me,
and all of matter--

light itself,
everything we see--

is like jelly.

Now jelly can move freely

on the surface of the toast,

but otherwise, it's stuck, it can't

leave the surface itself.

But what if gravity were different?

What if gravity were more

like cinnamon and sugar?

Now, this stuff isn't sticky at all,

so it easily slides

right off the surface.

But why would gravity

be so different from everything else

that we know of in the universe?

Well, turns out that
string theory, or M-theory,

provides an answer.

It all has to do with shape.

For years, we concentrated on strings

that were closed loops,
like rubber bands.

But after M-theory,

we turned our attention to other kinds.

Now we think that
everything we see around us,

like matter and light,

is made of open-ended strings,

and the ends of each string

are tied down to our
threedimensional membrane.

But closed loops of string do exist,

and one kind is responsible for gravity.

It's called a graviton.

With closed loops,

there are no loose ends to tie down,

so gravitons are free

to escape into the other dimensions,

diluting the strength of gravity

and making it seem weaker

than the other forces of nature.

This suggests an intriguing possibility.

Riddle of the Big Bang

If we do live on a membrane

and there are parallel
universes on other membranes

near us, we may never see them,

but perhaps we could one day feel them

through gravity.

SAVAS DIMOPOULOS: If there
happens to be intelligent life

on one of the membranes,

then this intelligent life

might be very close to us.

So theoretically, and
purely theoretically,

we might be able to communicate

with this intelligent life by

exchanging strong gravity wave sources.

BRIAN GREENE: So who knows?

Maybe someday we'll
develop the technology

and use gravity waves to actually

communicate with other worlds.

ALIEN:
Ay-yoo-ya.

BRIAN GREENE: Yes, hey,
it's Brian. How you doing?

ALIEN: Brian, hoh-ba
jubby wah-fa-loo

poo-jabba "Simpsons!"

BRIAN GREENE: We don't really
know if parallel universes

could have a real impact on us.

But there is one very
controversial idea,

which says they've already
played a major role.

In fact, it gives them
credit for our existence.

As the classic story goes,

the vast universe we see today was once

extremely small,

unimaginably small.

Then, suddenly,
it got bigger--

a lot bigger-- during the
dramatic event known as

the Big Bang.

The Big Bang stretched
the fabric of space

and set off the chain of events

that brought us to the universe

we know and love today.

But there's always been
a couple of problems

with the Big Bang theory.

First, when you squeeze the entire

universe into an infinitesimally small,

but stupendously dense package,

at a certain point, our laws of physics

simply break down.

They just don't make sense anymore.

DAVID GROSS: The formulas
we use start giving

answers that are nonsensical.

We find total disaster.

Everything breaks down, and we're stuck.

BRIAN GREENE: And on top of
this, there's the bang itself.

What exactly is that?

ALAN GUTH: That's actually a problem.

The classic form of the
Big Bang theory really

says nothing about what banged,

what happened before it banged,

or what caused it to bang.

BRIAN GREENE: Refinements
to the Big Bang theory

do suggest explanations for the Bang,

but none of them turn the clock back

completely to the moment
when everything started.

PAUL STEINHARDT Most
people come at this with the naive notion

that there was a
beginning-- that somehow

space and time emerged from nothingness

into somethingness.

BURT OVRUT: Well, I don't know
about you, but I don't like nothing.

Do I really believe that the universe

was a Big Bang out of nothing?

And I'm not a philosopher,

so I won't say. But I could
imagine to a philosopher,

that is a problem. But to a physicist,

I think, it's also a problem.

BRIAN GREENE: Everyone admits
there are problems. The question is:

"Can string theory solve them?"

Some string theorists have suggested

that the Big Bang wasn't
the beginning at all,

that the universe could
have existed long before

even forever.

Not everyone is
comfortable with the idea.

ALAN GUTH: I actually
find it rather unattractive

to think about a universe
without a beginning.

It seems to me that a
universe without a beginning

is also a universe
without an explanation.

BRIAN GREENE: So what
is the explanation?

What if string theory is right,

and we are all living
on a giant membrane

inside a higher dimensional space?

PAUL STEINHARDT: One of the
ideas in string theory that was

particularly striking
to me, and suggested

perhaps a new direction for cosmology,

is the idea of branes and the idea

of branes moving in extra dimensions.

BRIAN GREENE: Some scientists
have proposed that the answer

to the Big Bang riddle

lies in the movements
of these giant branes.

BURT OVRUT: It's so simple.

Here's a brane on which we live,

and here's another brane

floating in the higher dimension.

There's absolutely
nothing difficult about

imagining that these
collide with each other.

BRIAN GREENE: According to this idea,

some time before the Big Bang,

two branes carrying parallel universes

began drifting toward each other,

until...

BURT OVRUT: All of that
energy has to go somewhere.

Where does it go? It
goes into the Big Bang.

It creates the expansion that we see,

and it heats up all the
particles in the universe

in this big, fiery mass.

BRIAN GREENE: As if this
weren't weird enough,

the proponents of this idea make

another radical claim:

the Big Bang was not a special event.

They say that parallel universes

could have collided, not
just once in the past,

but again
and again--

and that it will happen in the future.

If this view is right, there's

a brane out there right now,

headed on a collision
course with our universe.

PAUL STEINHARDT: So
another collision is coming,

and there'll be another Big Bang.

And this will just repeat itself for

an indefinite period into the future.

BRIAN GREENE: It's an intriguing idea.

Unfortunately,

there are a few technical problems.

DAVID GROSS: Well, that was
a very ingenious scenario

that arose naturally
within string theory.

However, the good old problems

creep back in again.

BRIAN GREENE: The fact
is we don't really know

what happens when two branes collide.

You can wind up with the same situation

we had with the Big Bang;

the equations don't make sense.

GARY HOROWITZ: They have
to make a lot of assumptions

in their models, and
I don't think they've

really solved the
problem of the Big Bang

in string theory.

BRIAN GREENE: If string theory is the

one true theory of the universe,

it will have to solve the
riddle of the Big Bang.

And there's a lot of hope that someday

string theory will succeed.

But for now, there's
also a lot of uncertainty.

As promising and exciting the theory is,

we don't entirely understand it.

DAVID GROSS: It's as if we've stumbled

in the dark into a house,

which we thought was
a two bedroom apartment

and now we're discovering is

a nineteen-room
mansion-- at least.

And maybe it's got a thousand rooms,

and we're just beginning our journey.

BRIAN GREENE: So how sure are we that

the universe is the way that
string theory describes it?

Is the world really made up

of strings and membranes,

parallel universes and extra dimensions?

Is this all science or science fiction?

Signs of Strings

MICHAEL DUFF: Well, the
question we often ask

ourselves as we work
through our equations is,

"Is this just fancy mathematics,

or is it describing the real world?"

S. JAMES GATES, JR.: These exercises
in our imagination of mathematics

are all, at the end of the day,

subjected to a single question:

"Is it there in the laboratory?

Can you find its evidence?"

JOSEPH LYKKEN: String
theory and string theorists

do have a real problem.

How do you actually test string theory?

If you can't test it in the way

that we test normal theories,

it's not science, it's philosophy,

and that's a real problem.

BRIAN GREENE: Strings
are thought to be so tiny,

much smaller than an atom,

that there's probably no way

to see them directly.

But even if we never see strings,

we may someday see their fingerprints.

You see, if strings were around

at the beginning of the universe,

when things were really tiny,

they would have left impressions
or traces on their surroundings.

And then, after the Big Bang,

when everything expanded,

those traces would
have been stretched out

along with everything else.

So, if that's true, we may someday see

the tell-tale signs of strings

somewhere in the stars.

But even here on earth

there's a chance we can detect

evidence of strings.

This pasture in Illinois
serves as command central

for a lot of this research.

Well, actually, the real work happens

underground where the hunt is on for

evidence supporting string theory,

including extra dimensions.

JOSEPH LYKKEN: Not too many
years ago, people who talked

about large extra dimensions

would have been considered crackpots,

to put it lightly.

BRIAN GREENE: But all that has changed,

thanks to string theory.

This is Fermilab,

and right now, it's our best hope for

proving that extra dimensions are real.

Fermilab has a giant atom smasher.

Here's how it works:

scientists zap hydrogen atoms with

huge amounts of electricity.

Later, they strip them of their

electrons and send the protons

zooming around a four mile

circular tunnel beneath the prairie.

Just as they're approaching
the speed of light,

they are steered into
collisions with particles

whizzing in the opposite direction.

Most collisions are just glancing blows,

but occasionally there's a direct hit.

The result is a shower

of unusual subatomic particles.

The hope is that among these particles

will be a tiny unit of gravity,

the graviton.

Gravitons, according
to string theory, are

closed loops, so they can float off

into the extra dimensions.

The grand prize would be
a snapshot of a graviton

at the moment of escape.

MARIA SPIROPULU And then
the graviton goes to the extra dimension,

and then it shows in the
detector by its absence.

You see it by its absence.

BRIAN GREENE: Unfortunately,
Fermilab hasn't

yet "seen" the vanishing graviton.

And the pressure is
on, because another team

is hot on the same trail.

Four thousand miles away,

on the border of France and Switzerland,

a lab called CERN is constructing

an enormous new atom smasher.

When it's finished,
it will be seven times

more powerful than Fermilab's.

JOSEPH LYKKEN: There's
a great sense of urgency

that every minute has
to count, but eventually,

CERN, our rival laboratory,

will frankly blow us out of the water.

BRIAN GREENE: CERN will blow
Fermilab out of the water,

not only in the search
for extra dimensions,

but other wild ideas.

At the top of the "to do" list

for both labs is the hunt for something

called "supersymmetry,"

that's a central
prediction of string theory.

And it says, in a
nutshell, that for every

subatomic particle we're familiar with,

like electrons, photons, and gravitons,

there should also be a much

heavier partner

called a "sparticle," which

so far no one has ever seen.

Now, because string
theory says sparticles

should exist,

finding them is a major priority.

MARIA SPIROPULU: So, it's a big
discovery to find supersymmetry.

That's, that's a
humongous discovery and,

and I think it's a
bigger discovery to find

supersymmetry than to find life on Mars.

AMANDA PEET: If we were to hear tomorrow

that supersymmetry was
discovered, there would

be parties all over the planet.

BRIAN GREENE: The
problem is, if they exist,

the sparticles of supersymmetry

are probably incredibly heavy,

so heavy that they may not be detected

with today's atom smashers.

The new facility at CERN will

have the best chance, once

it's up and running in several years,

but that won't stop the folks at

Fermilab from trying to find them first.

MARIA SPIROPULU: The competition is

friendly and fierce at the same time.

We're competing like bad dogs,

essentially.

It has always been like that,
and it will always be like that.

JOSEPH LYKKEN: We have to make sure
that we don't make any mistakes, that

we do absolutely the
best we can do at these

experiments and take advantage
of what is really one of

the great golden
opportunities for discovery.

BRIAN GREENE: If we do find sparticles,

it won't prove string theory,

but it will be really strong

circumstantial evidence that we're

on the right track.

Too Elegant to be Wrong?

Over the next 10 to 20 years, the new

generation of atom smashers is sure

to uncover surprising truths

about the nature of our universe.

But will it be the universe

predicted by string theory?

What if we don't find sparticles?

Or extra dimensions?

What if we never find any evidence that

supports this weird new universe

filled with membranes and
tiny vibrating strings?

Could string theory, in the end,

be wrong?

MICHAEL DUFF: Oh yes, it's
certainly a logical possibility

that we've all been wasting our time

for the last twenty years

and that the theory is

completely wrong.

JOSEPH LYKKEN: There have
been periods of many years

where all of the smart people,

all of the cool people,

were working on one kind of theory,

moving in one kind of direction,

and even though they
thought it was wonderful,

it turned out to be a dead end.

This could happen to string theory.

BRIAN GREENE: Even though
there's no real evidence yet,

so much of string theory
just makes so much sense;

a lot of us believe

it's just got to be right.

STEVEN WEINBERG: I don't think
it's ever happened that a theory

that has the kind of mathematical appeal

that string theory has

turned out to be entirely wrong.

I would find it hard to
believe that that much elegance

and mathematical beauty
would simply be wasted.

GARY HOROWITZ: I don't really
know how close we are to the end.

You know, are we almost there
in having the complete story?

Is it going to still
be another ten years?

Nobody knows.

But I think it's going to keep

me busy for a long time.

JOSEPH LYKKEN: We have
been incredibly lucky.

Nature has somehow allowed us

to unlock the keys

to many fundamental mysteries already.

How far can we push that?

We won't know until we, until we try.

BRIAN GREENE: A century
ago, some scientists

thought they had pretty much figured out

the basic laws of the universe.

But then Einstein came along
and dramatically revised

our views of space and time and gravity.

And quantum mechanics unveiled

the inner workings of
atoms and molecules,

revealing a world that's
bizarre and uncertain.

So, far from confirming

that we had sorted it all out,

the 20th century showed
that every time we looked

more closely at the
universe, we discovered

yet another unexpected layer of reality.

As we embark on the 21st century,

we're getting a glimpse of
what may be the next layer:

vibrating strings, sparticles,

parallel universes and extra dimensions.

It's a breathtaking vision, and

in a few years, experiments
may begin to tell us

whether some of these ideas are right

or wrong.

But, regardless of the
outcome, we'll keep going,

because, well, that's what we do.

We follow our curiosity.

We explore the unknown.

And a hundred or a
thousand years from now,

today's view of the cosmos

may look woefully incomplete,

perhaps even quaint.

But undeniably, the ideas we

call string theory are a testament

to the power of human creativity.

They've opened a whole new spectrum

of possible answers
to age-old questions.

And with them, we've taken a dramatic

leap in our quest to fully understand

this elegant universe.

Made by: Nauris E�envalds
Coool Coool Corp. �