-- 101 --

dimensions, a small subset of their vast oscillatory repertoire consists of vibrations with spin equal to 1 or 2. These are the
candidate force-carrying string-vibrational states. Regardless of the shape of the Calabi-Yau space, there is always one vibrational
pattern that is massless and has spin-2; we identify this pattern as the graviton. The precise list of spin-1 messenger particles—their
number, the strength of the force they convey, the gauge symmetries they respect—though, does depend crucially on the precise
geometrical form of the curled-up dimensions. And so, once again, we come to realize that string theory provides a framework for
explaining the observed messenger-particle content of our universe, that is, for explaining the properties of the fundamental forces,
but that without knowing exactly which Calabi-Yau shape the extra dimensions are curled into, we cannot make any definitive
predictions or postdictions (beyond Witten's remark regarding the postdiction of gravity).

Why can't we figure out which is the "right" Calabi-Yau shape? Most string theorists blame this on the inadequacy of the
theoretical tools currently being used to analyze string theory. As we shall discuss in some detail in Chapter 12, the mathematical
framework of string theory is so complicated that physicists have been able to perform only approximate calculations through a
formalism known as perturbation theory. In this approximation scheme, each possible Calabi-Yau shape appears to be on equal
footing with every other; none is fundamentally singled out by the equations. And since the physical consequences of string theory
depend sensitively on the precise form of the curled-up dimensions, without the ability to select one Calabi-Yau space from the
many, no definitive experimentally testable conclusions can be drawn. A driving force behind present-day research is to develop
theoretical methods that transcend the approximate approach in the hope that, among other benefits, we will be led to a unique
Calabi-Yau shape for the extra dimensions. We will discuss progress along these lines in Chapter 13.

Exhausting Possibilities

So you might ask: Even though we can't as yet figure out which Calabi-Yau shape string theory selects, does any choice yield
physical properties that agree with what we observe? In other words, if we were to work out the corresponding physical properties
associated with each and every CalabiYau shape and collect them in a giant catalog, would we find any that match reality? This is
an important question, but, for two main reasons, it is also a hard one to answer fully.

A sensible start is to focus only on those Calabi-Yau shapes that yield three families. This cuts down the list of viable choices
considerably, although many still remain. In fact, notice that we can deform a multihandled doughnut from one shape to a slew of
others—an infinite variety, in fact—without changing the number of holes it contains. In Figure 9.2 we illustrate one such
deformation of the bottom shape from Figure 9.1. In much the same way, we can start with a three-holed Calabi-Yau space and
smoothly deform its shape without changing the number of holes, again through
what amounts to an infinite sequence of shapes. (When we mentioned earlier
that there were tens of thousands of Calabi-Yau shapes, we were already
grouping together all those shapes that can be changed into one another by such
smooth deformations, and we were counting the whole group as one Calabi-Yau
space.) The problem is that the detailed physical properties of string vibrations,
their masses and their response to forces, are very much affected by such
detailed changes in shape, but once again, we have no means of selecting one Figure 9.2 The shape of a multihandled
possibility over any other. And no matter how many graduate students physics doughnut can be deformed in many ways, one
professors might set to work, it's just not possible to figure out the physics of which is illustrated here, without changing
corresponding to an infinite list of different shapes. the number of holes it contains.

This realization has led string theorists to examine the physics resulting from a sample of possible Calabi-Yau shapes. Even here,
however, life is not completely smooth sailing. The approximate equations that string theorists currently use are not powerful
enough to work out the resulting physics fully for any given choice of Calabi-Yau shape. They can take us a long way toward
understanding, in the sense of a ballpark estimate, the properties of the string vibrations that we hope will align with the particles
we observe. But precise and definitive physical conclusions, such as the mass of the electron or the strength of the weak force,
require equations that are far more exact than the present approximate framework. Recall from Chapter 6—and the Price is Right
example—that the "natural" energy scale of string theory is the Planck energy, and it is only through extremely delicate
cancellations that string theory yields vibrational patterns with masses in the vicinity of those of the known matter and force
particles. Delicate cancellations require precise calculations because even small errors have a profound impact on accuracy. As we
will discuss in Chapter 12, during the mid-1990s physicists have made significant progress toward transcending the present
approximate equations, although there is still far to go.

So where do we stand? Well, even with the stumbling block of having no fundamental criteria by which to select one Calabi-Yau
shape over any other, as well as not having all the theoretical tools necessary to extract the observable consequences of such a
choice fully, we can still ask whether any of the choices in the Calabi-Yau catalog gives rise to a world that is in even rough