|
|
#1
11-02-2006, 03:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
String Theory Debunked?
Check out this article in a recent New Yorker
web page Synopsis: String theory has made no testable predictions. "the theory formerly known as strings remains a seductive conjecture rather than an actual set of equations, and the non-uniqueness problem has grown to ridiculous proportions. At the latest count, the number of string theories is estimated to be something like one followed by five hundred zeros." 
|
|
#2
11-02-2006, 04:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: String Theory Debunked?
"Synopsis: String theory has made no testable predictions."
This is new? That's why a lot of physicists refuse to recognize string theory. "Physics" is necessarily testable.
|
|
#3
11-02-2006, 08:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: String Theory Debunked?
I wouldn't exactly say it was "debunked". If string theorists had made any claims about it, maybe it could be debunked.
I think string theorists are pretty realistic about what exactly it is that they're studying.
|
|
#4
11-02-2006, 08:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: String Theory Debunked?
[ QUOTE ]
I think string theorists are pretty realistic about what exactly it is that they're studying. [/ QUOTE ] They are not studying, they are theorizing. Just to make sure: the 'String "theory"', is nothing like 'Evolution "Theory"'. The latter is falsifiable, the former isn't. They are very different claims, one is factual, the other is prospective.
|
|
#5
11-02-2006, 09:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: String Theory Debunked?
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't exactly say it was "debunked". If string theorists had made any claims about it, maybe it could be debunked. I think string theorists are pretty realistic about what exactly it is that they're studying. [/ QUOTE ] Agreed. I find Brane theory to be fascinating. Debunking a theory is part of scientific inquiry. Sample, chew, discard. Does that mean we should only investigate correct theories to begin with? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#7
11-02-2006, 10:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: String Theory Debunked?
No argument with that. If it's crap, treat it as such and move on.
|
|
#8
11-02-2006, 11:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: String Theory Debunked?
[ QUOTE ]
Synopsis: String theory has made no testable predictions. [/ QUOTE ] Wouldn't a theory-killer be that it can't make a testable prediction, not that it hasn't yet? Not claiming any equivalance but when the light was measured bending around the sun, did that prove that relativity was the Only explanation? Or just the only current explanation. It's way beyond my pay scale, I just have a problem understanding why the multi-explanation problem is enough to stop anyone from pursuing the possibility. In any area, how would you ever get to a single theory if when you run into multiple potential ones you stop? I agree at this stage it should be called String Conjecture, but can it never be cleaned up? luckyme
|
|
#9
11-02-2006, 11:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: String Theory Debunked?
It's a knotty business, string theory, in general, but at least you eliminate absurd possibilities.
To call the whole business as a whole bunk and punt it so goes against the grain of scientific inquiry.
|
|
#10
11-02-2006, 12:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: String Theory Debunked?
[ QUOTE ]
Synopsis: String theory has made no testable predictions. [/ QUOTE ] String theory may not have made testable physical predictions, but it has generated testable mathematical predictions for areas of mathematics not obviously connected to string theory, such as enumerative algebraic geometry. It's absurd to call string theory "bunk" at this point. I agree with many of the criticisms of string theory (I attended some talks supposedly aimed at 1st year graduate students which were unintelligible to me and to the other postdocs attending), but string theory is very far from nonsense.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
