3 ms·
Genuine question: so why do physicists explore a theory that posits 11 dimensions, if the evidence at hand does not require 11 dimensions - i.e. if it is additi
by logicallee 10y ago
Genuine question: so why do physicists explore a theory that posits 11 dimensions, if the evidence at hand does not require 11 dimensions - i.e. if it is additional assumptions about the Universe beyond what has been collected. (This question refers to string theory.)
- ksk 10y agoWell first you have to come up with at-least two theories that _both_ explain the phenomenon. Then you apply the principle to choose one that's "simpler". You cant do a 'premature' optimization and not even attempt to piece together a theory that sounds complex, when maybe that is currently the only theory that explains the phenomenon.
- jeremycw 10y agoI'm not a quantum physicist so take this with a grain of salt, but my favourite analogy is heliocentric vs geocentric orbits: http://i.imgur.com/AReqgfP.gif http://i.imgur.com/AReqgfP.gif The collection of data can have assumptions built in that you are unaware of. If you aren't thinking about the earth moving when measuring the orbits of the other planets the data shows that the orbits are pretty crazy. Likewise when we measure at the quantum level things seem pretty crazy, things in two places at once, etc. Saying "Once something is small enough it can behave completely differently from what we observe at larger scales" is a pretty big assumption. String theory trades some assumptions for others to rationalize some of the 'crazy behaviour' at small scales.
- srtjstjsj 10y agoThis is the major criticism of string theory. https://www.google.com/search?q=occam%27s%20razor%20string%20theory https://www.google.com/search?q=occam%27s%20razor%20string%2...