> String theory isn't pseudoscience, because it does make testable, falsifiable predictions. I feel like it's also worth pointing out that string theory is als

> String theory isn't pseudoscience, because it does make testable, falsifiable predictions. I feel like it's also worth pointing out that string theory is also a possible solution to an extremely difficult mathematical problem. You don't fully get an appreciation for this when reading popular accounts. You don't realize that string theory is not just mumbo-jumbo about strings that someone made up but rather that the extraordinarily sophisticated math behind it actually works out, something that can't be said for the vast, vast majority of attempts at resolving the issues that string theory does resolve. The difficulty of this problem is such that even coming up with possible solutions is itself a Herculean feat (witness the fact that Edward Witten, who proposed M theory, was awarded a Fields medal). This is ultimately why string theory has ever been taken seriously. None of this means string theory is correct, of course.