3 ms·
"Most scientists take a full stop at "my unproven theory of physics". He has yet to come up with testable predictions. Let alone trying to test them. Only then
by stephc_int13 6y ago
"Most scientists take a full stop at "my unproven theory of physics". He has yet to come up with testable predictions. Let alone trying to test them. Only then there might be a point in listening to the rest."
This is dumb.
Einstein's theories were not proven overnight and many were skepticals at the time.
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoHowever, Einstein's theories did make testable predictions.
- stephc_int13 6y agoIt wasn't obvious at the time.
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoLet's see. Einstein published his general relativity paper in 1915. One of the things it explained was the precesion of Mercury, but that was already known - it wasn't a prediction or a test. When was the observation of the sun bending starlight during a solar eclipse? 1919 - and Einstein proposed the test. He found ways to test the predictions rather quickly.
- jschwartzi 6y agoEinstein's theories were based on existing experimental results. In fact for Special Relativity he merely stated what must be true for the Michaelson-Morley experiment to fail to show any speed difference with respect to the ether. Lorentz and other physicists had already derived a set of equations(called Lorentz transformations) that must be true given the experimental failure. But they considered it unthinkable that the speed of light could be constant in all inertial reference frames, so they thought those equations were wrong or that there was something they were missing. The only thing Einstein did in that situation was come in and say "hey what if that unthinkable thing were actually true?" Contrast this with Wolfram's article, where he's postulating the existence of an entire kind of physics without any experimental or phenomenological basis. The comparison is without any basis.
- stephc_int13 6y agoYes, Wolfram is asking for a much bigger leap. That does not mean he is wrong or that you can easily brush all this work away because it is too speculative for your taste. String theory was also quite speculative.
- the_af 6y ago> String theory was also quite speculative. Doesn't string theory take a lot of flak precisely for that reason?
- stephc_int13 6y agoTo some extent. But it also had a very strong following and sizeable public funds.
- defterGoose 6y agoString theory is still quite speculative.
- stephc_int13 6y agoYes, it is, but it is also out of fashion today.