3 ms·
That doesn't mean that he didn't have ideas for testable predictions of the model. It implied all kinds of things, some of which he had not even thought of (lik
by jeremyjh 5y ago
That doesn't mean that he didn't have ideas for testable predictions of the model. It implied all kinds of things, some of which he had not even thought of (like Black Holes). Its quite a lot different to propose a model with some novel predictions that you can validate, and to propose a model that can never be tested in any form at all.
- spekcular 5y agoSome predictions of the model were tested soon after Einstein published the theory. Others, like gravitational waves, were not. Yet people still believed in gravitational waves long before they were empirically confirmed. I don't see any possible basis for that belief (at the time) other than arguments based on non-empirical reasons like consistency and parsimony. (That is, it would be strange if other predictions of the model worked out but this one didn't.) Yet it is exactly this kind of theoretical reasoning that Hossenfelder, taken literally, seems to reject (in the absence of experimental data). I'll also note that any other solution of the black hole information paradox has to be consistent with the the rest of what we know about physics, and any future empirical observations. So it can't be completely untethered from reality; it makes testable claims in this way. Further, it's not clear such solutions can never be directly tested, or will never be found to imply novel testable consequences.