5 ms·
Well then again theoretical physics was dominated by "string theory" for decades despite a lack of any physical or experimental evidence, so we should take cons
by elcritch 4y ago
Well then again theoretical physics was dominated by "string theory" for decades despite a lack of any physical or experimental evidence, so we should take consensus about speculative physics with a grain of salt. This sort of speculation is precisely what physicists should be doing, within measure. At least Sabine appears to recognize her "out there" aspect, unlike say the string theorists that stifled physics for decades. At worse maybe she'll annoy another theoretician to analytically disprove her.
That said of course whatever quantum gravity would bring it'll need to reduce to match known physics. However at the fringes of known physics what will happen as you get nearer to the singularities in special relativity? Generally speaking in the past singularities in physics have been due to incomplete knowledge of the physics in these regions.
- superposeur 4y agoYes, at the fringes of known physics, as you say. My point is that this question is not at the fringes known physics. Earth and Alpha Centauri are not near the singularity of a black hole and special relativity is perfectly adequate to predict that events now on Earth will take some time to influence events on Alpha Centauri.
- singularity2001 4y agoSince Sabine Hoffstader labeled the whole string theory (and some particle accelerator physics) as unscientific she shouldn't engage in the very fringes she appalls.
- taylodl 4y agoBoth String Theory and Brane Theory have been shown to yield equivalent results to the Standard Model (QFT). Nowadays physicists choose the model yielding the simplest computation for the problem at hand. No contradictions have been found after years of doing this.
- Valgrim 4y agoSo you're saying they're the same theory disguised as different, or another facet of the same solid, only useful as a computational shortcut. Maybe it's time to look for contradictions?
- taylodl 4y agoI'm not a physicist, just a knowledgable enthusiast. To your point, people are trying to look for contradictions. So far, none have been found. Physicists therefore use the model that simplifies the computation. If a contradiction is ever found then that will provide information as to which model is correct.
- nextaccountic 4y agoIsn't that just because there are enough free parameters that can be plugged in to make string theory agree with the standard model?
- flangola7 4y agoWhat is wrong with string theory?
- planck01 4y agoSome issues that string theory has: - We have not found any evidence for it. - Some predictions have been made from it that weren't found (e.g. no supersymmetric particles in the LHC). - It can be tuned to fit almost fit any universe and any observation, which doesn't really make it scientific. - The reasons for inventing it might have been misguided or flawed. (universe must be beautiful / simple / etc). The lack of results are turning a growing part of the scientific community off, while there is still a core amount of scientists holding on to it.