3 ms·
This "something" at very least works on some level — its a self-consistent theory that fits existing data, its competitors apparently cant. Are the detractors
by mhh__ 3y ago
This "something" at very least works on some level — its a self-consistent theory that fits existing data, its competitors apparently cant.
Are the detractors of string theory saying we should stop doing fundamental physics entirely? I don't think so
- jcranmer 3y ago> its a self-consistent theory that fits existing data, its competitors apparently cant. My understanding of string theory is that there isn't even a proper string theory variant of the Standard Model, and that most of the models people are trying out are basically toy models that kinda resemble, say, QED. This means it's not even coherent enough to ask the question if it fits existing data, which is part of the premise of it being "not even wrong."
- pdonis 3y ago> its a self-consistent theory Nobody knows this since there is no exact mathematical formulation of "the theory" to begin with. > that fits existing data Nobody knows this either since nobody has derived either General Relativity or the Standard Model of particle physics as an approximation to any string theory model.
- snarkconjecture 3y agoGeneral Relativity is a straightforward consequence of basically any form of string theory.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]