String Theory Backlash

[Pindar]

I think this is an interesting piece. It is a tad long. I'm using a hyperlink as an extended quote wouldn't allow people to follow the various links in the article.

Here: http://cosmicvariance.com/2006/06/19/the-string-theory-backlash/

[Banquo's Ghost]

It is a fascinating opinion piece with some good links which need time to go over because my tiny brain already hurts. I'm nowhere near intelligent enough to understand the nuances of string theory (physics is hard and involves sums, which is why I became a biologist :laugh4: ) but it seems an interesting avenue of investigation.

It is always appealing when a new theory appears to explain anomalies. I guess I have a in-built suspicion of Theories of Everything, but I recognise that as a unfounded prejudice.

Thanks for the link. :balloon2:

[Papewaio]

It would have been nice if the US had made their super particle accelerator... of course it didn't help that before it was canceled most of the money was spent on administration parties and pot plants.

It would have helped add some facts for the string theorists and other high energy theorists to chew on.

[Hurin_Rules]

Interesting stuff. I've never been all that excited about string theory, but i'm a novice when it comes to physics. What are the alternatives?

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Way over my head. But my calc teacher, a physicist of some kind who went to Princeton thinks that String Theory is bunk. :juggle2:

[Aenlic]

One of the big problems with string theory is that it approaches or perhaps even surpasses the limits of our ability to test the theory with experimental results. That makes it less a scientific theory and more of a philosophy. If the theory can't be tested with reproducible experimental results and thus can't be disproven or proven then it isn't really a scientific theory.

Hopefully, the collider being built by CERN (and you are right about the much-lamented American supercollider, Papewaio, such a shame it was cancelled) and the deep mine experiments might begin to provide experimental data in the future. Until then, however, string theory is currently just a concept. And the trend in physics lately has been to back away from the bleeding edge a bit. Perhaps in direct response to the disturbing rise of so-called "theories" like creationism and intelligent design.

[Kralizec]

It is a fascinating opinion piece with some good links which need time to go over because my tiny brain already hurts. I'm nowhere near intelligent enough to understand the nuances of string theory (physics is hard and involves sums, which is why I became a biologist :laugh4: ) but it seems an interesting avenue of investigation.

It is always appealing when a new theory appears to explain anomalies. I guess I have a in-built suspicion of Theories of Everything, but I recognise that as a unfounded prejudice.

Thanks for the link. :balloon2:

Pretty much the same for me, though my limited mind has led me to study law...oops, sorry Pindar :embarassed:
~;)

[A.Saturnus]

Backlash or not, the main problem of string theory is that currently we don't have the means to find evidence for or against it. Though if I understand correctly it is currently the only sound theory that can explain certain phenomena. Its critics have to present a better explanation in order to be taken serious. Anyway, I have no doubt future experiments will resolve this.