- #71
MTd2
Gold Member
- 2,028
- 25
If I switch almost all periods for commas, except for the last one, in both Polchinski's books and copy and paste them together, does it count as 1 sentence?
Kevin_Axion said:That is true, but no one can understand Quantum Mechanics yet they accept it, it comes down to falsifiability most likely.
Kevin,
nrqed said:Yes, let's discuss this precise statement (and nothing else).
Can you prove that string theory (the *theory*, not our actual knowledge of some solutions) is not provably wrong? The answer is a simple Yes or No. If the answer is no, then the statement was false. If the answer is yes, then the statement is true. That's all that I am saying.
..[snip]...
No but it does not prove that the theory is not provably wrong. Only that we haven't found a way yet to falsify it. That's a completely different statement. That's all I am saying.
inflector said:Well, the same could be said about the existence of God right? ..
..
Not currently provably wrong means that String theory is not currently a theory.
suprised said:Sorry this is BS.
suprised said:It is not just a matter of randomly "declaring" God or String Theory or other ideas to underly things. Science works a bit different! What goes in string theory is an enormous amount of hard, highly non-trivial computational _results_. And these tell which things work or can work, and which not. This gives strong scientific reasons for it, unlike for God. At least I don't know of any computation that could be interpreted either in favor of or against the existence of a god.
Haelfix said:I would suggest staying away from this board then, b/c almost by definition, everything 'beyond the standard model' is not falsiable in *practise*. Quantum gravity (not just string theory) has always suffers from that fate.
Haelfix said:I would suggest staying away from this board then, b/c almost by definition, everything 'beyond the standard model' is not falsiable in *practise*. Quantum gravity (not just string theory) has always suffers from that fate.
Kevin_Axion said:Michio Kaku always alludes to the idea of a single equation that would describe all physical processes in our universe which derives from Superstring Theory/String Field Theory (can someone explain the difference?). What form would this equations be in, a Lagrangian Density?
Kevin_Axion said:I know, I'm just asking if one were to be found what form would it be in? For instance the Standard Model can be formulated in a Lagrangian density.
tom.stoer said:String theory tries to construct a supersymmetric framework in 10 (11) dimensions from which all known elementary particles and interactions including gravity emerge (uniquely) from the modes of an one-dimensional, vibrating string.
Demystifier said:According to string theory, elementary particles are not really pointlike, but have a shape of a short string, too short to be visible with present technology.
Chronos said:String is a purely mathematical attempt to model reality. It is not provably wrong [and may never be], but, empirically unsatisfying thus far. It explains some observations, mostly at the quantum level, but otherwise has no compelling observational support.
Finbar said:String is a purely mathematical attempt to model reality. It is not provably wrong [and may never be], but, empirically unsatisfying thus far. It has no observational support.
suprised said:String theory is a physical model based on tiny strings that incorporates both quantum mechanics and general relativity and attempts to unify gravity with particle physics.
Galteeth said:String theory is an attempt to mathematically unify quantum mechanics and general relativity by using strings vibrating in multiple spatial dimensions as the fundamental building blocks of the universe.
CHIKO-2010 said:String theory is the only known consistent quantum-mechanical completion of gravity which also, at least in principle, is capable to describe known particle physics at ultra-high energies.