Is a career in string theory worth pursuing without experimental proof?

  • Physics
  • Thread starter rahaverhma
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Experiments
In summary, the conversation discusses the challenges faced by physicists in understanding and proving theories such as string theory and particle physics. It also touches upon the issue of funding for experimental research and the personal doubts and fears of a theoretical physicist. The speaker advises seeking advice from experts in the field rather than basing career decisions on popular science books.
  • #1
rahaverhma
69
1
We know the fact that we physicists are now understanding physics only mathematically(string theory) , there is not even a single physical variable(except time, space) in the equations. Yes, obviously, it had to happen because how much far can my eye see? It had already started from quantum mechanics.And,we have even hypothesized about multiverse, supersymmetry etc. But, you want the proof or be the witness in the lab. Dr. Hawking says it would require billions of dollars to experiment the now findings. So, I am frightened about my career that if all these theories would only be accepted after experiments, till then am I the person in doubt for myself? Then, my friend doing Computer Engineering is far much better than me cause he is doing something in reality and I was not? Advise me, please.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Science has to be tested in the real world, not just theorized on paper. What's the problem with that?
 
  • #3
Should I be getting my salary for some unproven theory? And it might even require trillions of dollars for that . actually, I want to be a theoretical physicist.
 
  • #4
Only a very small fraction of theoretical physicists work in string theory, and only a small fraction work in particle physics theory. All branches of physics have both experimental and theoretical aspects. Is there nothing in physics that interests you besides string or particle physics theory?
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Hi there!
rahaverhma said:
We know the fact that we physicists are now understanding physics only mathematically(string theory) , there is not even a single physical variable(except time, space) in the equations. Yes, obviously, it had to happen because how much far can my eye see?
I know very little about string theory, but how do you know what variables are used in equations? And what does any of this have to do with your eyesight? I'm struggling to understand your question (and I suspect others might also).

rahaverhma said:
So, I am frightened about my career
You mean, your future career?

rahaverhma said:
Dr. Hawking says it would require billions of dollars to experiment the now findings.
What prof Hawking (jokingly) said was:

We don't exactly know what the Planck length is in M-theory, but it might be as small as a millimeter divided by a hundred thousand billion billion billion. We are not about to build particle accelerators that can probe to distances that small. They would have to be larger than the solar system, and they are not likely to be approved in the present financial climate. (Universe in a Nutshell)

I am not in a position to give you general career advice, but I can tell you one thing: your life choices should not be based on what you read in "pop-sci" book. We have members here who specialise in theoretical particle physics, perhaps they can tell you more about how they get funding for their work, or what their work entails.

All the best.
 
  • #6
Hypercube said:
Hi there!

I know very little about string theory, but how do you know what variables are used in equations? And what does any of this have to do with your eyesight? I'm struggling to understand your question (and I suspect others might also).You mean, your future career?What prof Hawking (jokingly) said was:

We don't exactly know what the Planck length is in M-theory, but it might be as small as a millimeter divided by a hundred thousand billion billion billion. We are not about to build particle accelerators that can probe to distances that small. They would have to be larger than the solar system, and they are not likely to be approved in the present financial climate. (Universe in a Nutshell)

I am not in a position to give you general career advice, but I can tell you one thing: your life choices should not be based on what you read in "pop-sci" book. We have members here who specialise in theoretical particle physics, perhaps they can tell you more about how they get funding for their work, or what their work entails.

All the best.
 

1. What is the purpose of conducting experiments for theorists?

The purpose of conducting experiments for theorists is to test and validate theoretical models and hypotheses. This allows scientists to gain a better understanding of the natural world and make predictions about future experiments.

2. What types of experiments are typically conducted by theorists?

The types of experiments conducted by theorists vary depending on the specific field of study. Some common types of experiments for theorists include computer simulations, mathematical modeling, and controlled laboratory experiments.

3. How do experiments for theorists differ from experiments for experimentalists?

The main difference between experiments for theorists and experimentalists is the approach to conducting the experiment. Theorists use logical reasoning and mathematical models to predict outcomes, while experimentalists use physical experiments to test and observe phenomena.

4. How are the results of experiments for theorists used in scientific research?

The results of experiments for theorists are used to support or refute theoretical models and hypotheses. They also provide valuable insights and can lead to the development of new theories and further experimentation.

5. What are some challenges faced by theorists when conducting experiments?

Some challenges faced by theorists when conducting experiments include limited resources and the difficulty of translating theoretical concepts into practical experiments. Theorists also have to consider and account for potential biases and limitations in their models and hypotheses.

Similar threads

  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
4
Views
595
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • New Member Introductions
Replies
1
Views
100
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
47
Views
4K
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top