About this whole question of when a theory is scientific

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter josh1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Scientific Theory
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the testability and falsifiability of string theory and loop quantum gravity (LQG). Participants assert that while string theory is theoretically testable, it lacks falsifiability due to its flexibility in parameter adjustments, allowing it to fit experimental data post hoc. In contrast, LQG is critiqued for its empirical challenges, with a focus on the need for unambiguous predictions, particularly regarding gamma-ray dispersion, to validate or invalidate the theory. The conversation highlights the ongoing struggle within theoretical physics to reconcile advanced mathematical frameworks with empirical validation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of string theory and its implications in theoretical physics.
  • Familiarity with loop quantum gravity (LQG) and its foundational concepts.
  • Knowledge of empirical testing methods in physics, particularly regarding falsifiability.
  • Awareness of the significance of supersymmetry and its role in quantum gravity theories.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Lee Smolin's paper on falsifiable predictions from semiclassical quantum gravity.
  • Explore the concept of gamma-ray dispersion and its relevance to testing LQG predictions.
  • Investigate the role of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in testing string theory predictions.
  • Examine the philosophical implications of the "Landscape" problem in string theory.
USEFUL FOR

Theoretical physicists, researchers in quantum gravity, and students of advanced physics seeking to understand the complexities of testability and falsifiability in contemporary theories.

  • #31
f-h said:
*It is just a dimensionless number and there's nothing to measure.*

Like the fine structure constant? Or rather, the CKM angle in QCD?

The fine structure constant can't be described as simply some dimensionless number. It characterizes the strength of the electromagnetic interaction and isn't measured but calculated in terms of the fundamental physical constants of QED. CKM doesn't help you either.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K