About this whole question of when a theory is scientific

  • Thread starter Thread starter josh1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Scientific Theory
  • #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

I Unifying string theory and loop quantum gravity
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
I Is loop quantum gravity dual to CFT?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
I Two recent tests of loop quantum gravity theory
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
I Ads/CFT and Ashtekar variables or spinfoam
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
A Singularity structure being valid for all QFTs?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
I Some questions about Coleman's Baby Universe model
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
A Will QG leave GR unchanged or QT?
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
A A couple of long questions on positivity bounds for UV-complete EFTs
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
I Theories without Fundamental Space and Time
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
10K
A Are String Theory physicists violating the Scientific Method
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K