Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Brian Greene's NYT op-ed

  1. Oct 21, 2006 #1
    Via http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/10/brian-greenes-new-op-ed.html#comments".
    Let me comment to some extent.

    Greene is very likely referring to the two books (Woit's "Not Even Wrong" and Smolin's "The Trouble with Physics", and ensuing newspaper/magazine articles that appeared recently, together with the sometimes heated exchanges that have taken place in the past months. I am sure Greene and colleagues have reflected a lot on the "state of the art", but frankly what follows in the op-ed is not much a result of state of the art reflection. Of course, one will read the same stuff that has been repeated on and on since people seriously started asking questions about string theory.

    I'm not really sure what this last metaphorical piece is supposed to mean. Given Einstein ignored quantum mechanics, his supposed "torch of unification" could be thought, and quite rightly, as inherently wrong. It wasn't even supposed to light the way to a quantum theory of gravity, since it was not meant to. I guess young physicist serious enough really wanted to grab that kind of torch.

    I think Greene is wrong here, right? Einstein was not trying to put GR and QM together, hence he could not be concerned by "the disjunction between his own general relativity, [...] and quantum mechanics". Maybe I am not understanding this in the right way, or missing some hint.

    Then, according to my understanding, the theory of strings is not falsifiable. hmm...

    Well, you can read the rest and curse me for quoting what many of you, in general terms, have read and heard so many times now:

    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 22, 2017
  2. jcsd
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?
Draft saved Draft deleted