Can Superstring Theory Ever Be Refuted or Confirmed?

[Unique_Engineer]

I am reading a hebrew translation of the popular book by Michio Kaku on HyperSpace.

It seems Superstring Theory will never be refuted since if it's a theory of everything then you need infinite energies since the universe is infinite, and we can never get a from finite machines infinite energies.

Quite simple classical logic, right?

 

[PeroK]

Superstring theory would be refuted if it made a prediction that failed experimentally.

 

[Dale]

It seems Superstring Theory will never be refuted since if it's a theory of everything then you need infinite energies since the universe is infinite

This is not correct. A theory of everything will make predictions at all energies, not just infinite energy. It could be falsified at any energy.

 

[Unique_Engineer]

This is not correct. A theory of everything will make predictions at all energies, not just infinite energy. It could be falsified at any energy.

It depends, possibly you could find it at a finite energy, but there is no prediction what number of finite energy will it be. I don't think there's an upper bound that beyond it we will never find clues for Superstring theory.
I may be wrong, but there's no finite upper bound, so this search may last forever...

 

[Dale]

It depends

No, it really doesn’t.

Your specific claim is that a theory of everything cannot be falsified because it makes predictions at infinite energy. That claim is simply false. A theory of everything makes predictions at all energies and thus can be falsified at any energy.

The falseness of your claim does not depend on any upper bound.

 

[Unique_Engineer]

No, it really doesn’t.

Your specific claim is that a theory of everything cannot be falsified because it makes predictions at infinite energy. That claim is simply false. A theory of everything makes predictions at all energies and thus can be falsified at any energy.

The falseness of your claim does not depend on any upper bound.

But you don't give an upper bound for the search of the specific energy, so this quest for the TOE indeed may last forever.

 

[Unique_Engineer]

Unless of course it's truncated eventually at some energy, but no one guarantees you that.

 

[topsquark]

But you don't give an upper bound for the search of the specific energy, so this quest for the TOE indeed may last forever.

It may fail at some energy level, or it may be that String Theory is truly a correct Law of Nature.

But evidence from the last 3000 or so years of Scientific advancement leads to the conclusion that it isn't likely that we will ever come up with a perfect theory. I'm not worried that String Theory will never be disproven in some way.

-Dan

 

[Nugatory]

But you don't give an upper bound for the search of the specific energy, so this quest for the TOE indeed may last forever.

Sure, in the sense that there will never be a time when we can say that the theory is beyond falsification - there will always be the possibility that some future observation might falsify it.

But that’s true of all physical theories. For example, even when working with ordinary matter at commonplace energy levels there are an infinite number of possible configurations so no way to be sure that in some previously untested configuration we will find that the inertial mass is not equal to the gravitational mass.

 

[Vanadium 50]

It is impossible to say what a TOE predicts without having one.

It is impossible to say a TOE - or any theory - is right, because there will always be more things to test.

Depending on its predictions, a TOE may or may not be easily proven wrong. Obviously one would not propose a theory that is alreafy excluded, but one might propose one that is just past today's exclusions. And maybe tomorrow it will still be viable and maybe it won't.

 

[Unique_Engineer]

It is impossible to say what a TOE predicts without having one.

It is impossible to say a TOE - or any theory - is right, because there will always be more things to test.

Depending on its predictions, a TOE may or may not be easily proven wrong. Obviously one would not propose a theory that is alreafy excluded, but one might propose one that is just past today's exclusions. And maybe tomorrow it will still be viable and maybe it won't.

You know Hawking made it feel in his popular books that the end of physics is around the corner...

 

[phinds]

You know Hawking made it feel in his popular books that the end of physics is around the corner...

I SERIOUSLY doubt that someone that smart would believe something that dumb.

 

[Unique_Engineer]

I SERIOUSLY doubt that someone that smart would believe something that dumb.

Have you read his popular books?
I have.
At least his first two popular books.

 

[renormalize]

You know Hawking made it feel in his popular books that the end of physics is around the corner...

Can you please cite a specific passage from a specific book by Hawking that supports this claim?

 

[Unique_Engineer]

Of course I read it in the Hebrew translations of his books.

 

[renormalize]

Of course I read it in the Hebrew translations of his books.

So? You can still provide a citation.

 

[Unique_Engineer]

Can you please cite a specific passage from a specific book by Hawking that supports this claim?

I don't have these books here with me, they are in my parents' house, and I don't plan to go there just to prove you something.

 

[phinds]

I don't have these books here with me, they are in my parents' house, and I don't plan to go there just to prove you something.

So, it's probably a just misunderstanding on your part, or conceivably a mis-translation problem.

 

[Unique_Engineer]

These are the names of his pop books that I have read:
A Brief History of Time
Black Holes and Baby Universes and Other Essays
You can go and visit your local library and read through and be convicned for it yourself.
BTW, a few years ago I also purchased his co-authored book with Roger Penrose (only read through the first 2-3 chapters): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_N...a book that,Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking.
(The book I have has a different cover than this apple).
It's a correspondence between Hawking and Penrose, I can recall reading Hawking's confessing that Penrose found an error in Hawking's thesis, when he defended his thesis.

Actually I would like to continue reading this book, so I might come and visit my parents' house next week and let you know about the Hebrew translations.

 

[Vanadium 50]

You know Hawking made it feel in his popular books that the end of physics is around the corner...

Like others, I don;'t think this is accurate. It's certainly not what he said in our interactions (and yes, I had a few). Where does he say that?

Maybe it got mangled in translation.

 

[Unique_Engineer]

Like others, I don;'t think this is accurate. It's certainly not what he said in our interactions (and yes, I had a few). Where does he say that?

Maybe it got mangled in translation.

Perhaps, I'll give a look at it next week.

I am quite busy right now, haven't slept a lot for 4 days, Coke's to blame...

 

[Frabjous]

Here’s a transcript of Hawking
“Godel and the End of Physics”
http://yclept.ucdavis.edu/course/215c.S17/TEX/GodelAndEndOfPhysics.pdf

 

[berkeman]

Perhaps, I'll give a look at it next week.

I am quite busy right now, haven't slept a lot for 4 days, Coke's to blame...

 

[renormalize]

You can go and visit your local library and read through and be convicned for it yourself.

I don't think that's the way it works for claims made here on Physics Forums:
They who purport it, must support it.

 

[Dale]

But you don't give an upper bound for the search of the specific energy, so this quest for the TOE indeed may last forever.

That is exactly the opposite issue of your original post. The issue that you bring up here is the fact that you can never experimentally confirm a TOE over its entire domain of validity. But your OP said you could never refute it which is wrong. A TOE can be refuted at any energy.

Do you understand that confirming a theory is different from refuting it?

Anyway it looks like time to close this thread. Thanks for all who participated