Has string theory been totally written off?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the current status and future prospects of string theory, including its potential as a complete theory of physics. Participants explore various perspectives on string theory's relevance, its perception within the scientific community, and the implications of recent funding cuts on research in this area.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the likelihood of string theory being the final complete theory, noting negative sentiments surrounding it.
  • Others argue that string theory has not been entirely written off and continues to be a significant area of research, despite funding cuts affecting the number of string theorists.
  • A participant mentions that the reduction in string theorists could lead to a more focused and productive research environment.
  • Concerns are raised about the hype surrounding string theory's potential to be a complete theory, with references to Brian Greene's views on the matter.
  • Some assert that confidence in string theory remains high among physicists, citing its status as the mainstream approach to quantum gravity and its unifying capabilities.
  • It is noted that many universities are now offering undergraduate courses in string theory, indicating its continued relevance in academic settings.
  • Participants highlight the politicization of the field and caution against relying solely on public discourse for understanding the state of string theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of views, with some asserting that string theory remains a vital area of research while others highlight a shift away from its previously hyped status. No consensus is reached on whether string theory has been definitively written off or if it still holds promise as a complete theory.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of the topic, including the influence of funding dynamics, the evolution of research focus, and the need for a diversified approach to theoretical physics. There are references to specific interviews and reports that provide additional context but do not resolve the ongoing debates.

Can string theory (still) be the final theory?

  • Yes

    Votes: 15 34.9%

  • No

    Votes: 28 65.1%
  • Total voters
    43
  • #31
Thanks for the link Demystifier.

I read Max Tegmark's essay and I share some questions but I'm not sure I like his from what it seems apparently strong reductionist approach. But I haven't read any other of his papers.

If I am not mistaken he wants to find the birds view, and then find the projection onto the frogs view. The problem is that we are the frogs, and he then advices the frog to resort to some kind of antrophic principle? I question to what extent the frog can even properly relate to probabilities of a particular birds view? This doesn't quite make sense to me at least. It seems to contain some subtle circular reasoning I'm not sure how he breaks?

Is anyone reading this the same or is it just me beeing a frog? :)

/Fredrik
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
We get polls like this from time to time.
In this one to date 10 people said it could not be written off (Yes it had a chance at eventually developing into the final all-encompassing theory.)

And 25 people said it could be written off (No it could not turn out to be the final theory.)
===============

Basically what do polls and discussions about them communicate? I think the main thing is that the situation did change around 2003, with the KKLT paper and Susskind's Anthropic Landscape. The mood changed. Research output has declined since then and, more importantly, citations have declined markedly.

Another signpost was the Edge interview with Brian Greene (and Paul Steinhardt) where he changed his tune considerably----talk in the 1990s about a unique final inclusive theory was "youthful exuberance"---the claim now is to SOME relevance to nature, not to being the unique fundamental theory. Brian Greene was clearly reacting away from the earlier overhype.

Some people don't realize the mood has changed. Or they sense this in others but wonder why. they ask about it. Polls and threads can help answer those questions.

however, it is worth repeating that we cannot know the future of research and we can't answer these questions. all we have is hunches, impressions, guesses about the future.
When you don't know what is going to pay off, it can be helpful to diversify and have some people continue with string while others branch off in other approaches.

So I'd say "totally written off" would be an exaggeration unless you just mean as a final Theory of Everything. But I guess that is what Pivoxa was asking, and what the poll is about. His poll question was:

Can string theory (still) be the final theory?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

High School Balancing theories and empirical data, especially concerning string theory
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
9K
Graduate A couple of long questions on positivity bounds for UV-complete EFTs
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Graduate What is the Best Resource for Learning String Theory as a Side Project?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Graduate Is the Randall-Sundrum model background independent?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Graduate "Monstrous Higgs and Leech Spacetime"
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
Graduate Different symmetries or no symmetries in string theory?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School The building blocks of strings
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Graduate Can Cosmic Inflation and String Theory change fundamental laws?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Graduate Singularity structure being valid for all QFTs?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Graduate What would it mean if symmetries in physics would not be fundamental?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K