String Theory: Science or Philosophy?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter shipreckdpenguin
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on whether string theory should be classified as science, philosophy, or mathematics. Key figures include Urs Schreiber, who is affiliated with a mathematics department, and Michael Douglas, who recently published in the "Differential Geometry" archive, indicating a mathematical approach to string theory. The conversation highlights the distinction between empirical science, which relies on testable theories, and mathematics, which is based on axiomatic methods without the necessity of empirical validation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of string theory fundamentals
  • Familiarity with empirical science principles
  • Knowledge of mathematical axioms and their applications
  • Awareness of the fields of differential geometry and high-energy physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of string theory in mathematics
  • Explore the role of empirical testing in scientific theories
  • Study the axiomatic method in mathematics
  • Investigate the contributions of Urs Schreiber and Michael Douglas to string theory
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, physicists, mathematicians, and philosophy enthusiasts interested in the foundational aspects of string theory and its classification within scientific and mathematical frameworks.

shipreckdpenguin
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Plain and simple.. should string theory be considered science or philosophy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's a scientific theory...
 
shipreckdpenguin said:
Plain and simple.. should string theory be considered science or philosophy?

or mathematics?

I say that because a well-known young German string theorist named Urs Schreiber is now in the Math Department of his university (not in the physics department)
and an even more famous older American string theorist named Michael Douglas just posted an article that he wrote in the archive section for "Differential Geometry" (which is mathematics) rather than the usual "Hep-th" (high-energy-physics-theory) section where he has posted papers in the past.

Another young researcher Aaron Bergman, known to many of us, recently wrote a propos of something "...that's why I'm doing mostly mathematics now." I forget what the discussion was about.

=====================

Penguin, you might want to think about what empirical science is----where the theories are something you can test, and potentially falsify, by observation and experiment.

And compare that with mathematics, where one traditionally does not do experiments. One sets up axioms which don't have to be true. then one sees what can be logically derived from those axioms by ASSUMING that those axioms are true.

so to take a artificial example, one can have a 5 dimensional world shaped like a donut and one then proves things about that world----facts that follow logically from its being 5 dimensional and in some precise specific way "donut-like".
this is the axiomatic method, not the experimental method. it is not EMPIRICAL SCIENCE but it has often turned out to be extremely interesting and sometimes even useful.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K