Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Evolution questions for the science people
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chalnoth" data-source="post: 30945773" data-attributes="member: 159254"><p>Just noticed this quoted in TooCurious' post above, and since I am a graduate student in physics, thought I'd give it a response.</p><p></p><p></p><p>As far as I know, there is no scientist who rejects string theory. The problem with string theory isn't that anybody thinks it's wrong, it's that there are yet to be any testable predictions that have been verified from any model of string theory.</p><p></p><p>Basically, string theory, so far, is nearly impossible to test. Because of this, it has received quite a lot of ridicule and hostility from a number of physicists. Basically, for a theory to be 'good', it must both provide concrete, testable predictions and be consistent all current evidence. The problem with string theory is that at its core, it appears that it could describe an obscene variety of possible universes. So it is consistent with all current evidence, but perhaps only because it could be consistent with just about anything.</p><p></p><p>There are other reasons to think that string theory is a good theory, but I won't get into those right now. The perspective of the scientific community at the current time is basically, "Yeah, string theory is kinda neat mathematically, but until there's evidence I'll reserve judgment."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chalnoth, post: 30945773, member: 159254"] Just noticed this quoted in TooCurious' post above, and since I am a graduate student in physics, thought I'd give it a response. [FONT=Arial][/FONT] As far as I know, there is no scientist who rejects string theory. The problem with string theory isn't that anybody thinks it's wrong, it's that there are yet to be any testable predictions that have been verified from any model of string theory. Basically, string theory, so far, is nearly impossible to test. Because of this, it has received quite a lot of ridicule and hostility from a number of physicists. Basically, for a theory to be 'good', it must both provide concrete, testable predictions and be consistent all current evidence. The problem with string theory is that at its core, it appears that it could describe an obscene variety of possible universes. So it is consistent with all current evidence, but perhaps only because it could be consistent with just about anything. There are other reasons to think that string theory is a good theory, but I won't get into those right now. The perspective of the scientific community at the current time is basically, "Yeah, string theory is kinda neat mathematically, but until there's evidence I'll reserve judgment." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Evolution questions for the science people
Top
Bottom