Why Proof Doesn't Always Matter

Superstrings For those of you who sometimes wonder why string theory can be one of the most talked about scientific ideas of our day without a whisper of evidence backing it up—admit, there are a few of you out there—there's a very interesting and not too complex article in the new issue of Physics World. The piece reviews some of the history and progress of past scientific theories, and why considering only the big ideas that can be backed by some experimental proof isn't a good thing for advancing our understanding of the universe. The simplified conclusion: At this point, string theory is the only real candidate capable of pulling together gravity and quantum physics, so we might as well stick with it.—Gregory Mone

1 Comment

Comments

J Klay (imported)
Article Rating:
1
2
3
4
5

Except if you read the whole piece, it states that string theory is not yet progressive, or scientific, and "the questions of how much to invest in this effort and what should be sacrificed for that investment still remain". At this point, it is mathematical philosophy, as it does not follow the Scientific Method. It is also, unfortunately, the only theory mathematicians can get money to work on, so any other efforts are lacking.

0 out of 0 people found this comment helpful

POPSCI'S 21ST ANNUAL BEST OF WHAT'S NEW


Every year, PopSci honors the top 100 innovations in categories such as consumer products, medical tech and engineering.

Learn more and submit your product or technology today at popsci.com/enter.

PPX: The PopSci Predictions Exchange

RSS Link

SciTech

Ready to bet on the future? Start here!

Subscribe for 2 free issues!

may2008_cover.jpg