• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

What are scientists problems with String Theory?

S

SaltyNuts

Platinum Member
So, I love reading these science books. What I understand is that String Theory actually provides a "theory of everything" that combines gravity with the other forces (strong, weak, and electromagnetic), and that works at the ultra-small (quantum mechanics) and ultra-large (relativity) levels. And it makes what appears to be correct calculations/conclusions in all cases so far as we call tell.

So then why the hesitation to call it *THE* "theory of everything"? I've read that it hasn't made any new predictions that can be tested that can't also be predicted and tested in respect of other, less complete theories, but who cares? Results match string theory predictions on everything we can test, ultra small to ultra large, so why isn't it the proper theory of everything (at least until it is shown to not correctly predict something)?
 
My theory is that everything in our reality is nothing more than a plate of nachos and that we're too covered with melted cheese to be able to see that.

My theory has produced the same amount of testable results that string theory has and some of the greatest minds in the world have been working on theirs for 40 years and I've been working on mine for 40 seconds. And that's the problem with string theory. It could be 100% correct or it could be completely batshit insane and we're not any closer to knowing which. Yes, the math works if you invent 11 or 23 or 167 invisible dimensions. Well the math on mine works if you invent 219 invisible dimensions that are filled with sour cream and guacamole.
 
Results don't match string theory predictions because String theory doesn't make any testable predictions. There is a huge debate over whether or not String theory is really even a "theory" because it doesn't make any testable predictions, and therefore is un-falsifiable. An un-falsifiable theory is pretty much the same as saying 'The flying spaghetti monster did it"

Also String theory isn't a single thing, its many different sects including variations that include like 5, 11, 13, 26 dimensions, M-Theory, brane theory, Calabi-Yau manifolds.

I seem to remember reading about a scenario where String theory could make a prediction, but would require a particle accelerator the size of the orbit of saturn. Very predictable.

Just because something LOOKS right doesn't mean it IS right.
 
Why do we need string theory? All know that Eru Iluvatar created the heavens and the earth, and sent the Valar down to earth to shape and guide it.
 
dainthomas said:
Why do we need string theory? All know that Eru Iluvatar created the heavens and the earth, and sent the Valar down to earth to shape and guide it.
Click to expand...
They worked out so well that Eru had to eventually shuffle them off to their own sphere.
 
The problem with string theory is writing an interesting enough grant proposal so that you get funding for string theory.

Actually its like that in most of science. I don't know why you guys idolize it so much.

Anyways we live in the electric domain of the universe. All the fields we interact with directly for the most part are electric. So for example when you press on a wall and the wall presses back with equal and opposite force this is because you are ever so slightly compressing the electron cloud. An atom is about 99.99% empty space and all of our interactions are with the electron cloud. Pushing electrons through a wire is like the shiznit as far as us electric domain people go and "technology" for us is largely always going to be based on electronics/electrons/chemistry/photons. etc.

Trying to tap into nuclear /nano tech is really outside our domain (smaller, too concentrated, actually) and thus on a scale that is barely usable. The same goes for anything having to do with gravity other than keeping you tied to the earth. Its way beyond our scale.
 
Last edited:
NikolaeVarius said:
Results don't match string theory predictions because String theory doesn't make any testable predictions. There is a huge debate over whether or not String theory is really even a "theory" because it doesn't make any testable predictions, and therefore is un-falsifiable. An un-falsifiable theory is pretty much the same as saying 'The flying spaghetti monster did it"
Click to expand...

Hey, hey, hey!! That's damn close to heresy, you do not mention our Noodly Master in the same breath as String Theory, Gravity, Magnets and other made-up science hokum.
 
"Results don't match string theory predictions because String theory doesn't make any testable predictions. "

This is not true. It, at least thus far, doesn't make any testable predictions THAT ARE NOT ALSO TESTABLE PREDICTIONS IN RESPECT OF AT LEAST ONE OTHER THEORY. So what? If string theory came first, rather than the other way around, then you could say the same thing about that other theory (that isn't a theory of everything). Bottom line is it is a mathematically sound theory of everything where its calculations match what is observed - nothing else is so far as I know.

"Also String theory isn't a single thing, its many different sects including variations that include like 5, 11, 13, 26 dimensions, M-Theory, brane theory, Calabi-Yau manifolds."

Nah. All the string theories were essentially shown to be different manifestations of the same theory (and some of what you mentioned are not string theory). Look it up.

"My theory is that everything in our reality is nothing more than a plate of nachos and that we're too covered with melted cheese to be able to see that.

My theory has produced the same amount of testable results that string theory has and some of the greatest minds in the world have been working on theirs for 40 years and I've been working on mine for 40 seconds. And that's the problem with string theory. It could be 100% correct or it could be completely batshit insane and we're not any closer to knowing which. Yes, the math works if you invent 11 or 23 or 167 invisible dimensions. Well the math on mine works if you invent 219 invisible dimensions that are filled with sour cream and guacamole."

I'm sure your nachos, cheese, sour cream and guacamole theory is mathematically sound and provides for calculations that match real world observations. No doubt about it...
 
Last edited:
G1AfclO.jpg
 
OverVolt said:
The problem with string theory is writing an interesting enough grant proposal so that you get funding for string theory.

Actually its like that in most of science. I don't know why you guys idolize it so much.

Anyways we live in the electric domain of the universe. All the fields we interact with directly for the most part are electric. So for example when you press on a wall and the wall presses back with equal and opposite force this is because you are ever so slightly compressing the electron cloud. An atom is about 99.99% empty space and all of our interactions are with the electron cloud. Pushing electrons through a wire is like the shiznit as far as us electric domain people go and "technology" for us is largely always going to be based on electronics/electrons/chemistry/photons. etc.

Trying to tap into nuclear /nano tech is really outside our domain (smaller, too concentrated, actually) and thus on a scale that is barely usable. The same goes for anything having to do with gravity other than keeping you tied to the earth. Its way beyond our scale.
Click to expand...
Wot M8? 😵
 
OverVolt said:
Anyways we live in the electric domain of the universe. All the fields we interact with directly for the most part are electric. So for example when you press on a wall and the wall presses back with equal and opposite force this is because you are ever so slightly compressing the electron cloud. An atom is about 99.99% empty space and all of our interactions are with the electron cloud. Pushing electrons through a wire is like the shiznit as far as us electric domain people go and "technology" for us is largely always going to be based on electronics/electrons/chemistry/photons. etc.
.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. When I moved off the grid I abandoned electricity entirely. Now when I push against the wall my hands go right through it.
 
GagHalfrunt said:
Bullshit. When I moved off the grid I abandoned electricity entirely. Now when I push against the wall my hands go right through it.
Click to expand...

Personally I'm a fan of the Strong Nuclear Force. I use it everyday.

Without it imagine all life as you know it stoping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
 
I'm no expert, but from what I understand of the subject String Theory just doesn't Do anything. Meaning, that it can't be used to further our understanding, technology, or manipulate anything. IOW, it may fit within what we understand, but merely fitting within our understanding doesn't make it an explanation of reality. It requires the ability to Predict something and for that Prediction to be Tested to see if the prediction is accurate before it is of any value. Perhaps one day it will be able to do those things and even prove to be useful, but until then it is little more than a curiosity and not worth spending much focus on.
 
sandorski said:
I'm no expert, but from what I understand of the subject String Theory just doesn't Do anything. Meaning, that it can't be used to further our understanding, technology, or manipulate anything. IOW, it may fit within what we understand, but merely fitting within our understanding doesn't make it an explanation of reality. It requires the ability to Predict something and for that Prediction to be Tested to see if the prediction is accurate before it is of any value. Perhaps one day it will be able to do those things and even prove to be useful, but until then it is little more than a curiosity and not worth spending much focus on.
Click to expand...
Because its beyond the scale of our universe that is relevant. Scale is everything in my opinion. I would imagine that if you were a quantum particle that actually exists at that scale it is infinitely more complex at that relative scale than we could ever realize and I think the same is true at extremely large scales beyond the observable universe. Everything probably interacts with each other on such a large scale and it all probably connects in some mind-blowing way. Like its possible our 14billion light year universe only seems like its expanding because its attracted to large masses beyond the observable universe. There could be more forces other than gravity, small nuclear, etc. that operate at unfathomable scales and are immeasurable yet permeate everything we do. Dark matter may indicate a 5th force, operating at the multiverse scale, IMO. We could be in some kind of contained system part of a larger system for all we know. You think a single molecule of H2O knows its in a glass and not the ocean? Yet its still all connected. That molecule probably evaporated from the ocean and was rained into a reservoir. To a single molecule of H2O it has no idea its part of all these other possible systems except when its immediate, relative environment changes, because scale is everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top