Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
1–10 of 138 posts
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#2[flagged]
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#3[flagged]
From the FAQ
* Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
* Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
* Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.
* Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.
* Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
* Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#4An in half a century we still haven't found a single actually testable prediction.
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#5I thought Brian Greene did a great job interviewing Edward Witten (Fields Medal winner) on the World Science Festival Youtube channel [1].
I also just really enjoy Brian Greene, his books, and the World Science Festival Youtube channel.
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#6[flagged]
Physicist here. Would you like to enrich our world view by linking to counter-examples?
My understanding was that string theory being more "hypothetical physics" than "theoretical physics" at this point is still a pretty legit criticism.
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#7I thought Brian Greene did a great job interviewing Edward Witten (Fields Medal winner) on the World Science Festival Youtube channel [1]. I also just really enjoy Brian Greene, his books, and the World Science Festival Youtube channel. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAbP0magTVY
You might not like Angela Collier's video on string theory[1].
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#8[flagged]
I don't entirely understand where that comes from. The Standard Model and General Relativity are both tested to extreme precision. Any experiment unifying them will have to involve insane energies. It's not as if there is some other model with easy tests that we've agreed to ignore.
As far as I can tell, it seems to come from the developers of Loop Quantum Gravity, who feel left out of funding. And maybe that's true. But their theory doesn't offer practical tests, either. It would be weird if it did.
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#9[flagged]
Eh... mainstream physics by numbers is not HEP and definitely not HEP Th, and there are plenty of serious physicists somewhat critical of the field, and more so of the way it presented itself over the last decades.
And while I disagree with some of the criticisms and some of the style of the crtics, it's not like you get an honest appraisal from Greene (and Witten).
Re: Approaching 50 Years of String Theory
#10[flagged]
Physicist here. Would you like to enrich our world view by linking to counter-examples? My understanding was that string theory being more "hypothetical physics" than "theoretical physics" at this point is still a pretty legit criticism.
I'm legit interested in hearing more about this, like YouTube series, popsci books, magazines - I've been meaning to read Zwiebach's A first course, but I keep getting distracted with background reading and then never get back to it.