Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

math.columbia.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#21

Post by f1shy »

drpossum wrote: post #19
xqcgrek2 wrote: post #5

The whole String Theory affair is amusing but also a sad spectacle. These people convinced the world they were geniuses, but ended up fleecing funding agencies and universities for millions with zero accountability and scientific progress.

Do you have an example where funding was given out with zero accountability? I've worked at a number of universities and national laboratories for particle research and they all had multiple layers of accountability. At the top of any public funding structure is congress and the president and bigger initiatives will even be line items in public agency budgets. At the bottom are the required regular reports (I had bia…

The question, I think, is “how many alternative theories were dismissed by no funding?” IF there was other people asking for funding for other topics or theories were dismissed because “strings are cool” then I expect some explanation. And boy there were other theories and projects asking for funding!

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#22

Post by drpossum »

f1shy wrote: post #21
drpossum wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an example where funding was given out with zero accountability? I've worked at a number of universities and national laboratories for particle research and they all had multiple layers of accountability. At the top of any public funding structure is congress and the president and bigger initiatives will even be line items in public agency budgets. At the bottom are the required regular reports (I had bia…

The question, I think, is “how many alternative theories were dismissed by no funding?” IF there was other people asking for funding for other topics or theories were dismissed because “strings are cool” then I expect some explanation. And boy there were other theories and projects asking for funding!

Do not read "the system is perfect" or even "good" from my post. I'm focusing only on the claim from the post above that there is "zero accountability". The people accountable are everyone in the chain I described and the whole thing hinges on people that ultimately answer to elections.

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#23

Post by drpossum »

f1shy wrote: post #18
drpossum wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you recommend following only Sabine to be a good way to get a thoughtful and unbiased view of the issue?

Not only of course, but I find is a good reference point, as somebody that was right in the middle of it, got out, and has nothing to loose saying what she thinks is true. She could very well be doing videos explaining all the models she does not believe, and have much more subscribers.

The question was to the person above where it seemed like that's what they were doing and then expected us to take their view as something worth considering. It was giving them an opportunity for them to explain their position and give themselves credibility.

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#24

Post by physicsguy »

jmyeet wrote: post #16

I can't speak to the merits (or lack thereof) of string theory. That's well beyond my physics knowledge. It must however be daunting to be a theoretical physicist right now. It seems like the field has been in a standstill for years. The advances in the 20th century were just eye-watering. The Standard Model is a mixed bag of stunningly accurate prediction (eg electron monopole moment [1]) vs the wildly inaccurate (e…

> It must however be daunting to be a theoretical physicist right now. It seems like the field has been in a standstill for years.

The general public don't really understand where most physicists work. The largest subfield of Physics is really in condensed matter, where (depending on how you count it) somewhere like 30-50% of physicists work, and where there is plenty of interesting theory work. High energy physics is the next biggest subfield, but much of it is experimental, and then you get into "classical physics" like acoustics, optics, etc. Astrophysics is relatively smaller. There's also nuclear, plasma, fusion and then a whole host of interdisciplinary work like biophysics, materials science, etc. Especially with interdisciplinary work, people often do bits and pieces throughout their career, not everyone sticks strictly to a single subfield.

There's plenty of interesting theoretical physics work in pretty much all of these fields. Not everyone works on grand problems of the universe!

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#25

Post by cainxinth »

drpossum wrote: post #14
api wrote: post #10

Is part of it that we just can’t test any of this because we can’t either examine a black hole or run an accelerator the diameter of the Moon’s orbit? Maybe planet nine if it exists will turn out to be a small primordial black hole within probe range, or we will locate a micro primordial black hole within the solar system. Would building an even bigger deeper into time gazing JWST help? I’ve gone down the black hole…

No, because an untestable theory is just a useless theory (i.e. it is not meaningfully predictive). There are more difficult and confrontable issues such as predictions models will make like "supersymmetry", "the proton decays", and "early universe signatures in CMB" which could be, but have not been, observed. You can sometimes make models which can put these under various parts of the proverbial rug and, sure, clai…

Many testable theories started as untestable theories, including some of the most famous theories of all like evolution and atomic theory.

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#26

Post by exe34 »

f1shy wrote: post #21
drpossum wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an example where funding was given out with zero accountability? I've worked at a number of universities and national laboratories for particle research and they all had multiple layers of accountability. At the top of any public funding structure is congress and the president and bigger initiatives will even be line items in public agency budgets. At the bottom are the required regular reports (I had bia…

The question, I think, is “how many alternative theories were dismissed by no funding?” IF there was other people asking for funding for other topics or theories were dismissed because “strings are cool” then I expect some explanation. And boy there were other theories and projects asking for funding!

> how many alternative theories were dismissed by no funding

it's an interesting question - you should be able to request this information from the funding bodies!

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#27

Post by drpossum »

exe34 wrote: post #26
f1shy wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question, I think, is “how many alternative theories were dismissed by no funding?” IF there was other people asking for funding for other topics or theories were dismissed because “strings are cool” then I expect some explanation. And boy there were other theories and projects asking for funding!

> how many alternative theories were dismissed by no funding it's an interesting question - you should be able to request this information from the funding bodies!

Do you think you can't? It's all covered under FOIA. Bureaucratic stuff like this is in fact FOIA's wheelhouse.

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#28

Post by [deleted] »

cainxinth wrote: post #25
drpossum wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because an untestable theory is just a useless theory (i.e. it is not meaningfully predictive). There are more difficult and confrontable issues such as predictions models will make like "supersymmetry", "the proton decays", and "early universe signatures in CMB" which could be, but have not been, observed. You can sometimes make models which can put these under various parts of the proverbial rug and, sure, clai…

Many testable theories started as untestable theories, including some of the most famous theories of all like evolution and atomic theory.

[deleted]

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#29

Post by arp242 »

randomNumber7 wrote: post #4

> Peculiar individuals, no matter how famous they are, no matter how brilliant they are, if they’re off that consensus, and they’ve been off that consensus for a long time, they’re probably wrong. So this guy works on string theory and has never heard of Einstein? Why not use science to check what makes sense? - Because anyone would instantly notice that string theory is bs. I think there should be a system, that whe…

The quote continues with "That doesn’t mean for sure that they’re wrong".

> anyone would instantly notice that string theory is bs.

People said that about this wonky BS from Einstein too. And Einstein himself had some issues with that wonky BS of quantum mechanics (and he was not alone).

Re: The Crisis in String Theory Is Worse Than You Think

#30

Post by esperent »

cainxinth wrote: post #25
drpossum wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because an untestable theory is just a useless theory (i.e. it is not meaningfully predictive). There are more difficult and confrontable issues such as predictions models will make like "supersymmetry", "the proton decays", and "early universe signatures in CMB" which could be, but have not been, observed. You can sometimes make models which can put these under various parts of the proverbial rug and, sure, clai…

Many testable theories started as untestable theories, including some of the most famous theories of all like evolution and atomic theory.

This is a valid point. Some other theories that were originally thought of as radical and untestable were plate tectonics and germ theory.

On the other hand, I think the reason why this gets brought up so often for string theory is the degree to which it appears untestable. Multiple curled up dimensions and something like 10^500 possible versions of the theory, and with everything operating below the Planck length, which according to other widely accepted theories is the smallest possible measurement. How do you measure something smaller than the smallest measurable thing?

I think the only comparably untestable theory was atomic theory when first suggested by the Greeks 2000 years ago. Germ theory and evolution were relatively tame by comparison.

Post reply on HN