/sci/ - Science & Math

[None !gCB7kmvi3M No.3694828]

It's been said that string theory is part of the physics of the twenty-first century that fell by chance into the twentieth century. That's a remark that was made by a leading physicist about fourty years ago. What he meant was that human beings on planet Earth never had the conceptual framework that would lead them to invent string theory on purpose. String theory was invented essentially by accident in a long sequence of events, starting with the Veneziano model that was formulated in 1968. No-one invented it on purpose, it was invented in a lucky accident. By rights, thwentieth century physicist shouldn't have had the priviledge of studying this theory. By rights, string theory shouldn't have been invented until our knowledge of some areas that are prerequisite for string theory had been developed to the point that it was possible for us to have the right concept of what it was all about.

[Anonymous No.3694834]

Why does that nature of String Theory's discovery matter? Hell, Ive decided to ignore string theory until any part of it can be practically proven/implemented/demonstrated. It is a nice theory, but for now Ima let the string theorists do their thing, and Ill do mine.

[None !gCB7kmvi3M No.3694867]

the only science thread and no one posting? typical.

[Anonymous No.3694931]

String theory isn't a theory, since it cannot be tested.

Stop calling it a theory. It isn't. It's a new type of religion, prompted by an insular science community with a dearth of means of obtaining funding, combined with a great desire to actually do real work.

Oh yeah, I really said that, bunky. String "theory" is by all metrics just a scam, by people who know if that if they didn't come up with something new, they'd have to go work in fast food or something equally revolting.

How is used to be was that you'd look at the data, come up with a new theory, and then design experiments to test the theory's natural predictions. Then the vast twilight of the Western Empire arrived, and hordes of otherwise useless people called "academics" had to produce more bullshit or end up unemployed. So they started to issue more and more theories with wacked-out predictions that cannot be tested (who the heck can test for something that's the size of 10^-43?), and soon enough it became commonplace to make untestable predictions.

String "theory" is just a scam. Ignore it and return to demanding that predictors TEST their theories. Those that cannot be tested should be DISCARDED, and by "discarded" I mean LAUGHED OUT OF THE ROOM.

[Anonymous No.3694936]

>>3694931
Edit: combined with a great desire to AVOID doing real work

[None !gCB7kmvi3M No.3695012]

>>3694931
SOMEONES BUTTHURT

oh the irony, "physics" in captcha

[Anonymous No.3695021]

>>3694867
>implying string theory is science
>implying it isn't astrology tier

[Anonymous No.3695043]

>can't be tested
>science

[Anonymous No.3695061]

ITT: people not realising "string theory" can be tested

[Anonymous No.3695082]

>ITT: pseudo-intellectuals telling scientists what scientists what sting theory and science are.

shut up already you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. you people are as bad as the philosophers who say science is a waste of time.

[Anonymous No.3695136]

It seems like string theory is to physics as what set theory did for mathematics. It can be shown that all of mathematics can be derived using set theory. Likewise string theorists are trying to derive all of physics (standard model + GR) using string theory. Unfortunately it (currently) produces no testable predictions, so if there's an easier way to unify standard model and GR (which there probably is), that would be a much better theory than string theory. But it's a neat toy.

[Anonymous No.3695147]

>>3695136
>Unfortunately it (currently) produces no testable predictions
yes it does

[Anonymous No.3695162]

>>3695147
Instead of saying the opposite of what someone else has said, elaborate.

[Anonymous No.3695177]

>>3694931

10/10

epic troll post

[None !gCB7kmvi3M No.3695476]

oh look what i found on page 15

[Anonymous No.3695483]

>>3695476
Impossible.
It was on page 0 about 2 hours ago.
No way it's gone to page 15 that fast.
/sci/ is slower.

[Anonymous No.3695538]

SO CAN ANYONE CONFIRM IF STRING THEORY IS A COMPLETE BULL OR ANY POTENTIAL?

[Anonymous No.3695546]

>>3695538
The jury's out on it because we don't have many verifiable predictions that can currently be tested, and it wouldn't affect your life either way.

[Anonymous No.3695543]

>>3695538
It's bull and of potential.

[Teacup !obkpuSWh5M No.3695613]

String theory is mostly wrong.

[Anonymous No.3695892]

>>3695613
>teapot making a statement on scientific theories

[Anonymous No.3695956]

QUESTIONS FROM MY TESTS ON STRING THEORY

[Anonymous No.3695961]

2/2 TOO LAZY TO UPLOAD MORE

[Anonymous No.3695965]

>>3695956
>>3695961
>implying that is hard

[Anonymous No.3696608]

>>3695061
>>3695147
>make claim
>"take my word for it"

fuck you

[Anonymous No.3696622]

>>3694828 What he meant was that human beings on planet Earth never had the conceptual framework that would lead them to invent string theory on purpose.

Sounds about right. Think about it. What conceptual framework do most people have that leads them to believe that humans are so fucking smart that we can invent our way out of any problem? We aren't smart enough. Look at the planet, take a look at the Amazon rainforest on google maps. Look at the CO2 graph from Mauna Loa. We are going extinct, people. Fast.

[Anonymous No.3696656]

>>3695147
> yes it does
String theory says that dimensions are rolled up into "string" structures that are vastly smaller than nuclear particles. So, Einstein, how DO you test for that?

YOU CAN'T. String theory is BUNK. Scientists are only pursuing it since they are terrified of being remaindered in their professions... which is what should have happened to a lot of them, since they aren't producing SHIT for us anymore.

[mtp !EKFQOBEsKo No.3696697]

>>3696656
they are pursuing it to find some testable predictions...

[cy No.3696698]

>>3695956
>>3695961
what the fuck that is some insane physics

[Anonymous No.3696716]

In regards to OP's post, why is it bad that we 'discovered' string theory a century early?

[Anonymous No.3696735]

>>3696697
Holy shit dude, that's either the macro I made like 3 years ago or you had the exact same idea.

[Anonymous No.3696745]

>>3696697
> they are pursuing it to find some testable predictions...
Nice propaganda, sci-slave. "Find it"? "Pursuing it"? If you have a real theory right in front of your nose, it's pretty much the next conclusion to isolate a section that becomes a natural prediction, which then leads to designing an experiment to test it. Strong theory has no sections that can be tested. Nobody can conduct a test for something that's as smaller than an electron as the earth is smaller than the universe.

String theory was a jump into a pure fantasy world, which is why people are spending so much time and energy "pursuing" stuff that they need to "find". I sure as heck would spend a lot of time "pursuing" unicorns if I had claimed they existed; and I'd never find those, since they don't fucking exist, old son!

String theory was a huge jump. It's invalid, since it cannot be tested. Stop pretending otherwise. Even laymen like us can see that, clearly.

[mtp !EKFQOBEsKo No.3696844]

>>3696735
must be a macro, found it here on 4chan and its actually quite useful on this board...

>>3696745
thou art moronic.

>>3696716
the quote in OP is taken from book "superstrings a theory of everything?" which was written about 25 years ago, im reading it now and decided to post it just for the fun of it. the problem theorists are having is that the mathematics involved is beyond the current results in mathematics, and the idea is that the extra dimension "fold" on itself, but the way in which it does it is not known, so they can only guess, and hence there are infinite ways of doing it, and we just dont know which is the actual one. from what i gather, few methods have been proposed as candidates for a theory of everything, and they are trying to find mathematical inconsistencies within those. and as the quote goes, physicists happened to stumble upon a sring theory when trying to make models for strong interactions.

furthermore, in the book the guy explains that for example einstein took the ideas that were alredy there in geometry, and applied them to create his theory of general relativity. what is going on with string theory is that we have the mathematical foundations, but have no idea what does it all really mean.

at least thats what i have gathered from this book so far.

also, dont quote me too much, im shit at explaining things with words(and written language in general)

[mtp !EKFQOBEsKo No.3697771]

bumping thread because going to sleep, hope to see it tomorrow

[Anonymous No.3699307]

The path to the theory of everything resides in the octonions. I called it /sci/. screencap this post.

[Anonymous No.3701469]

How does this relate to quantum immortality?