String Theory revisited (Introduction)
by David Turell 
, Monday, September 21, 2009, 13:55 (5334 days ago)
Matt should particularly be interested in this article, again noting that 40 years of string theory going almost nowhere: -http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/09/is_string_theory_an_unphysical.php?utm_source=selectfeed&utm_medium=rss
String Theory revisited
by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 02:46 (5332 days ago) @ David Turell
Matt should particularly be interested in this article, again noting that 40 years of string theory going almost nowhere: > > http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/09/is_string_theory_an_unphysical.php?utm_... I've had that issue for some time, but assuming you saw my spam about the first real-world application of a string-theoretic formula, I'm no longer prepared to write it off completely. -To counter that minor bit of optimism: Newton's equations for gravity, although still useful; had the entirely wrong premise. String Theory has very far way to climb in order to be fully valid.
--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"
\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"
String Theory revisited
by David Turell , Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 14:40 (5332 days ago) @ xeno6696
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/09/is_string_theory_an_unphysical.php?utm_... > HAH! I've had that issue for some time, but assuming you saw my spam about the first real-world application of a string-theoretic formula, I'm no longer prepared to write it off completely. > > To counter that minor bit of optimism: Newton's equations for gravity, although still useful; had the entirely wrong premise. String Theory has very far way to climb in order to be fully valid.-Here is hope for strings, a new set of helpful equations, maybe?:- http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090922202535.htm
String Theory revisited
by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 15:30 (5332 days ago) @ David Turell
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/09/is_string_theory_an_unphysical.php?utm_... > > > HAH! I've had that issue for some time, but assuming you saw my spam about the first real-world application of a string-theoretic formula, I'm no longer prepared to write it off completely. > > > > To counter that minor bit of optimism: Newton's equations for gravity, although still useful; had the entirely wrong premise. String Theory has very far way to climb in order to be fully valid. > > Here is hope for strings, a new set of helpful equations, maybe?: > > > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090922202535.htm-A little too optimistic, the holy grail for any theory is experimental evidence. The toolkit they developed will help them verify that the quantum effects explained (and confirmed) by field theory are accurately portrayed in the String Theory model. At this point, they're still in philosophy-ville. Any results they get will say that their representation of quantum fields are at the least, as good as the ones in the Standard Model. -String theory has been very productive for theoretical mathematics, especially topology. (Which in essence, is an entire field dedicated to explaining why a donut and a coffee cup are the same object.)
--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"
\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"