English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In physics, M-theory (sometimes reffered to as U-theory) is put forward as the master theory that unifies the five superstring theories. Although M-theory is already well established among the physics community, it still lacks the critical understanding that is regarded as key importance in all major physical theories.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

2006-08-04 13:28:43 · 5 answers · asked by 自由思想家 3 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

5 answers

It is just a theory which means that it can not be proven as is creationist theory. You should be taught the major theories in school so you don't graduate ignorant

2006-08-04 13:47:45 · answer #1 · answered by Fallon V 4 · 0 3

Nah, I think M-Theory shouldn't be allowed in public schools because

1) It's too complex for most high schoolers to understand, let alone grade schoolers,

and 2) It's a theory that is still in the very beginning stages, so new that even the best minds of the day have yet to fully grasp it.

According to its discoverer, Edward Witten, as quoted in the PBS documentary based on Brian Greene's book "The Elegant Universe", the "M" in M-theory "stands for magic, mystery, or matrix, according to taste." He also added, "Some cynics have occasionally suggested that M also stands for 'murky,' because our level of understanding of the theory is in fact so primitive." Then, jokingly, he said, "Maybe I shouldn't have told you that!".

2006-08-04 21:35:04 · answer #2 · answered by Paul McDonald 6 · 0 0

M-theory really isn't a developed theory yet. It's appropriate to teach the various aspects of it that are testable, but the theory that those pieces are interrelated is still just a hypothesis at this point.

Should we have taught cold fusion in schools? No, but not because it has anything to do with religion. M-theory has smart people looking at it, but even they agree it's just speculation at this point.

2006-08-04 20:44:30 · answer #3 · answered by lenny 7 · 0 0

Erm...yes? Evolution negates the need for a creator of us as a planet too. As long as it's a sound scientific theory that is tested and examined thoroughly, just as with any scientific theory or hypothesis, why not?

2006-08-04 20:33:43 · answer #4 · answered by JabbaHutt444 2 · 0 0

Any Theory should be taught freely to adult students.

2006-08-04 21:27:47 · answer #5 · answered by kritikos43 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers