2007-04-25 06:03:24 · 12 answers · asked by TJ 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
But why do we have to a theory of everything. Why can't we just stick to rigourous experimental testing. Like what on Earth is a Brane. How can I know it exists without being able to test for it. 11-dimensional space time. Hmph!
2007-04-25 06:13:52 · update #1
11 dimensional string theory has not produced anything.
It is possible that the 7 dimensions of space, (that are not perceived), are mathematical deception, and therefore string theory is a theory of nothing, as you will find if you read the wikipedia article on string theory all the way to the end.
2007-04-28 14:05:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Theoretical physics is certainly not a waste of time. You would not be sitting at a PC without it - computers operate on pure quantum physics.
However, I do thing string theory is a waste of time. There is growing reason to believe it is a completely misguided approach that has yet to produce a single testable result. It fails the most basic requirement of science. It also totally lacks the elegance of theories that went before it - which is not encouraging.
I think we will find in a few years that a generation of scientists basically wasted their careers - and there are number of physics professors who agree with me.
2007-04-25 06:44:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the trial-and-error of science there must be some failed ideas. That doesn't mean they were worthless or bad ideas, just that when tested they didn't pan out. String theory may turn out to be a failed idea. Or it may revolutionize physics as we know it. Is theoretical physics pointless? Most "practical" physics starts out as "theoretical" physics. We've got to have good minds working on difficult problems, even ones that won't work, if we are going to have good ideas result. Do you think it's a pointless waste to plant a field of wheat if some fraction of the seeds don't sprout?
2007-04-25 06:14:05 · answer #3 · answered by Faeldaz M 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Rigorous testing?" Do you mean like, the Scientific Method? I thought the first step before the experiment/test was to develop a hypothesis (same meaning as a theory). THEN test it.
Is string theory a waste? To say yes would be like saying the scientific method is a waste of time. The theory needs to be tested, making it worthwhile. Besides, experimentation very frequently leads to other discoveries along the way.
Will string theory every amount to anything? Remains to be seen. But yes, a lot of time has been spent, and probably much of it undue.
2007-04-25 07:08:58 · answer #4 · answered by John E 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Parallel Worlds by Prof Michio Kaku was a right rivetting read (I don't get out much). String theory seems to be the best candidate for the "Theory of Everything" at the moment. Even if it transpires it's completely wrong in the end it's offered some intruiging possibilities.
2007-04-25 06:08:15 · answer #5 · answered by Del Piero 10 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When Albert Einstein gave the theory of relativity and his famous formula
E= MC^2, very few people understood it. In fact very few really understand it even today. Its application was not known then. You may appreciate that this famous scientist did not get his first Nobel for relativity, but for thermionic emission theory. Even this great scientist had doubts about the existence of black holes which his own theory predicted.
What about now? Right from atom bombs to the nuclear power stations to nuclear powered submarines are using this principle. The correction of time and mass is made in high speed electrons and other sub atomic particles.....
Did newton know that his observation on falling apple would lead to launch of setellites in future??
These theories are the building blocks of future science. You know what sort of beautiful buildings will be made in future..
However, if you insist, we may agree to differ on this issue.
2007-04-25 07:51:37 · answer #6 · answered by dipakrashmi 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because you cannot measure those directly but string theory will come up with measurement that will support the theory. Without theoretical physics you wouldn't have transistors -- read that as no computer, no ipod no cell phones. Is that enough of an argument.
2007-04-25 06:21:38 · answer #7 · answered by Gene 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
properly, i'm an atheist, and that i know plenty approximately sting theory and you're lacking the ingredient. great string says each and everything has occurred, yet that would not propose the regulations of nature have been broken. shall we not return and forth there. it would desire to be that as your expertise makes judgements somewhat of issues actually happening you bypass thorough distinctive "worlds" and time would not exist. Like a choose your own journey e book. 2ndly you're making an assumption that Moses and Jesus existed right here, there is not any information that Moses is something yet fiction and little information that Jesus replaced right into a real guy or woman.
2016-11-27 19:55:04 · answer #8 · answered by twilley 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who knows the answers about everyday life that a few of these theories could solve. Questions like, can we make life (save many lives in medical situations), space travel, time travel, to smaller personal questions like is there a god, and is qigong or taichi real?
Physist are working on answering the world's questions by solving a few math problems. A waste of time I say not!
2007-04-25 06:15:09 · answer #9 · answered by Jimmy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Theoretical physics gave us things like nuclear power and electricity. So it is hard to say what knowledge might be practical or not in the future.
2007-04-25 08:24:22 · answer #10 · answered by Randy G 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋