how can String Theory be called science when it can't be proven right or wrong?

Question

If it can't be proven then it is philosophy not physics.

Answer 1

Right. String theory (more correctly called string hypothesis) is pure philosophy, not science. It exists nowhere but in the minds of its proponents, at least as far as we know at this time.

Answer 2

Science is not about proof, it doesn't deal in proof. Proofs are left to mathematicians and philosophers.

Science deals in evidence and tries to explain the evidence. Science observes and sees various things. It conducts experiments. It makes hypotheses - ideas on why things happen as they do - and tests the hypotheses with further observation and experiment. It uses the hypotheses to make predictions and checks to see if those predictions are correct. If a hypothesis is shown to be wrong, it is thrown out or changed and then retested.

When a hypothesis explains all the observations and experiments and its predictions come true, the hypothesis is raised to the highest possible scientific status, that of a Theory. In science, a theory is as good as it gets.

A theory can and must be changed if further evidence shows it to be wrong. A good example of this is gravity. Newton's theory of gravity lasted for three hundred years and is still in use today. It was used to send men to the Moon and the Voyager spacecraft to the edges of the solar system. It will be used to land humans on Mars. It is, however, wrong. At the quantum level, Newtonian gravity doesn't work but Einseinian gravity - relativity - does. Relativity is too complex for everyday use so Newtonian gravity is still used for the big things where it works but not for small things where it doesn't.

Gravity, evolution, electricity, relativity, germ theory of disease, string theory, light etc etc etc are all scientific theories not proofs. As I said, science doesn't deal in proof. It never has and it never will. It is always open to new ideas and change.

Answer 3

As to that issues substitute: so what! communicate some lot of socalled scietific hand waving to over categorize (an errors in severe thinking of hasty overgeneralization; there is such simply by fact the set of info all genuine yet seem to be contradictory) a phenomenon that should not shop the 2d of theromdynamics of physics nor the maths of probability. without conserving different variables consistent, the technology ought to not isolate a study on very plenty. And yet, on a similar time, the interrelationship of those remoted variables ought to be studied at the same time to form a greater holistic attitude to the socalled technology. Newton stated 'regulation' in the 1800's or so. We see that there may be extra want for study into why and hows of the genuinely mechanics of the gravity. So then, isn't 'regulation' a misnomer with recognize to the relativity of the situations and reactivities in touch in the viscosity of area and darkish rely. with the aid of the way, Babylon had a narrative of a definite planet that was once seen in the sky which expoded sometime; i think of. The gravitation of our photograph voltaic equipment is declared, to on the instant time, to have a 'placeholder' with recognize to the gravitational forces speaking to the lifestyles of yet another planet 'previous' pluto which has not been got here upon.

Answer 4

DO YOU KNOW THE MEANING OF THE WORD "THEORY?!?" THEORY meant it isn't proven. It's a THEORY based on scientific evidence and concepts, therefore it is taught in some physics classes AS A THEORY (why it's in the name) to make people THINK (something you're probably not used to). Try doing a little research before you ask a stupid question. If not that, at least look in a freaking dictionary.

Answer 5

Many many physicists agree with you.

Of course in the case of string theory and science, the scientists promoting string theory are working hard to find ways to experimentally verify it. They don't just assert that it must be true and discourage people from trying to test it.

That's the fundamental strength of science. Sometimes that kind of thinking winds up killing a theory that scientists generally thought was really promising (the "ether" and the Michelson-Morley experiment, for the obvious example). Other times the development of new methods winds up confirming a theory (the measures of the bending of the sun's light during the 1919 eclipse, which confirmed Einstein's theory of relativity).

Answer 6

Posting a science question in the religion and spirituality section often means the asker does not really want an answer. His goal is to ask a question that he believes proves some scientific knowledge to be wrong, or that science does not yet answer, and make the implicit claim that the only other explanation is a god, and specifically, the same god he happens to believe in.

It's the "god of the gaps" - intellectually bankrupt, since it favors ignorance instead of knowledge, and because of the contained logical fallacy.

Answer 7

The theory can't be tested directly, but its predictions can be observed. The biggest problem is not that it fails to make predictions, but that other models predict observations comparably. Gravitons, gravity waves nor any other mechanism for gravity have yet been detected, but the effects of gravity, obvious and obscure are sufficient to make gravitation a viable theory.

Answer 8

a theory is something that has been proven possibly true, but it could still be false. there are 3 steps hypothesis, theory, and finally law.

Answer 9

Um...yeah...that is the reason it is called a theory in the first place.

Answer 10

Why dont you go put some clothes on ,you ever think for one minute that children may come on here , Maybe your one of these people that roots for these perverts wanting sex with kids ,Good grief have some class