Are many in the Physics community too quick to embrace M-theory as the much sought after T.O.E?

Question

Doesn't it have serious problems in some or all of the following areas : testability, the virtual infinity of Universes that inhabit the string theory landscape, the paradoxical background dependence, the excessively difficult mathematics, the absence of a guiding principle such as the Uncertainty principle or the Principle of Equivalence and it's heavy use of highly abstract maths to explain its key features eg. p-branes, supersymmetry, curled-up dimensions, holography,dualities,... amid a dearth of experimental support.Finally, isn't it the case that other contenders notably Loop Quantum Gravity have to progress in it's shadow? Even if only some of this is true isn't it quite unsatisfactory? A bit like the 21st century version of the ether...Apparently for the experts in the field it's beautiful but does that make it true?

Answer 1

Yes. . . . You mean you can take a 42 or more parameter theory and fit it to experimental data?! *Gasps* The truth is, with all the different possible versions, string theories could account for the spontaneous generation of elephants, yet they produce few new PREDICTIONS. It's a mathematical juggernaut that has been used to try and mesh relativity and quantum--yet, having accomplished this, it's not really that much more useful than using relativity or quantum. Quantum field theory so far I think is the best theory created by humans. We'll find out when the new accelerators are built . . .

Answer 2

Well, just because it is vague does not mean it's not true...these things just have to be worked out over time and if things go well more and more will be theoretically proven and then testible and so on and so forth. Yes string theory and these other theories are mathematically elegant but no that does not make them true at all...i don't remember the exact quote but a think a famous physicist richard feynman once said that we may be working on a 25th century theory that requires 25th century mathematics in the 21st century.

Answer 3

11 dimensional string theory, (and 26 dimensional M theory), has not produced anything.

It is possible that the extra 7 dimensions of space in string theory, (that are not perceived), are mathematical deception. This mathematical deception first appeared with 5 dimensional Kaluza-Klein Theory.

String theory is possibly deception, derived from adding dimensions of space to the already existing 3 dimensions of space one dimension at a time at 90 degree angles to the previous dimension.

That string theory is possibly invalid is stated at the end of the wikipedia article on string theory.

Answer 4

Not everyone is jumping on board the M-theory wagon.

Complexity of mathematical description does not equate to wrongness.

There is no way to test *any* cosmological hypothesis...unless you had a really big lab and billions of years of time on your hands.

If M-theory explains things more efficiently than other theories, what's the problem? If someone proves that it is incorrect or inaccurate, then it will be discarded for the better explanation.

Answer 5

Blimey mate, what's up ??????????? haven't got a clue what you're on about.