So in your judgement are string theories best regarded as science or as metaphysics. given the apparent fact that they do not seem to admit to experimental verification or falsification? As I recall, for a number of years Sheldon Glashow criticized them on precisely that ground.
Jim F.
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 14:43:28 -0500 Les Schaffer <schaffer at optonline.net>
writes:
> > Also, the work of these two...well, these two whatever-they-are is
> > in *theoretical* physics, and my impression is that even the best
> of
> > these folk are regarded with suspicion by their experimental
> peers.
>
> in addition, there are the elders amongst the __theoretical__
> particle
> physics community who also are suspicious of string theories
> (plural!!!).
>
> > Is there any result of "string theory," for example, that so far
> has
> > admitted of experimental verification?
>
> none.
>
> string theories, in so far as they are "valid", can be shown to be
> __consistent__ to predictions of standard model theories, and have
> the
> additional "nice" feature that gravity might be pulled in under the
> quantum umbrella.
>
> there is always some excitement generated when the string theorists
> __suggest__ that the unification energy might be lower than
> previously
> thought, as that would allow at least __some__ form of experimental
> verification to occur sooner rather than later in the future.
>
>
> les schaffer
>
>
________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com