>>9745909Gödel simply proved that not all propositions within any given system of logic could be proven one way or the other.
That's not a statement about physical reality.
We can't PROVE that, say, quantum mechanics is "true". But any statement we make about the real world might be DISPROVEN by some yet-to-be-conducted experiment.
On the other hand, a proof or disproof of the Riemann hypothesis might turn up tomorrow and would not change no matter what we learned in the future. In math, we set the rules. It's like chess. In nature, we can only attempt to guess the rules by watching games being played.
>>9745885That's why some people feel physics has gone over the cliff into metaphysics (or theology.)
String theory or alternate time tracks have no immediate prospects of being tested. Neither would a claim that magical pastel ponies live on a world in Andromeda.
Lack of supersymmetrical particles seems to weigh against Strings but, again, that's not proof.
