/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11357706

478KiB, 1802x1214, string-theory-lifehack.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

another string theory thread

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 20:50:03 2020 No.11357706 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11357712 >>11357938 >>11358168 >>11359056

at this point we all admit string theory is the best way to advance theoretical physics, right? ignore the sabine-posters and buttblasted cond-mat idiots and lee-smolin-funded-by-epstein idiots, amirite?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 20:54:33 No.11357712 Report

Quoted By: >>11357719

>>11357706
No, it's not the best way. It never answers any questions, only shifts them to different, mathematical questions without offering any insight.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 20:57:28 No.11357719 Report

Quoted By: >>11357911

>>11357712
so if it is not the best way, then you have in mind that there is a better way?

pray tell, anon. i would like to hear your great ideas

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 22:20:14 No.11357911 Report

Quoted By: >>11357929

>>11357719
I made my case. I don't need to come up with something better in order to call something out for what it is.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 22:29:08 No.11357929 Report

Quoted By: >>11357973

>>11357911
your case is that "string theory just sharpens questions into harder questions! that's bad!"

that's not bad. that's good. if you think it's bad, then you need to give a reason why.

if the theory says "oh, your question about A reduces to a harder question about B" then it has at least done some progress.

anti-string shills seem to think that "NO I REJECT YOUR REFINING THE QUESTION, I PREFER ALL QUESTIONS TO REMAIN UNPROGRESSED REEE" is better than actual progress. so i think your argument is just stupidity

and even if string theory is wrong (which all evidence points to it is not wrong while no evidence exists to say it is wrong) then at least there is a framework to address questions. as opposed to "ABANDON ANY FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING PROGRESS AT ADDRESSING QUESTIONS IN FAVOR OF... IN FAVOR OF I DONNO MUH WISHFUL THINKING"

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 22:30:53 No.11357933 Report

Quoted By: >>11359053

The critique against String Theory is always "it's incredibly difficult so it must be wrong".

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 22:32:53 No.11357938 Report

Quoted By:

>>11357706
>t.Ed Witten

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 22:45:08 No.11357973 Report

Quoted By: >>11357995

>>11357929
That's not what I said. I said it doesn't give answers to physical questions, it just transforms them into mathematical question.
Why would I want to argue with you if you won't even read what I write but instead attack something different?

>which all evidence points to it is not wrong
This is how I know you don't know shit about what you say.

>no evidence exists to say it is wrong
False.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 22:58:24 No.11357995 Report

Quoted By: >>11358044

>>11357973
okay, i see that your argument is 100% deflection instead of making any counter argument. i love it when anons say "false" without any argument or evidence to back it up; very scientific right there anon

i read what you said and i gave a standard argument, and you refusing to acknowledge it is classic cognitive dissonance

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 23:26:09 No.11358044 Report

Quoted By:

>>11357995
As I said, when you expect anything more you should at least have the decency to read what I write.

>i read what you said
No, you didn't. You claimed my argument was
>string theory just sharpens questions into harder questions! that's bad
which is not at all what I wrote. Keep denying it and coping all you want, but you're very obviously the retard here.
If you don't give others respect, you don't deserve it yourself.

>say "false" without any argument or evidence to back it up;
That's not how it works btw. You made a claim. You have to prove it. You can't though, because all you know about string theory and probably physics in general comes from pop-sci shows.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 00:41:00 No.11358168 Report

Quoted By:

>>11357706
>theory doesn’t work?
>add more dimensions until it does!

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Eric-Weinstein-Net-Worth-Bio-Wif (...).jpg, 47KiB, 650x424

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 02:03:29 No.11358352 Report

Quoted By:

>Laughs in higher dimensional geometric symmetries

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 12:27:50 No.11359053 Report

Quoted By: >>11359055

>>11357933

Spacetime has four dimensions, get over it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 12:30:41 No.11359055 Report

Quoted By:

>>11359053

Versions of string theory is consistent in 4 dimensions.

Let's say we 100% rule out more than 4 dimensions, you still haven't ruled out string theory, just certain versions of it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 12:31:07 No.11359056 Report

Quoted By:

>>11357706

What is the current shape of the cosmos? Is it through time, expanding to a superbola?

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches