Is string theory a hoax?
>>16541611No, but we won't be able to test it any time soon.
>>16541611It’s not a hoax. It used to be a promising theory in the 80s-early 90s until more and more evidence started to pour in that contradicted it. So instead of dropping it, they started conjuring up more garbage like R-parity to make it work. It got so complicated as a result that no useful predictions could be made in the context of particle physics. Your average string theorist today copes by basically admitting that they do condensed matter theory disguised as some super duper sophisticated thing.
It's become a bloated mess that's sucked dry all funding in quantum gravity research dry. It's also completely resistant to any philosophical criticism, which makes it all the more difficult to take the salvageable parts of it and moving on. But it's not a hoax. All former string theorists I've met have realized it's going nowhere whereas all who still work on it are victims to the sunk cost fallacy.Physics is stuck, anon.
>>16541680>sucked dry all funding in quantum gravity researchWhy shouldn't it? There is no good alternative, and it's not like there are many physicists working on quantum gravity in the first place.
>>16541685>There is no good alternativeand that’s why no one outside your cult takes you guys seriously. Screaming “I’m right and everyone is wrong” gets you nowhere no matter how many Wittens you have in your exclusive club.
>>16541611All jüdische physik is
>>16541685That is utter faggotry. Loop quantum gravity, causal set theory, shape dynamics, scale relativity, literally anything.QG departments should allocate funding for speculative attempts other than string theory, given that the latter is untestable.It's all the US's fault.
>>16541734Nice. I saw Rovelli deliver that slide in person back in 2017.
>>16541740>It's all the US's fault.Also this. LQG research is alive and well, but mutts love when you sprinkle bullshit marketing in your grant proposal so the flashiest hunk of shit ends up bleeding everything else dry.
>>16541744*alive and well in Europe
>>16541734>Screaming “I’m right and everyone is wrong” gets you nowhereNobody is preventing anyone from thinking about an alternative approach. I know we are on 4chan, but theoretical physics is not some big conspiracy. Most people who care about quantum gravity consider string theory for theoretical reasons. Those who care about loop quantum gravity despite its limitations continue to work on it. Whoever is working on some other even more fringe theory needs to do something impressive with it if they want to attract more people and funding (which is basically a means to hire more people).
>>16541758It's become a sociological problem. String theory students are brainwashed into thinking that no alternative theories are possible because, if they were, they'd know about them. Then you approach them and tell them about causal set theory and they'll invariably tell you that they've never heard about it. The imbeciles who assign funding don't know any better, so they don't hire people working in alternative approaches.It's up to the philosophers of physics to save foundations research at this point.
>>16541758>Nobody is preventing anyone from thinking about an alternative approachBut it apparently doesn’t exist in stringniggers’ version of the multiverse because they conveniently plug their ears the moment anyone mentions the alternatives.>Those who care about loop quantum gravity despite its limitations continue to work on it.What’s that? I thought you wrote there are no alternatives and string theory is the only possible quantum gravity theory. Or did I read wrong?
>>16541769>It's up to the philosophers of physics to save foundations research at this point.Ok cool, go for it.
>>16541778Didn't get funding. Doing a Data Science PhD until I can self-fund.
Stochasticists will be validated.
>>16541740>>16541744>>16541749Suspect the U.S. diverted a bunch of money into string theory over the decades as a distraction and honeypot to keep the gap between mainstream physics and classified black project physics large. Other countries though are no longer following the U.S.'s lead with regards to what gets funding (China certainly isn't) and are poised to overtake U.S. companies regards to application and commercialization of scientific research. The U.S. finally woke up though and realized they can't be throwing off it's own companies which is what lead to the recent limited disclosures of what is possible to the venture capital world (e.g. US Space Disruptors Day Event and the recent Shoshin Works podcasts like 65,69).
>>16541826based schizoredpill us more
>>16541826the explanation is simpler. College produced only useful idiots for 80 years. The shabbos were filtered into traitorous positions and would experiment on the population and never produce anything of value. Despite literal decades of supposed education that doesn't teach logic or memory, a class of people rose out of this garden of edom. You see, the experiments of the leaders had accidentally produced a serum that gave super powers. They have been injecting into children for decades. This tism-juice was their downfall and it worked nothing like their lead-stupifier of the previous gen.
>>16541826>>16541831The U.S. has no choice, trillions of dollars in the upcoming decades are at stake and U.S. companies have been mislead as to what is possible and what are viable research and commercialization paths due to censorship through media and grant funding.The cold fusion experiment from 1989 and subsequent media coverage and fallout (arguably due to gov psyops and censorship; note U.S. Navy kept it's own research on the subject going) has turned many companies away from considering anything remotely looking like cold fusion (e.g. LCF). A recent embarrassing example is the method of Lattice Confinement Fusion (LCF) developed by NASA being commercialized and used by Astral Systems Ltd... a U.K. company!>https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/Lattice-Confinement-Fusion-and-Astral-Systems.pdf
>>16541875>the deep state keeps cold fusion away because ehhh… it just does ok. What are the benefits of doing so? Idk, I’m not the deep state.gigabased. I respect your honesty.
>>16541911Cold fusion would likely fall under category XI of the Patent Security Category Review list of the Invention Secrecy Act which may be why (if they did) suppress/smear it at the time.Patent Security Category Review List 1971: pg 13 >https://sgp.fas.org/othergov/invention/pscrl.pdfUnfortunately for the most recent release of the Patent Security Category Review List 2009 they have redacted all the subcategory details:>https://sgp.fas.org/othergov/invention/pscrl-2009-red.pdf
You would have thought any physical theory that required more than 3 spacial dimensions would have quickly been ruled out as plausible. But oh no, many decades later and here we still are.
>>16541611>Sing>AbdallahYikes
>>16541611According to the official mg curriculum, no it isn't:>>16534183
>>16541934There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with that. The Standard Model is technically a 10-dimensional theory, because the gauge group has a clear mathematical interpretation as acting on a 6-dimensional complex manifold. But it’s just a mathematical tool and nothing more. These extra dimensional manifolds don’t “mix” with spacetime. The real problem with extra dimensions in string theory is that their ambitious claim at unifying everything means they have to put both 4D spacetime and those extra dimensions into a single manifold and then cook up a way to “hide” the extra ones. And you can do that, but then you immediately run into two major issues: your extra dimensions are unstable and want to “unfold” and there are multiple ways you could “fold” an extradimensional manifold into a copy of spacetime with no way of choosing which way is better. String theory gives you some ridiculous number of possible “foldings” and they plainly admit they don’t know how to deal with it. People like Susskind and Kaku go full cope mode and start making unfalsifiable claims about le multiverse and the anthropic principle while forgetting to tell us exactly how all that nonsense will help out sieve the correct solution.
>>16541611>rajasekaran>sri ram>chew>oh>phua>singh>wadia>abdalla>sanchez
>>16542015> The Standard Model is technically a 10-dimensional theoryIs it really? I have never heard that stated before. Not ever.
>>16542033what do you think the numbers in SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) stand for? They’re the dimensions of complex manifolds the groups act on similar to how the Poincare group E(1,3) acts on the Minkowski space. It’s just that this is more of mathematical trivia since the Coleman-Mandula theorem says those complex manifolds are completely separate from Minkowski space and don’t form a single structure. String theory circumvents Coleman-Mandula via supersymmetry so they have to deal with all the bullshit that I described.
>>16542049Isn't supersymmetry a dead idea now?
>>16542052It’s not “dead” per se, it’s just that minimal supersymmetry has been ruled out. You could say it’s dead but there will always be some guy who will go “yeah but we can cook up some shit where you need a bigger collider to test it”. The biggest issue with supersymmetry isn’t the testable predictions (string theorist have made moving experimental goalposts an art of its own), it’s the purely theoretical issues like supersymmetry breaking. We don’t observe supersymmetry at “our” low energy scales, so it must “break” at some higher energy similar to the Higgs mechanicism. The problem is that supersymmetry is much more restrictive than “regular” symmetry and doesn’t admit something like the Higgs mechanism. There has been all kinds of attempts to rectify this via “soft” supersymmetry breaking, but it’s still kinda garbage and doesn’t work. The reason string theorists cling onto it so hard is because their bullshit literally can’t work without it. There’s no way to incorporate fermions into string theory without supersymmetry.
>>16542057So when can we officially rule string theory to be dead? It is simply a case of waiting for the old guard to die?
>>16542068Never. As long as they have people like Witten, they get to keep the clout and the funding. They will eternally continue to justify their crap because they can always brag about how so many jerkoffs in Princeton or whatever are working on it. These days they cling onto like the one niche application of one aspect of string theory to condensed matter physics and by extension quantum computing. So they successfully continue milking the grant machine because the average Joe at the Department of Energy hears sees the magic words “quantum computing” and “machine learning” in the grant proposal and cums buckets from it.
>>16542072don't hate the playerhate the [horrors beyond your comprehension]
>>16542078Nah, this is exactly the case where you should hate the player. This is the kinda guy who invents his own rules when playing Monopoly and then when you tell him to fuck off he tells you how he’ll tell mom and you won’t get invited to their place for a sleepover anymore. These people ruined the image of HEP theory and then when they realized they salted the earth they moved to greener pastures of condensed matter pretending like nothing happened and they’re still working on quantum gravity and particle physics. Meanwhile people doing particle physics got shafted and ridiculed for no reason. Horrible work ethic.
>>16541611More of a scam than a hoax.
>>16541611the theory isn't a hoax (see: >>16541621 >>16541680)the real hoax are the dudes getting grants to bloat it and print PhDs
>>16542081When are you going to realize you don't actually know anything about hep-th? I'm willing to bet you're the guy a few days ago that was mixing up higher form symmetry with some kind of trivial subgroup symmetry.
>Is string theory a hoax?No. Hoaxes have evidence. Fake evidence, but still.
It's not a hoax but it won't ever take off because it's very inelegant. People are desperate for a Standard Model replacement because it's ad hoc.People not robots work on physics and people will not want to work on something that is unappealing or icky.Relativity took off because one look at it was enough to think that this is the one.
of course not
