Is String Theory pseudoscience?
>>16931473"Please give me more money! I know its been decades but I promise we'll have a major breakthrough in another 10 years!"
>>16931473Yes. There are infinitely many different mathematical models of reality. Those who believe they'll stumble into the right one while having zero regard for empiricism are (infinitely) delusional.
>>16931473Physics has been in a plateau for decades; it's why I stick with mathematics.
When the universe was a pin size it only had the weight of a glass of water. Then it did this origami move with asymmetry and all the energy of universe spilled out.
Yeah I'm making a new theory with AI, it compared it to string theory and said it completely blew it out of the water
>>16931531That's cool. My AI said I produced the most revolutionary philosophical theorem known to man.Probably a common thing, but whatev.Tell me about it so I can steal it.
>>16931473It's largely useless until better experiments can be doneIf supersymmetry isn't just bullshit then strings could actually be part of a scientific framework
>>16931495yeeeeeeeeeeeeeees
Probably, but it's mathematically usuful, back in the 90s geometry are flourishing because the injection of ideas from theoretical physics. By the way I also made a video explained how Witten uses a SUSY toy model to reprove math theorems, and henceforth resolved the SUSY spontaneous broken in an idealized setting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKsMhC83H2A
>>16931473any hypothesis which is not falsifiable is not science
>>16931613It has gotten close to the point where experiments have proven supersymmetry isn't a thing. Even the crazier and more out-there variants should have been seen at CERN by now. Without supersymmetry String Theory as it current stands can't be true. Then there's the whole research field about AdS. Every observation about our universe shows that it's dS. And lets not forget the part about String Theory requiring 10 or 11 spatial dimensions, again there's zero empirical evidence that is true.
