heddle #157 wrote:
Of course you can call it apologetics, but that’s because you don’t know jack shit. A little investigation and you would discover that a lot of scientists have the same criticism about the various multiverse theories and about String Theory in general—that it makes no contact with experiment.
Yes -- and my understanding is that String Theory proponents agree that this is a serious problem, and if they want to get their theory accepted they're going to have to figure out a way to test it through experiment, and not just through elegant math.
What String Theory proponents do not do:
1.) Describe the dimensions as interactions of Love and Harmony, knit together through balanced vibrations of Consciousness.
2.) Claim that String Theory is not simply a matter of science and reason, but of a mature wisdom which seeks beyond the self, in wonder and mystery, recognizing that there are things we cannot understand. The universe is stranger than we can imagine.
3.) Scorn critics as guilty of "scientism," and ask if they have any way to measure things like their mother's love through their telescopes? Not all things that are real, need to be empirically demonstrated to others.
4.) Explain that String Theory is untestable by necessity, not simply due to its physical limitations, but by its requirement that one approach it with humility. If String Theory could be demonstrated through experiment, scientists would be forced to accept it, and put it in their models of reality, and then think they understood it all. But love cannot be forced, nor can the appreciation of beauty. It has to come from an act of acceptance, as one pulls on the Strings, and comes home.
Okay, I admit it. I'm talking out of my area here, so I guess I don't really know for sure that String Theorists don't claim this stuff.
But I don 't think they do. If they did, I think you'd see a lot more hostility towards String Theory, and String Theorists. They would probably be considered overzealous in protecting -- and advancing -- their theory.