Is string theory science or philosophy?

[Gutwrench]

I can't seem to create a poll, but was interested in your thought.

1. Science, no further comment.

2. Philosophy, no further comment.

3. Probably science, immature theory but on the right track to yield scientific benefits.

4. Not science, waste of time.

5. Other

 

[APlotdevice]

It is exactly what it's name suggests: a theory. That is to say a scientific theory, which itself is defined as "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment."

 

[S.B.G]

Polls are added after you create the thread. Now just edit the post and the poll options will be available to you.

 

[Gutwrench]

Polls are added after you create the thread. Now just edit the post and the poll options will be available to you.

Thank you. I think I deselected the poll option when creating the thread so it doesn't look available to me now. I appreciate the tip and will remember it.

 

[angelneo]

I'm no scientist, but hasn't it evolved to M-theory? Correct me if I'm wrong

It's theoretical physics, with our current technology, it can't be proven in the strictest sense, but we can verify it by observing the results the theory implies. That being say anything in science can still be proven wrong if solid evidence is there, nothing is really set in stone.

 

[S.B.G]

Thank you. I think I deselected the poll option when creating the thread so it doesn't look available to me now. I appreciate the tip and will remember it.

You can add it right now if you like. Press the edit button on your first post and scroll down to the poll section and add it.

 

[Gutwrench]

It is exactly what it's name suggests: a theory. That is to say a scientific theory, which itself is defined as "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment."

Not that I really think it's philosophy but how has it ever been tested and ever repeatedly confirmed through observation?

 

[Gutwrench]

I'm no scientist, but hasn't it evolved to M-theory? Correct me if I'm wrong

It's theoretical physics, with our current technology, it can't be proven in the strictest sense, but we can verify it by observing the results the theory implies. That being say anything in science can still be proven wrong if solid evidence is there, nothing is really set in stone.

I'm guessing you are correct.

 

[Huntn]

I can't seem to create a poll, but was interested in your thought.

1. Science, no further comment.

2. Philosophy, no further comment.

3. Probably science, immature theory but on the right track to yield scientific benefits.

4. Not science, waste of time.

5. Other

Personally I believe it is the OPs responsibility to express some kind of an opinion or leaning when starting a thread like this. So what is it?

 

[Gutwrench]

I agree and sorry I haven't done so. I'm still coming to grips with it all. I'm far from any expert, but at this stage tend to agree with angelneo---I think it's a valid theory which is adding or at least helping to add to our knowledge.

I posed the question because science requires testable and observable experiments and with our current knowledge we are unable to do that at the quantum level....particularly when dealing with the idea of strings or multidimensions. Exciting stuff though. From Newton to Einstein and Maxwell to this.

 

[eric/]

I'd say its a mixture. It's science for obvious reasons, but I think it's philosophy because its simply a scientific way of describing life and the pursuit of that knowledge.

 

[monokakata]

When I was in graduate school, one of my professors liked to talk about "dubious dichotomies."

"Science" versus "Philosophy" I think is one of those.

But for an interesting discussion of how many physicists looked at quantum theory as either physics or philosophy, see this book:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Hippies-S...sr=1-1&keywords=how+the+hippies+saved+physics

It might sound like a woo-woo book, but the author is a historian of science, and he's writing about real people.