Page history
Talk: String theory
June 27, 2009
Reverted edits by AlanN (Talk) to last version by Aschlafly
m-146
→The falsfiability section makes no sense
+146
June 26, 2009
→The falsfiability section makes no sense: reply to AlanN
+308
→The falsfiability section makes no sense
+420
June 25, 2009
→The falsfiability section makes no sense: reply
+264
no edit summary
+571
→The falsfiability section makes no sense: reply
+244
→The falsfiability section makes no sense: new section
+487
June 17, 2009
June 16, 2009
→Witten, the History Major
+451
→Completeness and Computability: There is no possibility that string theory will ever be validated
+262
→Witten, the History Major
m+6
→Witten, the History Major
+278
→Witten, the History Major
m+1
no edit summary
+931
→Witten, the History Major
+387
→Witten, the History Major: Witten is a mathematician
+220
reply re: Witten
+574
→Witten, the History Major
+236
→Witten, the History Major: Witten also has a Craaford Prize
+257
→Witten, the History Major: mis-wrote something, so corrected it
m+14
→String theory "unrelated" to known forces in nature?: was known decades before string theory
+184
→Witten, the History Major
+722
Not to worry
+278
Re: Witten
+741
→Witten, the History Major: reply
+500
no edit summary
+681
→String theory "unrelated" to known forces in nature?
+615
→String theory "unrelated" to known forces in nature?: No, string theory does not predict the photon
+422
no edit summary
+355
no edit summary
+530