SkipCaptcha
710
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 23:
Line 23: + +
no edit summary
:::: Sure, Witten is a physicist. But he is primarily respected for his accomplishments in Math, not Physics. He is never going to get that Nobel prize in Physics. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:36, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
:::: Sure, Witten is a physicist. But he is primarily respected for his accomplishments in Math, not Physics. He is never going to get that Nobel prize in Physics. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:36, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Witten held professorships at Princeton (and IAS) for ten years before taking up that chaired position, so it's clearly irrelevant to his qualifications in physics. Simonyi aside, I'm not sure why conducting a college-level physics experiment is supposed to be a prerequisite to be called a physicist, particularly a theoretical physicist. Many winners of the physics Nobel do purely theoretical work (Wilczek and Gross are two recent such winners, off the top of my head). Perhaps they did experiments as undergraduates, but they almost certainly haven't since. Would you question that their work is physics? Why would that fact that Witten didn't do trivial experiments decades ago have any implications for his qualifications to do physics? I doubt very much that his failure to perform these experiments has had too crippling effect on his physical intuitions. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 18:47, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
== String theory "unrelated" to known forces in nature? ==
== String theory "unrelated" to known forces in nature? ==