152
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 5:
Line 5: + +
→String theory "unrelated" to known forces in nature?
: No, string theory does not predict the photon. Saying that it can accommodate a massless vector boson means nothing. It does not tell us anything about photons. I also disagree with saying that there is uncertainty about string theory being a genuine theory of everything. It is a settled matter. String theory is not a theory of anything (in the physical world). [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 15:01, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
: No, string theory does not predict the photon. Saying that it can accommodate a massless vector boson means nothing. It does not tell us anything about photons. I also disagree with saying that there is uncertainty about string theory being a genuine theory of everything. It is a settled matter. String theory is not a theory of anything (in the physical world). [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 15:01, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
Out of curiousity, what makes you so certain of this? Do you have any background in string theory? I mean, consider this: suppose you have a theory with a massless vector boson, A. There's really only one gauge-invariant kinetic term you can construct out of it, namely dA^*dA. Well, as soon as you have that kinetic term in a Lagrangian, then boom, you have Maxwell's equations. So, um, yeah, accommodating a vector boson does indeed predict things like photons and electromagnetic fields. If you still disagree I am interested to know what your source is.--[[User:Lemonpeel|Lemonpeel]] 16:13, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
== Falsifiability is from Pragmatism, not Positivism ==
== Falsifiability is from Pragmatism, not Positivism ==