Pentcho Valev

2017-12-18 23:27:16 UTC

Permalink

“String theory (or, more technically, M-theory) is often described as the leading candidate for the theory of everything in our universe. But there’s no empirical evidence for it, or for any alternative ideas about how gravity might unify with the rest of the fundamental forces. Why, then, is string/M-theory given the edge over the others?” https://www.quantamagazine.org/why-is-m-theory-the-leading-candidate-for-theory-of-everything-20171218/Raw Message

The answer is obvious. String theory is unverifiable, even in principle. This means maximum fraud - string theory is the absolute champion in post-truth science.

In TOE, post-truth scientists try to reconcile irreconcilable concepts - Newton’s absolute time and Einstein’s spacetime which cannot be both correct:

"The effort to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity means reconciling totally different notions of time. In quantum mechanics, time is universal and absolute; its steady ticks dictate the evolving entanglements between particles. But in general relativity (Albert Einstein's theory of gravity), time is relative and dynamical, a dimension that's inextricably interwoven with directions X, Y and Z into a four-dimensional "space-time" fabric." https://www.quantamagazine.org/20161201-quantum-gravitys-time-problem/

Perimeter Institute: "Quantum mechanics has one thing, time, which is absolute. But general relativity tells us that space and time are both dynamical so there is a big contradiction there. So the question is, can quantum gravity be formulated in a context where quantum mechanics still has absolute time?" https://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/research/conferences/convergence/roundtable-discussion-questions/what-are-lessons-quantum

The incorrect concept is, of course, Einstein’s spacetime - almost all theoreticians admit that, explicitly or implicitly.

Pentcho Valev