{"id":117,"date":"2004-12-03T17:05:02","date_gmt":"2004-12-03T21:05:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=117"},"modified":"2004-12-03T17:05:02","modified_gmt":"2004-12-03T21:05:02","slug":"string-theory-gets-real-not","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=117","title":{"rendered":"String Theory Gets Real &#8211; Not"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A recent issue of <A href=\"http:\/\/www.sciencemag.org\">Science<\/A> magazine has an article about the &#8220;Strings and the Real World&#8221; workshop at Aspen this past summer, entitled <A href=\"http:\/\/www.sciencemag.org\/cgi\/reprint\/306\/5701\/1460.pdf\">String Theory Gets Real &#8212; Sort Of<\/A>.  A more accurate title for the article might be &#8220;String Theory Would Like to Get Real &#8212; But Can&#8217;t Because it Doesn&#8217;t Work&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>The article claims that up until recently string theorists were not even trying to connect string theory with experiment, but &#8220;Now a small but growing number of them are trying to forge connections between string theory and detailed data&#8221;.  This is really nonsense.  There have always been plenty of people doing &#8220;string phenomenology&#8221;, but it has always been a doomed subject, for reasons I&#8217;ve gone on about at length here and elsewhere.  The article does mention the problem of the Landscape with the increasingly standard loony comment that &#8220;physicists may have to rethink what it means for a theory to explain experimental data&#8221;.  This is absurd.  There&#8217;s no question about what it means for a theory to explain experimental data and the simple fact of the matter is that this theory can&#8217;t do it.<\/p>\n<p>There&#8217;s also a claim that &#8220;the  cosmological constant now appears to be real, and string theorists hope to calculate its value&#8221;.  This misunderstands the whole Landscape argument, which tries to justify why no one can ever hope to calculate this value.<\/p>\n<p>The article also includes a sidebar which tries to explain why young people go into string theory.  It quotes a Penn postdoc, Brent Nelson, as saying that he read about string theory as a teenager and couldn&#8217;t believe so many people accepted something so outlandish.  But he went into string theory anyway, and now says &#8220;I haven&#8217;t learned enough&#8230; I still don&#8217;t know why I should believe&#8221;.  Sorry Brent, but no matter how long and hard you stare at this particular emperor trying to appreciate the beauty of his clothing, he&#8217;s still going to be naked as a jaybird.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, when asked how many revolutions will be needed to make string theory work, John Schwarz says &#8220;I don&#8217;t know, but I think we&#8217;ll need many more&#8221;.  At about a decade per revolution, it looks like Schwarz now doesn&#8217;t expect to live to see this happen.  Neither do I.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A recent issue of Science magazine has an article about the &#8220;Strings and the Real World&#8221; workshop at Aspen this past summer, entitled String Theory Gets Real &#8212; Sort Of. A more accurate title for the article might be &#8220;String &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=117\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-117","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=117"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=117"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=117"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=117"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}