This is a good question.
In science, theories shouldn’t have to be something you “believe in” – they should be mathematical frameworks that explain experimental/observational facts and make predictions. Unfortunately, string theory is in a weak position here. Although the structure of the theory naturally accounts for gravity – which is famously difficult in quantum theories – it has proven very difficult to persuade string theory to produce any testable predictions about the world.
I regard string theory as a branch of mathematics more than a real physical theory. It may be that in the future it will graduate to theory status, when it becomes more predictive.
I agree – string theory in my eyes is currently a mathematical idea and not a true scientific theory.
A theory need to be testable – ie make a prediction about something that you can observe/measure. String theory does not do this. I therefore can not say that sting theory is a correct model to describe our universe. It is however an interesting idea that has the potential to explain a lot – but it is currently still an idea with a lot of problems that are being worked on and and the ‘theory’ is constantly developing as a result.
Comments