Redpill me on string theory /sci/. I've heard people claim that it's unscientific because it's unfalcifiable. Is this accurate?
>>8110390
Why do you care? Are you at all educated or relevant in cutting edge physics? No? Then why do you need an opinion on it? Fuck off.
>>8110406
>don't ask questions about things you don't understand
I'm asking because i don't want to be misinformed.
>>8110423
You are necessarily going to be misinformed because you don't have the foundation to actually evaluate what someone tells you about string theory. You are literally just asking for someone to give you an opinion you can copy.
>>8110433
everyone has to rely on other peoples opinions when it comes to fields the aren't experts in
>>8110390
>it's unfalcifiable
Not true. Just because we can't test it right now doesn't mean it is untestable.
>>8110390
>free will exists please respond
Every time
>>8110445
Become an expert then, it's not impossible.
You won't understand anything before that happens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtTxclYsVjc
>>8110406
As much as I want to call you a douche, you really are right.
OP, there are multiple stances you can take on string theory. If you don't understand enough to form your opinion, you don't know enough to actually need a stance on string theory. Regurgitating someones opinions has never and will never do anything good for science. It might make you seem smarter, but that's a waste of fucking time.
>>8110578
Nice strawmanning
I don't think any physicist takes Neil LeGrasse Tyson seriously
>>8110578
He does have a point in some issues, but why is he attacking psychiatric drugs? Evidence-based tests and trials are used to ensure their efficacy before they can be sold.
>>8110406
Stringfag detected
