It’s ‘the thing’ now. We need a bug-a-boo to oogle over. If it makes the math work, i see it as a regrettable necessity *for now* but it’s going to have to be filled in much better.
Is it likely there’s stuff in the Universe that doesn’t partake in photonic interactions? Of course – there’s got to be. Makes it darned hard to measure it too. But we’re going to have to find ways to detect it rather than “it’s everything else we can’t see and here it is mathematically” because it’d make theoretical physics look like the most non-scientific field out there before long.
I guess that’s why I like John Ellis’ attitude. Focus on what we know. WE have PLENTY to work with there, instead of wasting time with multiverses and perfectly fine-tuned Universe stuff. It’s not as fun, it’s slower going, but we’ll be able to DO STUFF with _real_ subatomic things, rather than writing money-making books and telling people bedtime stories about reality on the Science channel.
I mean, they’re nice and inspirational… but they’re stories.
thank you! yes. It’s philosophy and it’s stories.. and for some it’s almost religious (in the broad definition of religious), but it’s not science.
Theory leads to experiment… or sometimes experiment leads to theory. Removing the experiment and what’s left?
I shouldn’t be so mean towards Dark energy – It’s actually fascinating that it’s a fixed point. Might be the revolutionary thing it needs to move it forward.
I apologize for my rant above. It was unnecessary.
It’s a good take. I believe the ‘multiverse of ideas’ should definitely remain open… just put in their proper locations. Multiverse for example, is a purely mathematically based theory that solves mathematical problems and makes for some REALLY great science fiction.
So, that’s where it goes. Useful mathematics. Great science fiction.
But the amount of _focus_ it gets should remain in the places where it’s mathematically useful and where it makes great fictional stories, but NOT presented as Science in the same manner as, say, wavelengths of colors and such.
I personally want to believe in the multiverse. I’d LOVE for string theory to be correct – all those awesome dimensions. And dark energy and matter are great fodder for the imagination….
… but they should remain as science fiction mathematics that are plausible but untestable and instead focus should remain on what we know, even if it’s less exciting.
After all, if your head is in the multiverse when you could be working on a theory to allow the building a nano-sized measuring tool for the inner angles of protein folding or something… well.. .to me, that’s a better use of theoretical physics.
It’s not that the other things should go away… but I think the focus (at least in the public face of science) is very lopsided.
Actually, wait, that’s a lie. I’d love for a dimension overlaying ours, JUST OUT OF PHASE where all the interesting stuff is happening.
I’d love for experiments for it too. But if there’s no way to test it, either now or the conceivable future, so it’s incorrect for it to be considered science per se but storytelling.
I’m grateful on a daily basis to be here. Not that I don’t have bad days, but I’m very happy to be a witness to this particular period in history where I happened to be living in. It’s a marvelous time, and much to explore.