Re:Wait, what? (Score 1)

i think the disaster the article talks about isn't so much the existence of the theory, or it's shortcomings. the disaster is the popularity and the ensuing concentration. because this stuff can't really be tested, the theory doesn't advance in an appreciable way. are there brilliant things said about it? sure. is it sort of cool? well, i certainly think so. but if so many minds are focusing on a theory that cannot advance (be proven or disproven) in the forseeable future, the result (in the extreme, disaster for modern science way) is an intellectual landscape with stunted ideas. does that mean string theory should be abandoned? probably not. but do you recall how it felt in school, when you had to study a subject or read a book wholly unrelated to your interests and future plans (perhaps Home Economics..i hated Hoem Economics)? how it felt like a huge waste, and like it was robbing you of time and energy for what you wanted to learn and do? or, maybe, your parents had huge expectations of you as a pianist, so you plugged away at your lessons even though you felt your time would be better spent dismantling the television of playing baseball or baking cookies whatever it was that you enjoyed doing. the idea of string theory as a disaster comes from a certain pressure to pursue it, in my opinion, rather than the fact that it is pursued.