(Untitled)

[rei_c]

(Obligatory squee at the time and how FAST it seems to be passing: AIEEEIEIEIE!)

The thing about SoB Crit is that it's so timely. As found in this article from the New Yorker:

Comments

[roundegotrip]

String theory really is the new macro-evolution. Connect-the-dots theory that appears to be unprovable scientifically, but which some 'scientists' latch on to for the sake of having something to hang their theoretical research hats on. These people are correct in one thing, though: Nature is not [always] simple. But they're still missing the point. Nature isn't always simple, but it is logical

[rei_c]

I would argue that it's not as much the simplicity of a theory that makes it beautiful, as its logic.

I'm very definitely in agreement here.

I've never been much for physics -- I always preferred chemistry, to be honest -- but string theory has always been intriguing to me simply because it supposes that there are answers. I love the humanities for all of the grey zones, but I love science for the concrete-ness it provides, often more stable than my own life. There is an inherent sense of beauty in logic, in following something from beginning to end and seeing it laid out step by step.

I'm going to have to do some more reading on this whole debate and see how SoB Crit fits in with everything. It was just really, really wonderful to see that the theoretical juggernaut I'm working on has meaning outside of lit/art studies.

[paradise_city]

It's interesting to watch string theory lose support in the face of supergravity and dark matter theories. The former is unwieldy and far from aesthetically pleasing, while the second can only be aesthetically pleasing in its absence.

And with the Russian mathetmatician refusing to accept the various awards for solving the Poincare conjecture, not to mention the recent Pluto debacle, physics is an ugly place in the public eye. It's such a change from the very recent heyday of Brian Greene when physics was more accessible to the general public. As things evolve and physics focuses inward again, I wonder if they'll gain the esoteric beauty only they can understand at the expense of the beauty the public could partake of.

[rei_c]

As things evolve and physics focuses inward again, I wonder if they'll gain the esoteric beauty only they can understand at the expense of the beauty the public could partake of.

A very interesting question, and I love how you pose it.

I'm woefully out-of-date on my (definite layperson's) knowledge of string-theory, but this article reminded me that the debates in science are never really over. I'm going to have to do some reading on this, though I found the article intself really interesting.