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.
