Anti-ID physicist also trashes media fave "string theory"
Physicist Lawrence Krauss, who has garnered headlines for opposing ID, now "turns on his own", as it were, by dissing string theory.
Put simply, string theory offered to combine the otherwise contradictory insights of relativity and quantum mechanics (the two great theories of the twentieth century) by proposing many extra dimensions, but the theory may be untestable without an accelerator the size of the galaxy. Both relativity and quantum mechanics are testable under real world conditions.
How could he?, anguished thousands ask.
Paul Boutin, fronting Krauss's new book Hiding in the Mirror, offers an explanation:
... Krauss' book is subtitled The Mysterious Allure of Extra Dimensions as a polite way of saying String Theory Is for Suckers. String theory, he explains, has a catch: Unlike relativity and quantum mechanics, it can't be tested. That is, no one has been able to devise a feasible experiment for which string theory predicts measurable results any different from what the current wisdom already says would happen. Scientific Method 101 says that if you can't run a test that might disprove your theory, you can't claim it as fact. When I asked physicists like Nobel Prize-winner Frank Wilczek and string theory superstar Edward Witten for ideas about how to prove string theory, they typically began with scenarios like, "Let's say we had a particle accelerator the size of the Milky Way …" Wilczek said strings aren't a theory, but rather a search for a theory. Witten bluntly added, "We don't yet understand the core idea."
Hey, you could like this guy Krauss, especially now that he has made himself vulnerable by dissing a popular theory - and for lack of evidence, no less. Access Research Network should send him a free hoodie - on account of the glacial stares he is likely to get.
Here's the St. Louis Post-Dispatch's account of a debate between Krauss and Kansas science standards reformer John Calvert.
If you like this blog, check out my award-winning book on the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?. You can read excerpts as well.
Are you looking for one of the following stories?
The Pope using the term "intelligent design" to describe the Catholic view of origins, go here.
Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams attacked by Darwinist, hits back. Will he now cartoon on the subject?
"Academic Freedom Watch : Here's the real, ugly story behind the claim that 'intelligent design isn't science'?".
Roseville, California, lawyer Larry Caldwell is suing over the use of tax money by Darwin lobby groups to promote religious views that accept Darwinian evolution (as opposed to ones that don’t). I’m pegging this one as the next big story. See also the ruling on tax funds. Note the line that the “free speech” people take.
How to freak out your bio prof? What happened when a student bypassed the usual route of getting frogs drunk and dropping them down the chancellor’s robes, and tried questioning Darwinism instead.
Christoph, Cardinal Schonbon is not backing down from his contention that Darwinism is incompatible with Catholic faith, and Pope Benedict XVI probably thinks that’s just fine. Major US media have been trying to reach rewrite for months, with no success.
Museum tour guides to be trained to "respond" to those who question Darwinism. Read this item for an example of what at least one museum hopes to have them say.
World class chemist dissed at Catholic university because he sympathizes with intelligent design.
Blog policy note:Comments are permitted on this blog, but they are moderated before they appear.