Does String Theory Satisfy Einstein's Conditions for a Physical Theory?

[caltechpostdoc]

Does String Theory Satisfy Einstein's Conditions for a Physical Theory?

In his autobiography Einstein said:

Before I enter upon a critique of mechanics as a foundation of physics, something of a broadly general nature will first have to be said concerning the points of view according to which it is possible to criticize physical theories at all. The first point of view is obvious: The theory must not contradict empirical facts. However evident this demand may in the first place appear, its application turns out to be quite delicate. For it is often, perhaps even always, possible to adhere to a general theoretical foundation by securing the adaption of the theory to the facts by means of artificial additional assumptions. In any case, however, this first point of view is concerned with the confirmation of the theoretical foundation by the available empirical facts.
The second point of view is not concerned with the relation to the material of observation but with the premises of the theory itself, with what may briefly but vaguely be characterized as the "naturalness" or " logical simplicity" of the premises (of the basic concepts and of the relations between these which are taken as a basis). This point of view, an exact formulation of which meets with great difficulties, has played an important role in the selection and evaluation of theories since time immemorial. The problem here is not simply one of a kind of enumeration of the logically independent premises (if anything like this were at all unequivocally possible), but that of a kind of reciprocal weighing of incommeasurable qualities. Furthermore, among theories of equally "simple" foundation that one is to be taken as superior which most sharply delimits the qualities of system in the abstract (i.e., contains that most definite claims). Of the "realm" of theories I need not speak here, inasmuch as we are confining ourselves to such theories whose object is the totality of all physical appearances. The second point of view may briefly be characterized as concerning itself with the "inner perfection" of the theory, whereas the first point of view refers to the "external confirmation." The following I reckon as also belonging to the "inner perfection" of a theory: we prize a theory more highly if, from the logical standpoint, it is not the result of an arbitrary choice among theories which, among themselves, are of equal value and analogously constructed.
Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, Volume One, 1949, Autobiographical Notes, p 21--23,
Open Court, Cambridge University Press.

Does string theory conform to this?

did string theory ever have an original postulate?
did string theory ever have an original postulate?

if so, where was it stated?

who stated it?

was the whole point of string theory a way to get rid of points?

so strange that nobody knows string theory's original postulate, nor the person who stated it.

we can quote einstein, but who started string theory?

Does anyone know what the annual NSF budget is for string theory?

Is it worth it?

Is it a little bit like Enron, where elite insiders are playing a joke on the unsuspecting public, and profiting from it?

Does anyone know what the annual NSF budget is for string theory?

Is it worth it?

Is it a little bit like Enron, where elite insiders are playing a joke on the unsuspecting public, and profiting from it?

Have Ed Witten and Brian Greene gotten the math right?

If so, where is the equation?

Where are the equations that make them brilliant?

String Theorists have thrown thousands of speculative claims in the air, and not one has been backed up yet with math nor physics.

And indeed, what is wrong with physics in the first place? Why do we need string theory? What does it explain that is not expalined elsewhere?

Who says that math is the most basic requirment of physics?

I would argue that physics is the most basic requirement of physics.

As Richard Feynman said, "Physics is to math what sex is to
masturbation." He certainly knew what physics was, did he not?

"I don't believe in mathematics." --Albert Einstein.

Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity, I do not understand it myself anymore.
Quoted in P A Schilpp, Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist (Evanston 1949).

Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom. --Einstein
Quoted in H Eves Return to Mathematical Circles (Boston 1988).

Most of the fundamental ideas of science are essentially simple, and may, as a rule, be expressed in a language comprehensible to everyone. --Einstein (NOT STRING THEORY)

Mathematics are well and good but nature keeps dragging us around by the nose.
Quoted in A P French, Einstein: a Centenary Volume