The complete & utter failure of string theory from day#1

[astro]

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/w...p=486#comments

Comments on the Superstring Syndrome (also from May 1986)

“Superstring Theory” Syndrome (published in the popular magazine “Parity”, September 1986)

Can the superstring theory become physics? (January 1993)

This last paper claims that “the bubble of superstring theory has … bursted”, which, in 1993, was rather premature.

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/w...p=486#comments

[Epsilon=One]

Originally Posted by astro

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/w...p=486#comments

Comments on the Superstring Syndrome (also from May 1986)

“Superstring Theory” Syndrome (published in the popular magazine “Parity”, September 1986)

Can the superstring theory become physics? (January 1993)

This last paper claims that “the bubble of superstring theory has … bursted”, which, in 1993, was rather premature.

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/w...p=486#comments

The fundamental problem with String Theory (ST) began when it was highjacked by the pomo theoretical physicists of academia that could not, or would not, look beyond the standard models for their fundamental concepts. When first proposed in 1955, the "string-like" phenomena was intended as a means to otherwise explain gravity and quantum "fields"; and, as a way to explain forces other than than with SR, GR, and QM.

That “string-like” oscillations underlie all formations of all fundamental quanta is the only reasonable conclusion that can explain the observed enigmas of Reality.

The problem with ST, today, is that it applies such a fundamental conclusion to the mythical postulates of standard model theory, which theory continues to unravel the more that it is examined.

See: The Elliptical Constant resurrects String Theory
& Resuscitates Loop Quantum Gravity