World Science Scholars

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • When people say string theory was discovered, it is not as if someone saw a particle up close with string properties.
    It is a theory that is used / imagined to try to explain the contradiction and as yet there is no proof.
    This reminds me of reading old papers where John Dalton proposed the atom as a solid sphere.
    Do we have proof that black holes radiate?
    Is it convenient to assume a black hole is a hologram and we can’t see whats in it so we can say anything we like about what might be in it. A bit like Schrodingers paradox?

    Defining a black hole as something with area is over simplifying it.
    It is a lot more than just area.
    Area is one of its defining properties.
    Just like height and weight is a defining property of a human. Or not?

    Do we need a single combined theory to describe everything we see?
    Some would say yes, there must be a way to write down a “formula” for how the universe works from the smallest particle and force to the largest mass and galaxy etc.
    Maybe we don’t know enough yet to be able to combine it all together.
    There may be another “quantum leap” to release a new subject area to expand our knowledge base.

    I think it has to do with human nature and how inquisitive we are and how we want to know and tell others. A form of pride?
    They used to say the quickest way to get the right answer to a question was post a wrong answer on a discussion forum.
    This has probably changed recently and now people are using AI tools to get “an” answer and assuming it is 100% correct.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)