String theory does not work with de-Sitter spaces, only with anti de-Sitter spaces. Science has proved we are living in a de-Sitter space. String theory cannot be true.

▲

maxnoe 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Science never proves a positive.

You can only disprove.

The only way to prove a positive if there is a finite number of possibilities and you have disproven all but one. But even then, someone could conceivably come up with an alternate description that preserves the current understanding but makes additional predictions or is a simpler model making the same.

As Feyman said: "We can never know if we are right, we can only be certain if we are wrong".

	▲	seanhunter 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don't think that's true regardless of whether you or Feynman or anyone else says it. For example: Every continuous symmetry of action in a physical system with conservative forces has a corresponding conservation law. (Noether's Theorem) There must be two antipodal points on Earth with exactly the same temperature and barometric pressure (as a result of the Borsuk-Ulam Theorem) As far as I know these are absolutely proved positively because they are mathematical consequences of the properties of continuous functions etc. I'm not a scientist, but there are thousands of things like this where we are definitely absolutely certain we are right because of the possibility of a mathematical direct proof.
	▲	simiones 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		This is just sleight of hand. It's true that science can never be certain about anything, not to the same level as mathematics. But otherwise, there is nothing special about positive or negative statements. You can express any positive statement as the negation of a negative statement, so to the extent that science can "disprove negatives", it can equivalently "prove positives".

▲

dmd 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That is literally what this article is about.

▲

squeefers 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> “What they have found is a 5D de Sitter solution, and we don’t live in 5D,” said > Antonio Padilla(opens a new tab) of the University of Nottingham.

> Still, the work is expected to launch a new era in matching the mathematical > elegance of string theory to the actual world we live in."

yeah, sounds real promising. string theory all over. nice maths but who cares if it doesnt map to reality, its nice maths!

	▲	bluGill 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Which would be fine if they were calling themselves mathematicians, we can debate if their ideas are more/less worthy of funding vs all the other mathematicians working on interesting math that might or might not be useful. However when they call themselves physicists we demand they prove they are creating useful physics. There are other areas of study in Physics that are producing results and thus seem more worthy of funding. Remember resources are limited. We cannot fund everyone who wants it. Society needs to make choices, we are generally okay with a bit of "interesting but unlikely to produce anything important", but most of what we fund needs a return on investment.