Jump to content

Would scientists still study the theories after GUT ?


Recommended Posts

Year 2200. The grand unified theory is discovered

all constants can be derived, all particles too

everything is explained and verified experimentally.

 

Would the scientists still study all the theoretical

structures that have been devised anyways as

pure math or to see how alternate universes could

be devised ? This would have no consequence on

physics, but are all those theories /string, symmetry etc)

worth studying for themselves anyways (in their own

right) ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh no, there work would not be pointless. You would still need people to extract the information from the theory. A TOE (which is what I think you meant by GUT, a GUT is just the unification of the strong interaction and the electroweak interaction), is going to contain alot of stuff. And what about approximations and stuff. I would expect a TOE to be extremely complicated, and we are going to need people to find methods that would give good approximations to the true answer and be equally easy to calculate. And then there's the fact that you can never truly know whether or not you actually a TOE or not...there could always be something hidden beneath the surface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would the scientists still study all the theoretical

structures that have been devised anyways as

pure math or to see how alternate universes could

be devised ? This would have no consequence on

physics' date=' but are all those theories /string, symmetry etc)

worth studying for themselves anyways (in their own

right) ?

 

...

...

...

 

OK, interesting replies.

 

What I want to know is if these theories are

already today an area of research in pure

mathematics and if alternate theories inventing

other universes even with no practical use

would be interesting to study.[/quote']

 

In mathematics one does this all the time. there are

always interesting mathematical things to study

(but if it does not predict the outcomes of physics experiments then

one does not call it physics)

 

perhaps string theory is more a department of mathematics than

a testable theory about the real world---but it is called physics

by habit or convention.

 

any structure that can be imagined and defined axiomatically can, I suppose, be studied----what is considered interesting is partly a matter of taste

and partly governed by time-honored considerations of logical power, generality, elegance. In any case if it is mathematics then it does not have to agree with empirical observation---it must only follow from its own axioms.

 

Humans will always complicate their world, causing the need for new

types of analysis----they invent games and this requires mathematical game theory, they invent computers and this requires computer science and

the mathematics of computation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scientists don't study the Newton physics, they just use it. If today theories are facts of tomorrow they will be used to discover new theories and get closer to the mind of the creator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.