universe

[ed84c]

 

I agree there are clear evolutionary advantages to a species having curiosity.

 

 

not from the point of view of the Fox

[Martin]

not from the point of view of the Fox

 

interesting comment

 

which reminds me that Dogs seem a curious lot in general

 

they always go sniffing around and are very likely to find something (like a Fox) that is hiding somewhere (like in a Hole)

 

the curiosity of these dogs has been historically useful to us people

 

=================

I think that a multiverse in the terms of branes in string thery do exist, or at least I hope there do [b']all that maths can't be wasted surely.[/b]

 

I suspect that most theoretical physics research (the very mathematical kind) has always been a waste

as far as turning out to describe nature

and being a testable predictive model

 

the NY Times recently reported on a String Theory conference in Aspen

where they considered, among other things, the possibility that String may be a colossal failure

 

The conference was the 20th Anniversay celebration of the first StringTheory Revolution.

 

Brian Greene raised the possibility that the theory might be just plain wrong and said that it would be helpful if it could be proven wrong since then physics could "move on".

It would be helpful either way---to get some positive confirmation or to get some evidence refuting it.

 

the NY Times article is payfor, but this blogger copied exerpts of it so you dont have to be a NYT subscriber

 

http://pmbryant.typepad.com/b_and_b/2004/12/string_theory_d.html

 

thats how progress goes. theories are made to be proven wrong and they almost all have turned out to be wrong-----the important ones are those that have not been proven wrong YET.

 

the difference with String is that it has been hyped to the public so the public has some kind of irrational faith that it's right. It has probably been a mistake for the research establishment to build up these high expectations in the public. It could well backfire.

 

Brian Greene has been in part responsible for this overkill String hype.

But thankfully he is beginning to shift ground slightly.

It deserves respect when people who have invested much of their career in some line of research openly acknowledge that it is a so-far unconfirmed gamble and may be a flop.

 

And in some larger sense no theoretical work is ever a waste, as mathematics. Even if it gets replaced by some new ideas that describe nature better there is still the abstract model itself which may be interesting to mathematicians.