LHC and the demise of String Theory

The LHC will go on-line later this year and hopefully will be gathering useful data before the end of the year.
A lot of hopes are resting on the LHC to begin answering some fundamental questions - not least among String Theorists.
As yet there is no experimental evidence that string theory is in any way valid - in fact it is not even a theory, and its many forms are contradictory and at odds with Standard Model experiment results. It introduces more questions than answers - instead of the 11 unknowns the Standard Model leaves unanswered, String Theory introduces a myriad of unknowns and unknowables that can never be answered by experiment. Maybe the LHC results will give an indication wether it is a valid science.

As you've probably gathered I am not a proponent of String Theory or its many variations, so I will state my bias against it now. One of the few areas where I think it might be relevant is Loop Quantum Gravity which is usually scorned by most String Theorists.

I am predicting that the LHC does not find evidence of a Graviton or of micro black holes. However String Theorists have a habit of making excuses and I am sure that failure to find any experimental evidence for their "theory" will not deter them from their current path. To paraphrase one of the greatest minds of the last century "String theorists do not make predictions - they make excuses" Richard Feynman.

The big problem with an alternative to the Standard Model is that at the moment String Theory is the only game in town and most of todays most prominent physicists (those in charge) have invested fruitless decades in it. They are unlikely to lay it down due to lack of evidence. I am with Peter Woit on this one - String Theory is "Not Even Wrong".

The LHC therefore will not help String Theorists, but I do believe we will see them making even more excuses about why we see no experimental results that might agree with their "Theory". I would love to have to eat my words on this - science progresses when experiment throws up new unexpected results, however I'm not getting out the salt and pepper yet.

I'm off to fill myself with Beer after reading all that rubbish.

Why does Science not say :

"Dunno, but I would love to know."

Both Art and Science share one thing in common: Arrogance.

Not at all meant for you John.

I was ranting and raving.

I apologise if you took my view of the state of Science personally.

Both Art and Science share one thing in common: Arrogance.

No - thats just me.

Are there no defenders of string theory here? - Superstrings, supersymmetry, M-Theory, etc. etc. etc.? I know enough about each to describe its principles but not a definition of the theory.
Can any proponents give me a definition of any of the theories, of what they predict and the experimental results that confirm them?

I think we'll find that there is no theory (only a hope that there may be a theory), that no predictions have been made, and that no experiments have been done (you can't do an experiment unless you can make a prediction). And it has taken well over 3 decades to get here (nowhere).

So when you read an article in Astronomy Now about the possibility of the LHC finding Gravitons, and micro black holes just remember where these fictitious ideas have come from (NOT the successful Standard Model - which has nothing to say about them - 'cause they don't exist).

It is time for physicists to wake up and reject String Theory. Take the sexy mathematics that has been developed and put it in your tool bag and move on. Unfortunately String Theorists now run most of the top jobs in physics - are they going to admit they were wrong after wasting 30 years on it? I hope the LHC results will hasten the demise of all things String.

So when you read an article in Astronomy Now about the possibility of the LHC finding Gravitons, and micro black holes just remember where these fictitious ideas have come from (NOT the successful Standard Model - which has nothing to say about them - 'cause they don't exist).

I'm more interested in seeing whether the LHC finds the Higgs Boson and what the properties turn out to be.

I'd love to debate string theory but I'm sitting on the fence about it. I've studied it a bit but I don;t understand it enough to debate it with you!