String theory is patent rubbish and many theoretical physicists say as much. The implications for math are profound. But as a physical theory, it is untestable for one and based on shoddy foundations from what I've understood for second. More like a shotgun wedding instead a natural union like say electromagnetism. Ok, I never got past beginning graduate quantum mechanics but you get enough of a flavor for the way things are done. Checkout the comments by Nobel laureate Sheldon Glashow: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/view-glashow. html
Granted that Einstein is an iconic figure.
Certainly there are more people DOING physics (and even doing so brilliantly) and any other thing today than in 1905 (Einstein's annus mirabilis). And relativity today is for the physics undergraduate today what Newtonian mechanics was for one in 1905. However, this doesnt change the fact that there have not been any paradigmatic shifts since quantum mechanics and its subsequent developments. The second coming will be when someone can come to grips with the measurement problem in quantum mechanics amongst a host of other huge problems.
We have to stop with the logic and good reasoning when dealing with real-world usability issues.;)
You are Joe Schmoe newbie. What are your possible thought processes?
"I am going to download that Photoshop-type program. Damn what was it called?"
"Hey man, I've been using this kick-ass program for manipulating images. Damn, I forgot where it went and what it's called."
These scenarios are easily circumvented and, frankly, trivial for an organization that is willing to migrate desktops to Linux. But for widespread desktop acceptance this could be a problem. Think of technology reviewers for magazines and online mags. For them, what won't matter is the logic in the *NIX GUI way of doing things but how crazy the names are. Not that we should give two turds about these people at the end of the day, but if you want widespread Linux use, maybe something to think about.
Slashdot Mirror
String theory is patent rubbish and many theoretical physicists say as much. The implications for math are profound. But as a physical theory, it is untestable for one and based on shoddy foundations from what I've understood for second. More like a shotgun wedding instead a natural union like say electromagnetism. Ok, I never got past beginning graduate quantum mechanics but you get enough of a flavor for the way things are done. Checkout the comments by Nobel laureate Sheldon Glashow: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/view-glashow. html
Granted that Einstein is an iconic figure. Certainly there are more people DOING physics (and even doing so brilliantly) and any other thing today than in 1905 (Einstein's annus mirabilis). And relativity today is for the physics undergraduate today what Newtonian mechanics was for one in 1905. However, this doesnt change the fact that there have not been any paradigmatic shifts since quantum mechanics and its subsequent developments. The second coming will be when someone can come to grips with the measurement problem in quantum mechanics amongst a host of other huge problems.
...as it were.
We have to stop with the logic and good reasoning when dealing with real-world usability issues. ;)
You are Joe Schmoe newbie. What are your possible thought processes?
"I am going to download that Photoshop-type program. Damn what was it called?"
"Hey man, I've been using this kick-ass program for manipulating images. Damn, I forgot where it went and what it's called."
These scenarios are easily circumvented and, frankly, trivial for an organization that is willing to migrate desktops to Linux. But for widespread desktop acceptance this could be a problem. Think of technology reviewers for magazines and online mags. For them, what won't matter is the logic in the *NIX GUI way of doing things but how crazy the names are. Not that we should give two turds about these people at the end of the day, but if you want widespread Linux use, maybe something to think about.