QUESTION FOUR
4. Hawking made the intriguing observation that M-theory has as much evidence for its claims as astrology, yet Hawking thinks astrology is more or less bogus. Why, then, does Hawking believe that M-theory is most likely correct and NOT claims of the paranormal? Read Hawking carefully before you leap.
simply put, the reason why hawking thinks astrology is "bogus" and the m-theory not is described in the opening of chapter 4, "predicting the future:" it is not so much about "scientific evidence or the lack of it, but because it is not consistent with other theories that have been tested by experiment." (hawking 103) as a positivist, hawking does not ask much for a theory or idea to be plausible; he doesn't even care whether the new theory can be physically interpreted or not; all he asks is for the theory to to be mathematically consistent both in itself and with other well-established theories. astrology cannot provide this, especially after the discovery that heavenly bodies revolve around the sun, not the earth. hawking expresses his doubts on astrology by questioning, "why should the positions of other planets against the background sky as seen from earth have any correlations with the macromolecules on a minor planet?" (hawking 103)
now, the m-theory, although has yet to be experimentally test, is more plausible for a positivist like hawking than astrology, since m-theory stems from scientific theories, and most importantly, is consistent. m-theory comes from the idea that the different existing string theories are just actually just "different expressions of the same underlying idea," (hawking 56) and this single underlying idea is the m-theory itself. string theory is known as the only CONSISTENT existing theory these days that --- if proven correct --- successfully unifies all four forces of nature. the theory is mathematically consistent both in itself and with other well-established theories as well. voila! exactly what a positivist is looking for. although string theory seems a little "bogus" as well since it's consistent only in ten or eleven dimensional universe, for a positivist like hawking --- as he said it himself --- "the question 'do extra dimensions really exist?' has no meaning." (hawking 54) consistency with established theories is the key concept that astrology could not provide for positivists like hawking, and although the m-theory seems to be not very "deterministic," it would be a more plausible one for hawking to accept.
simply put, the reason why hawking thinks astrology is "bogus" and the m-theory not is described in the opening of chapter 4, "predicting the future:" it is not so much about "scientific evidence or the lack of it, but because it is not consistent with other theories that have been tested by experiment." (hawking 103) as a positivist, hawking does not ask much for a theory or idea to be plausible; he doesn't even care whether the new theory can be physically interpreted or not; all he asks is for the theory to to be mathematically consistent both in itself and with other well-established theories. astrology cannot provide this, especially after the discovery that heavenly bodies revolve around the sun, not the earth. hawking expresses his doubts on astrology by questioning, "why should the positions of other planets against the background sky as seen from earth have any correlations with the macromolecules on a minor planet?" (hawking 103)
now, the m-theory, although has yet to be experimentally test, is more plausible for a positivist like hawking than astrology, since m-theory stems from scientific theories, and most importantly, is consistent. m-theory comes from the idea that the different existing string theories are just actually just "different expressions of the same underlying idea," (hawking 56) and this single underlying idea is the m-theory itself. string theory is known as the only CONSISTENT existing theory these days that --- if proven correct --- successfully unifies all four forces of nature. the theory is mathematically consistent both in itself and with other well-established theories as well. voila! exactly what a positivist is looking for. although string theory seems a little "bogus" as well since it's consistent only in ten or eleven dimensional universe, for a positivist like hawking --- as he said it himself --- "the question 'do extra dimensions really exist?' has no meaning." (hawking 54) consistency with established theories is the key concept that astrology could not provide for positivists like hawking, and although the m-theory seems to be not very "deterministic," it would be a more plausible one for hawking to accept.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home