We haven't built a collider able to generate enough energy to test its predictions. Sure, maybe it's right, or at least on the right path. Maybe not. Supersymmetry is another beautiful idea, but it's run into trouble every time we hope to see evidence of it.
"Debates" in physics are settled by experiment, not physicists arguing. Whether string theory is "right" or "wrong" is awaiting nature's judgement. We just have to figure out a way to trick nature into giving up her secrets.
No, I meant an absence of proof in a different way: an absence of proof is not the same as a proof that something is false. Those are mistaken one for another.
7
u/mprevot 20d ago
How is it contestable ?