String Theory Is Plausible

The article from which you quote is extremely biased, and should not be taken seriously. Take this quote from the article in question: "Boring scientists say this is probably evidence that some physicists don't know how to write proper code. However, string theorists have pointed out that a firm prediction of string theory is the existence of extra space-time dimensions." Right off the bat, it labels the scientists that conduct TRUE science as "boring" which I suppose makes string theory exciting according to the article. But there are other, more comprehensive articles, that show the many flaws of string theory. Here is one such example: https://www.americanscientist.org... As far as the author is concerned, Jon Butterworth is a physics professor at University College London. However, am I supposed to really take him seriously when his blog "Life and Physics" tells everyone that he is making it all up. View the page. On the top right hand side, it states "Making it up as I go along." This is exactly what string theory is, and this is what string theorists do. It is all made up! There is zero evidence. (Jon Butterworth's blog -- http://lifeandphysics.wordpress.com...) Returning to the article, the more precise values were used to detect the alignment of charged particle tracks. When dealing with charged particles, we are no longer dealing with the physical laws of the macroscopic world. Quantum mechanics is what governs the movement of particles, and it is very well known that the quantum world, even in principle, cannot be fully studied. A more precise constant being inversely proportional to the precision of the detector boundaries is exactly what SHOULD be expected. Anyone that has studied Werner Heisenberg will see that the situation here is analogous to The Uncertainty Principle, and has nothing to do with evidence of string theory. Furthermore, the deviation of the apparent value of pi does not require more dimensions. Value deviations in regular three-dimensional curved space have already been shown to exist. A triangle on a flat surface has angles that add up to 180 degrees. However, if the triangle is on the outside of a curve (e.g. on the outside of a sphere), then the angles will add up to a value greater than 180 degrees. If a triangle is placed on the inside of a curve, the angles will add up to a value lower than 180 degrees. String theory and extra dimensions are not needed to explain why the value of pi can deviate. The same dimensions with which we are all familiar can explain this. It is simple Riemannian Geometry. http://en.wikipedia.org... In your argument, you state: "While just about every prediction of string theory is hard to test, in time, we will have the ability to test such predictions. This means that string theory is inherently falsifiable, even if it is not yet." This is simply incorrect. String theory makes no testable predictions, even in theory. While it is claimed that string theory "predicts" more dimensions, it is not testable, even in principle. The claim of the string theorists is that these extra dimensions are wrapped up in some small areas of space in the form of hidden six-dimensional geometric constructs. They are far too small to ever see or ever detect, and can never be shown to exist. That does not qualify as a prediction. It is a made up statement. Why would string theorists make it up? Because if we deny the existence of extra dimensions, we must deny string theory. The string theorists are basically grasping at straws.