Kaptain K,

String Theory
Why do you think m-theorists might get lucky? Is that your definition of the scientific method? Does anyone else support Kaptain K's view?

The rapid advances in other fields of science such as biology was not due to luck, rather it was due to biologists preforming a set of specific experiments that were used to develop a fundamental base for biology. Biologists are not positing 12 dimensional space.

There is no fundamental base in physics. Physics has a set of contradicting curve fitting black box models.

Why is developing m-theories science? How many dimension in the real physical universe? 13? 20? How are banes different than Maxwell's model for which space had wheels and small balls in it?

What is a dimension? Note the string dimensions are not observable. After 20 years m-theorists have not develop a single testable “theory”. Why do you believe m-theory is different the alchemy? Compare "theoretical" physics to biology.

Comments:
The fact that a hundred thousand papers per year are and can be written in the field of m-theory (string theory), indicates that there is no possibility of closure using the “infinite number of monkeys” developing an infinite number of mathematical models methodology. The problem is not just that the "infinite monkey methodology", "no bounds on the model methodogy" will not solve the fundamental problems of physics (i.e. The fundamental problems are not even identified), but rather that intelligent people in physics, astrophysics, other fields do not criticize the methodology and its result (i.e. A hundred thousand papers per year with no convergence or connection with observation.)

Compare the number of m-theory models 100^503 to the number of hydrogen atoms in the universe. There are roughly 4x10^79 hydrogen atoms in the observable Universe.