![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sniffnoyhttp://www.reddit.com/r/Xiv/comments/1t5646/noscale_supergravity_in_the_light_of_lhc_and/ce4h78b
[...] In my view this is exactly the sort of thing that demonstrates why its wrong to dismiss string theory as "non-predictive". This attitude simply fails to grasp that string theory is not analogous to the standard model, but to quantum field theory. People still have to write down a model in order to make a prediction, just like always. Now that process just has taken on a totally different set of constraints, that in many ways are far more restrictive than before. Scientifically the only difference is that now we call it "choosing a vacuum", but its scientifically the exact same thing as "postulating a Lagrangian" in quantum field theory, like the one that earned Higgs and Énglert the Nobel Prize.(Yes, this is a followup to this old entry.)
