“Popperazi” = falsifiability enthusiasts, a la Karl Popper
Here.
When George Ellis and Joe Silk wrote an op-ed in the prestigious Nature magazine, dramatically entitled “Defend the integrity of physics,” cosmologist Sean Carroll responded via Twitter (not exactly a prestigious scientific journal, but much more effective in public discourse) with, and I quote: “My real problem with the falsifiability police is: we don’t get to demand ahead of time what kind of theory correctly describes the world.” The “falsifiability police”? Wow.
It’s how he sees them, Massimo, and whatever appears to be true to him is true.
The focus, of course, is superstring theory and related concepts (such as that of a multiverse), which appear to be dominant in the fundamental physics and cosmology communities at the moment, and yet have gathered an increasingly vociferous number of critics who allege that these mathematical constructs are just that: math (possibly even useful math), but not science. More.
Pass the cheez zizzles this way, please, and someone go for more pop.
See also: Not only is earth one nice planet among many, but our entire universe is lost in a crowd
and
The multiverse: Where everything turns out to be true, except philosophy and religion
Follow UD News at Twitter!