First Cause vs. String Theory, M-Theory 1-0

People look at modern scientific theories like the String Theory of the Membrane Theory (M-Theory) and call them “elegant”. They praise Science for having these “excellent” examples of innovative thinking and look upon the scientists who first formulated them. But how blind can a person be?

How can you look at theories demanding 11 dimensions which you do not have yet seen, or multiple Universes which you will never see and tag them “elegant”? If these are elegant theories, then how do the “not elegant” theories look like? It is really funny to know that the same people who name these theories “elegant” and “simple” and the same people who refuse to accept the simplest idea of all: that the cosmos has a (First) Cause…

READ ALSO:  Religion as the single foundation of Science

Some times simplicity is right in front of our eyes, but we refuse to look at it.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Comments (

)

  1. J

    Good point. I have been trying to understand how string theory can overcome the cosmological argument and have not found a good answer. Then again, I am a bit of an amateur when it comes to string theory…

    1. skakos

      And we will all remain amateurs… By the time we understand it all, they will have invented about 60 new dimensions… 🙂

  2. kraussk

    Okay, I get what you’re trying to say here, but I’m guessing Englishis not your first language. Please have someone whose native language IS English proofread these postings.

    1. skakos

      Too much attitude and zero essence here. If you have a specific mistake or error to point out, feel free to do so. If you have some comments for the content also feel free to make them and I will explain anything you do not understand. Philosophy is not for everyone.

      Cheers.

%d bloggers like this: