. Over the last three decades, physicists have engaged in, sometimes heated, debates about relative merits and prospects of string theory as a viable research program and even about its status as a science. The aim of this paper is to provide a deeper understanding of this controversy as a particular form of boundary discourse. Drawing on the sociological work of Thomas Gieryn and Lawrence Prelli, we bring to light the way in which protagonists appeal to, and rhetorically construct, different (...) views about the scientific method and the scientific ethos, in an effort to legitimize or delegitimize string theory. (shrink)

String theory has been very influential within theoretical physics for the past few decades. It is the most popular attempt to solve the problem of formulating a viable theory of quantum gravity. Furthermore, it also unifies the other fundamental forces within one theoretical framework. In string theory, it is assumed that what before was thought to be point particles should really be seen as one-dimensional extended entities, i.e. strings. Different particles are supposed to correspond to various vibrational patterns of the (...) strings.In recent years, much critique has been directed towards string theory, and the fact that it inhabits such a strong position within the theoretical physics community. The main complaint is the complete lack of empirical confirmation of new predictions derived from string theory. The books, criticizing string theory, that have received most attention are the ones written by Smolin (2006), Woit (2006), but there are many more critics some of which express much harsher criticism towards string theory than the above-mentioned authors. (shrink)

Some scientists or philosophers argue that multiverse theories are unfalsifiable and thus not scientific. However, some advocates of multiverse theories have recently argued that although the multiverse is not observable, multiverse theories are indeed falsifiable in principle. Therefore, they share similar features with a conventional scientific theory. On the other hand, the proposals of an epistemic shift and nonempirical theory assessment have possibly revived the discussions of the scientific nature of multiverse theories. In this article, I revisit the falsifiable arguments (...) made by the advocates of multiverse theories and show that these arguments do not justify arguing the scientific nature of such theories. Moreover, even if we accept the proposals of the epistemic shift and the nonempirical theory assessment, I argue that multiverse theories still cannot pass or satisfy the required assessments based on the new theoretical virtues and the nonempirical arguments. (shrink)