String theory is at the moment the only advanced approach to a unification of all interactions, including gravity.But, in spite of the more than thirty years of its existence, it does not make any empirically testable predictions, and it is completely unknown which physically interpretable principles could form the basis of string theory. At the moment, "string theory" is no theory at all, but rather a labyrinthic structure of mathematical procedures and intuitions. The only motivations for string theory consist in the mutual incompatibility of the standard model of quantum field theory and of general relativity as well as in the metaphysics of the unification program of physics, aimed at a final unified theory of all interactions, including gravity. The article gives a perspective on the problems leading to and resulting from this situation.
String Theory and Philosophy of ScienceSome physicists seem to take it for sure that string theory 4 is the adequate theory of quantum gravity and the ultimate theory of nature."I believe that we have found the unique mathematical structure that consistently combines quantum mechanics and general relativity. So it must almost certainly be correct." (Schwarz (1998) 2) Others see in it the ultimate hype in which the ideals of physics as an empirical science get lost. But what is string theory really? -There are certainly good reasons to claim that this question can not be answered conclusively at the moment, because string theory isn't yet a complete theory. 't know." (Susskind (2005) 124)
"Elegance requires that the number of defining equations be small. Five is better than ten, and one is better than five. On this score, one might facetiously say that String Theory is the ultimate epitome of elegance. With all the years that String Theory has been studied, no one has ever found even a single defining equation! The number at present count is zero. We know neither what the fundamental equations of the theory are nor even if it has any. Well then, what is the theory, if not a collection of defining equations? We really donAlready in 1988, after the first wave of string enthusiasm which started with the development of the first consistent anomaly-free perturbative supersymmetric string theories, Robert Weingard wrote in his paper A Philosopher Looks at String Theory: " [...] there is, in a sense, no theory for the philosopher to analyse." (Weingard (1989) 138) In a certain way, the conditions for an evaluation of string theory did not change a lot since Weingard's assessment -an assessment which did not prevent him from writing his paper on the subject. Although string theory is at present the most extensively developed approach to a future theory of quantum gravity, it seems to be a rather confusing collection of physical intuitions and mathematical procedures which either will or will not lead finally to a physical theory. At the moment, string theory has no clear and unambiguous nomological basis; no physically motivated fundamental principle is known for ...