Hello John,
I'm not sure you are going to be able to find a refutation of string "theory". From what I've heard this "theory" does not (because it can't) make any predictions. How do you refute something like that?
This is based on some statements made about string theory (by its proponents) in the recent PBS mini-documentary on the theory.
That documentary was interesting, and they had some neat graphic effects. But it was long on conclusions and short on supporting evidence. Like "particles are these string-like objects that vibrate". You would then expect them to elaborate. But they didn't.
Now, this documentary was aimed at the general public, so perhaps they figured they could get away with it in front of that audience. But in the various on-line discussions I lurked afterward this absense of "meat" figured prominantly. And several times participants that seemed to be up on the subject complained that this was also the case in papers aimed at technical audiences.
But I haven't spent much time digging into the theory, or into the kinds of complaints I've just mentioned. Sounds like there is likely to be at least a little politics involved in it.
(Sometimes) I wish I had more time for stuff like this.
Regards,
LB
